I am not sure what you are going on about. Jesus did not address any of these things either. Neither did Krishna, nor Mohammed. If the religions associated with them had some speculations in these areas, that was part of a larger culture, not original to their messages, which focused on salvation in their respective terms.
Folk wisdom is not political science. Lamaism is a political organization, it is not political science.
Intriguing and enduring ideas are not science. They are philosophy, as I have noted. Even if someone had the idea of relativity before Einstein, not in a framework of a theory that could rigorously explain a range of observed facts, and that was subject to verification in the long run, by testing its predictive power. Even if there was "Buddhist medicine", that is part of the culture, not specifically taught by the Buddha.
I already said that the two areas where something like scientific progress was made predating the modern period were mathematics and astronomy.
I never said anything about being rolled into one ball of wax. I said that prior to the rise of science, these topics were addressed as part of philosophy, or as part of natural history. Thus, it means nothing to say that the topics were addressed prior to the 16th century, since the issue is whether they were addressed in a way that involved rigorous induction and, when possible, the experimental testing of hypotheses, and the development of theories with sufficient predictive power to be testable through further observation. |
