3 Answers

  1. Alchemy is not a useless science. At one time, alchemy established a lot of facts, which in turn gave rise to another science – chemistry.

    The purpose of alchemy was to find the Philosopher's Stone, immortal elixir, and so on. That is, the purpose of alchemy as a science is fundamentally different from chemistry.

    In fact, alchemy can be considered as chemistry without a scientific method. As a result, the purpose of science also changes

    Alchemy = chemistry-scientific method

  2. I do not know about “creativity”, but the juxtaposition of chemistry and alchemy is fundamentally wrong. Alchemy was a stage in the development of chemistry and alchemists were mostly good scientists at the level of their time. Although formally the goal was to search for the “philosopher's stone” and other wisdom of the pharaohs, in reality they were more interested in the laws of chemical transformations. They established a lot of patterns, discovered a lot of elements and compounds, and advanced the methodology and technique of the experiment. In general, they were engaged in normal science.�

    Finally, the development of science reached the point where it became obvious that nothing would work with the philosopher's stone, and the prefix “al -” somehow fell off, but in principle, scientists continued to work with similar methods and with similar tasks, it was a gradual evolution from more “magical” to more “scientific” tasks, and it began almost immediately, because despite esoteric goals, alchemists worked with real substances, so the unproductivity of some experiments and the impracticability of others automatically led them closer and closer to natural science methodology.

  3. Unlike alchemy, the classical science of chemistry has a coherent theory, this theory has a very good predictive ability and it is confirmed by an independent experiment.

Leave a Reply