3 ms·

It is more than just a passing interest. There would be no Newtonian physics without religion. "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" is just the go

It is more than just a passing interest. There would be no Newtonian physics without religion. "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" is just the golden rule restated as a physical law. Newton starts from the assumption that the physical world follows a moral law because it was created and is animated by god and everything else follows from and is in accordance with that belief.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" is just the golden rule restated as a physical law. No, it's closer to lex talionis stated as a physical law. Which I guess is also religious.
- V2hLe0ThslzRaV2 9y ago
  "Lex talionis" sounds a lot like "an eye for an eye" - which I might be wrong, but that phrase/idiom has religious origins.
  - NotSammyHagar 9y ago
    I always find these claims not persuasive, where some modern laws of physics can supposedly be aligned or derived from some historical religious concepts that no one ever used to make any predictions that could be verified by science until we started working backwards. There are some brilliant and lovely ideas in the historical texts that have survived to this day, but.... I just don't see that god passed on ideas to the authors of those texts.
- saas_co_de 9y ago
  Newton's third law is: "Actioni contrariam semper et æqualem esse reactionem" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion Translation from google: "To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction" If the golden rule is: do unto others as you would have them do unto you and you restate that as if it has force of law then you get: Whatever you do to others will be done to you. And then that moral law is generalized to all things to make the physical law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Also, it could be argued that the use of actio (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/actio https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/actio) implies a rational agent, not an abstract principle. It could also be pointed out that the "law" itself is just metaphysical twaddle. There is no empirical basis for this "law" and it makes no sense at all unless taken as a principle based on established authority. The modernized version of the law is "When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body." The extent of revision required to make the "law" even vaguely scientific demonstrates how unscientific the original was.
s_m_t 9y ago
Without some sort of equality or law of conservation it seems to me that nothing would be very easy to figure out. Maybe that is where the golden rule comes from, try and hold one social variable in place so that everyone can more easily understand everything else.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" is just the golden rule restated as a physical law. No, it's closer to lex talionis stated as a physical law. Which I guess is also religious.

V2hLe0ThslzRaV2 9y ago
"Lex talionis" sounds a lot like "an eye for an eye" - which I might be wrong, but that phrase/idiom has religious origins.
- NotSammyHagar 9y ago
  I always find these claims not persuasive, where some modern laws of physics can supposedly be aligned or derived from some historical religious concepts that no one ever used to make any predictions that could be verified by science until we started working backwards. There are some brilliant and lovely ideas in the historical texts that have survived to this day, but.... I just don't see that god passed on ideas to the authors of those texts.
saas_co_de 9y ago
Newton's third law is: "Actioni contrariam semper et æqualem esse reactionem" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion Translation from google: "To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction" If the golden rule is: do unto others as you would have them do unto you and you restate that as if it has force of law then you get: Whatever you do to others will be done to you. And then that moral law is generalized to all things to make the physical law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Also, it could be argued that the use of actio (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/actio https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/actio) implies a rational agent, not an abstract principle. It could also be pointed out that the "law" itself is just metaphysical twaddle. There is no empirical basis for this "law" and it makes no sense at all unless taken as a principle based on established authority. The modernized version of the law is "When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body." The extent of revision required to make the "law" even vaguely scientific demonstrates how unscientific the original was.

s_m_t 9y ago

Without some sort of equality or law of conservation it seems to me that nothing would be very easy to figure out. Maybe that is where the golden rule comes from, try and hold one social variable in place so that everyone can more easily understand everything else.