D&D General Effect of Druids on Scientific Knowledge in your Campaign?

[Shardstone]

The thing is there is a lot to unpack there. A lot prescientific natural philosophy came from rich people (mainly men) that actual wrote stuff down and they were prone to thinking in terms of philosophy and the believe that the nature of reality could be derived from pure reasoning. People who might be in the position to know the relationship of caterpillars and butterflies were usually not in a position to write their observations down.
The notion of the scientific method, where stuff was not accepted without observational evidence and inductive reasoning from observation came much later. Social standing, and the connection of manual works with slavery probably plays a big role in this.

Then there is the nature of magic, in a reality where magic exists, then magic is as fundamental a force of nature as gravity or electromagnetism. However, we as players and game creators tend to model our fantasy worlds as if some or all of the magical world view of our ancestors was actually true.

Where you end up depends a lot on where you want to go and what assumption you want to make. Also, on the amount of rigor or not on the fundamental nature of magic. I am not sure we could really do a from the ground up take on magic because we have no idea on how it might really work.

we can do a ground up because we make up the rules for the magic lol

 

[UngainlyTitan]

we can do a ground up because we make up the rules for the magic lol

Maybe you could but it is a lot of work, and I am not sure I have seen attempt that I think manages it.

 

[Tonguez]

You know the fundamental flaw in this question is thinking that a an animal knows what class or phylum it belongs to

for instance Mako sharks are livebearers - so give birth to fully formed young, just like dolphins do. Would a Mako shark be able to tell a Druid that its a cartilaginous fish? Why would Bears, Wolves, Seals and Weasels think they were anymore 'phylogenetically related' than a tiger or a crocodile?

 

[Cadence]

You know the fundamental flaw in this question is thinking that a an animal knows what class or phylum it belongs to

for instance Mako sharks are livebearers - so give birth to fully formed young, just like dolphins do. Would a Mako shark be able to tell a Druid that its a cartilaginous fish? Why would Bears, Wolves, Seals and Weasels think they were anymore 'phylogenetically related' than a tiger or a crocodile?

Maybe they would determine phylogenetic relationships were silly. See the Aristotle's above where.nimber of limbs, hot or cold, etc... were used to classify.

I'm guessing they might no about migration and metamorphosis though.

 

[Baron Opal II]

I just listened to a podcast about the Yellow Fever epidemic of 1793 in Philadelphia. In short, the Haitian Rebellion had started and many refugees as well as expected trade vessels had landed in Philadelphia. It was also an unusually hot summer. The ships brought with them the mosquitoes that carry Yellow Fever with predictable results.

Among other methods of trying to contain the disease, there were two main theories as to how this, or any really, disease spread; filth generating a disease causing miasma and contagion from someone already sick. Philadelphia was quite filthy at the time, with rotting animal carcasses and sewage in the streets. And, there were newly arrived foreigners that were sick with the Fever. Both were reasonable conclusions from available data and experience. However, it wasn't for another hundred years that biting insects would be discovered as a disease vector.

In this context, I could certainly see druids keying in that otherwise ignorable creatures, mosquitoes, could be a disease vector similarly to how some mammals can transmit rabies. While the learned magicians may discover benefits of sanitation and clerics drive out miasma generating disease spirits, it would be the druids that reveal the contagious bite of some miniscule creature, and the means to remove or control said pests.

 

[LordEntrails]

I don't like science in my D&D. Too many disconnects when you try to mix the two.

Would druid know these things? Many of them yes. But whales as mammals? No, because taxinomy is not relevant.

Would the world know these things? No. Because despite magical communications being possible, few people can afford it and few people travel outside of their local area.

Throwing out science allows for more magic and fantasy. Even if you allow firearms, they do not need to be based upon science, but could rather be based upon elemental fire or arcane crystals or ...

Keeping people and knowledge local allows for disparities and variety. Rather than everything being the same everywhere, different locations are different (like our world used to be).

 

[Necropolitan]

In this context, I could certainly see druids keying in that otherwise ignorable creatures, mosquitoes, could be a disease vector similarly to how some mammals can transmit rabies. While the learned magicians may discover benefits of sanitation and clerics drive out miasma generating disease spirits, it would be the druids that reveal the contagious bite of some miniscule creature, and the means to remove or control said pests.

That made me think about how the existence of Aberrations and Outsiders might further confuse classification for those with insufficient knowledge. Think about how many sightings of mythical creatures in our world came about because someone misidentified an animal.

For example: is the canine creature devouring a village's cattle in the night an unusually large wolf, a direwolf, a werewolf, a gnoll, a wolfwere, a winter wolf, a death dog, a corrupted Hound Archon, a rabid blink dog, etc.?