Question

why was the scientific revolution a turning point in history?
i can... explain how the scientific revolution challenged religious authority,
absolute rule, and mercantilism
read: medieval \science\
throughout the european middle ages, much of the
scientific knowledge from greek and roman texts were
lost or destroyed due to the chaos of the era. for those
books that remained, few were able to read them since
they were written in greek or latin, languages that few
people in europe could understand. moreover, most
people were illiterate in any language since the struggles
of daily survival made reading an unnecessary skill. the
catholic church ran the only centers of learning, which
were universities where bible and religious text analysis
represented most scholarly pursuits. when scholars
explored science, it was in the context of proving the
church’s ideas were correct and accurate.

for most people outside of the catholic church, ancient
superstitions guided an understanding of the world. people
believed in the four humors theory, which claimed that
there were four important fluids (or humors) in the human
body. the goal, according to medieval \doctors\ was to
maintain a balance of the humors to stay healthy. these \doctors\ would cut the
person who was sick and drain out some of their blood in a process called
bloodletting. of course, sometimes this process resulted in the death of the patient
due to blood loss.

how did most people in the middle ages determine if something was true?
______________________

turn and talk

1. what are the risks of embracing new ideas? what are some risks of

refusing to do so?
______________________

Explanation:

For the question "How did most people in the Middle Ages determine if something was true?":

Most people in the Middle Ages relied on two main sources to determine truth: 1) The Catholic Church's teachings and religious texts, as the Church ran centers of learning and scholarly pursuits were tied to proving Church ideas. 2) Ancient superstitions (like the four humors theory) and traditional beliefs, especially for those outside the Church, since scientific knowledge was limited, literacy was low, and daily survival took precedence over critical inquiry.

• Social/Religious Backlash: New ideas might contradict established religious (e.g., Church) or societal norms, leading to persecution (like Galileo’s conflict with the Church).
• Uncertainty/Chaos: Rapidly changing ideas could disrupt social order, as people’s long - held beliefs (e.g., about the universe, society) are challenged, causing confusion.
• Misinformation: Not all new ideas are valid; embracing untested or false ideas (e.g., flawed scientific hypotheses) could lead to poor decisions (in medicine, governance, etc.).

• Stagnation: Societies or individuals may fall behind in progress (e.g., scientific, technological, social). For example, refusing to accept new medical knowledge could lead to continued use of harmful practices (like bloodletting).
• Ineffectiveness: Failing to adapt to new realities (e.g., changing economic systems, environmental issues) can lead to problems (e.g., economic decline, inability to address crises).
• Loss of Innovation: A culture of refusal to embrace new ideas discourages creativity and problem - solving, limiting human development.

Answer:

Most people in the Middle Ages determined truth through religious authority (Catholic Church teachings/texts) (for those connected to Church - run learning) and ancient superstitions/traditional beliefs (for most others, as scientific knowledge was lost/difficult to access, literacy was low, and survival needs dominated, with ideas like the four humors guiding understanding).

For the "Turn and Talk" question "What are the risks of embracing new ideas? What are some risks of refusing to do so?":

Risks of embracing new ideas: