A tale of two (three) chemists gave me such a different take on the enlightenment and an appreciation for the science that came about in this time period. It was also a little teaser for a future lecture that will include Marie Lavoisier and a multitude if strong female influences in the scientific community (which I am so excited for). I really enjoyed the activity in which we had to put ourself in their shoes and describe things such as air with little to no knowledge of anything because it was really amazing to realize how difficult this subject matter and thought process would have been. It also made me think how different times are were they were just able to accept a very generalized and undefined answer to their question and now it seems that every question in the scientific community is continuously studied to deeper and deeper levels of understanding. I also find it very interesting that at this time they still had a very distinct separation between religion and science as these scientist were also heavily influenced and supported by the church and government. It was also amazing to see how democracy and the revolution were so intertwined and influential on one another, a movement in one spectrum caused a shift at the other. I will me very interested to follow up with “Out of Thin Air” to learn more.
Yes, let me know what you think of that documentary on Priestly and Lavoisier, Adrian. I think they do a good job of encapsulating the story, but from my reading of the two individuals I don’t see the portrayals as that accurate. One thing I think they may get right is that Priestly may have been a bit naive and not able to recognize when to stop talking. It is nice to know you have some background knowledge of the time period and we can fill it in a bit with the scientific developments.