This book is one of the finest discussions of issues in the intellectual and scientific history of ancient societies, in particular as a critique of the concept of "primitive mentalities." It's scandalous to find that it has gone out of print.

I'd read this book some years ago, but found it difficult going at the time. I decided to re-read it recently, as it was on the wish list of a friend which reminded me I still had the volume. This time around I found it much more interesting and more understandable. There definitely seems to be a time for everything, and apparently this was the time for Greek Science for me. What I found of particular interest was a new perspective that I acheived in a novel way. I recently attended a Minneapolis Childrens' Theater production featuring events from the life of Galileo. It was pointed out in the playbill that what seems to us in retrospect a patent persecution of a new concept by jealous intellectuals and religious authorities was not quite so clear cut at the time. In fact the scientific thinkers of Galileo's time, as those of the Hellanistic Greek and Roman times, labored with the technological inability to test the validity of scientific observations. Much that passed for science during those times might be considered philosophy or metaphysics in our own. Without the means of externally testing opposing explanations of natural phenomenon little of definitive worth could be said about any given observation. It then became a matter of philosophical orientation, of reputation and of religious sanction. It was in fact anybody's guess. We who are used to measuring equipment as simple as a thermometer and as complex as an earth orbiting satelite often forget that these devices were not yet available to the researchers of ancient or even medieaval times. Some of the simpler devices were only just being introduced in Galileo's time and were considered untested and highly suspect themselves. Given that a number of ingeneous inventions of early times were engineered with the specific intent to mislead or impress the public, the scepticism with which something like the telescope or the microscope were greeted is not surprising. To the early critic, one could not necessarily believe ones eyes; it was better to believe what the Holy Book or a learned philosopher had to say with respect to nature than what a "conjurer" might say. Greek Science After Aristotle makes this point apparent, explaning that only in the area of mathematics and in applied physics (engineering, especially military engineering) could anything like trustworthy precision be achieved. It also points out that though modern science values observation and experiment, the neglect of these was not necessarily due to a laziness or disregard for precision, but due to a lack of technological means. In fact, much was done and some very ingeneous devices to accomplish it were invented to perform it. The researchers of the times had to be very innovative and original in their approach to problem solving; something which we with our computerized devices are rarely called upon to do a such basic levels. Rereading the book from this perspective definitely gave me a greater appreciation for the achievments of our intellectual predecessors.

I really enjoyed this book. The Greeks undoubtedly had a very interesting culture, and an analysis of their early scientists is an important an interesting read. Mr Lloyd has compiled a good introductory overview, outlining the major players, the development of various ideas, and some suggestions why their "science" got started in the first place. This is not an easy question to answer. I liked his idea that critical analysis of ideas about the natural world may have been a corrollary of a general environment of critical examination of political structure and ideas in difficult times. In other words, because ideas in general were subjected to critical analysis, critical examination of the natural world logically followed, more as an afterthought than a deliberate injunction. It is an interesting theory.

The book includes discussions of various differences and similarities between modern and ancient science. Ancient thinkers seemed less concerned with the practical potential of their ideas. The pursuit of knowledge for knowledge sake, with a few notable exceptions, was a worthy enough endeavour in itself. They saw the natural world as something more to be studied than "tamed". "Science" was a more vaguely defined discipline; few people practised it much less got paid for it. The book discusses the various streams and ideas which grew about, with, and around it, such as medicine, philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, and biology. The Pythagorians, Platonists, Milesians, Aristotle, Thales, and Anaximander are all names which come to the fore, but unfortunately, their contribution withers away far too quickly in the history of the world. Some interesting points I noted were early suggestions that man had sprung from other organisms, (namely fish), the problem of change, theories concerning the nature of matter-you know-elements, atoms and so on.

A look into the thinking of the early Greeks is in part a mirror into the heart and nature of our society. My only complaint with the book is that we have so little remaining information about these thinkers and their times.

Please, archaeologists and the like, find much more about the Greeks in some colossal discovery of thousands of well-preserved, buried manuscripts in a buried ancient city somewhere about Greece, so we can know more about the ancient world.