8 ms·
>That dynamism stands in contrast to the usual tales we are told about the birth of science, stories portraying the debates around the Copernican theory as occa
by nyc111 8y ago
>That dynamism stands in contrast to the usual tales we are told about the birth of science, stories portraying the debates around the Copernican theory as occasions when science was suppressed by powerful, entrenched establishments. Stories of scientific suppression, rather than scientific dynamism, have not served science well.
Well, this doesn't make sense. Galileo was executed by the Inquisition, an institution inside the Catholic Church. The church was not interested in debating rival scientific theories. They only debated heliocentric theory and their own earth-centric dogma. Once they identified the heliocentric model to be against their dogma they supressed and punished anyone who advocated heliocentric notions. But this does not mean the church was ignorant of astronomy. The church was the main supporter of astronomy because of their interest in maintaining an accurate calendar. Christoph Scheiner mentioned in the article was a Jesuite astronomer respected by Galieleo and the two corresponded.
The title of the article must have been decided by an editor who did not read the article. He wanted to write something like “The popular stories we are told about the beginning of scientific thinking have been wrong.” The word “creation” is totally wrong. Astronomy was not created in the 17th century.
- philipov 8y agoGalileo was put under house arrest, not executed.
- watwut 8y agoGalileo is not even mentioned in that article.
- ConceptJunkie 8y agoYeah, but he always comes up. Always.
- cvoss 8y agoI didn't read the phrase "creation story" as literally referring the start of astronomy. It's a punchy allusion that fits well with the themes and thesis of the article.
- philipov 8y agoSo, I take that to mean you aren't an athesist.
- ItsMe000001 8y agoWhat does that have to do with anything discussed here, or said in the article you responded to? "Creation" is a word used for more than that one thing that seems to occupy your mind as its only use. Please consult a dictionary, the religious meaning is only one of many. When I create software I'm not doing anything religious as far as I can tell. Never even mind that the submission title explicitly states what "creation" is meant: "of astronomy" (that's a scientific field). One might argue whether Kepler & Co. mark the time and place where "astronomy" was created or whether the article's subject actually is the creation of astronomy or just a famous episode from its much longer history, still has nothing to do with your purely religious interpretation of a common word. If you actually read the article you will find that this article is about - astronomy. As promised in the title.
- philipov 8y agoIt was just a lame pun. No need to overthink it.
- djrogers 8y agore-read GP - he did not write atheist, he made a joke with the word thesis.
- ItsMe000001 8y agoIn other words, he should be on reddit's /r/funny - THE place to be for teenager level jokes.
- ItsMe000001 8y ago> he made a joke with the word thesis In other words, his content doe snot belong here. He should go to reddit or some other useless "fun" site. And so should anyone defending such BS.
- 6Typos 8y ago> Galileo was executed by the Inquisition, Was only arrested at home, for 10 years (but wrongly convicted) > Once they identified the heliocentric model to be against their dogma they supressed and punished anyone who advocated heliocentric notions I recommend reading [0], particularly: > as in astrology the theory of eccentrics and epicycles is considered as established, because thereby the sensible appearances of the heavenly movements can be explained; not, however, as if this proof were sufficient, forasmuch as some other theory might explain them. So, the Ptolemaic model was used because it fit the observations well enough. On the other hand, the Copernicus work was (indirectly) used in the construction of the Gregorian calendar. Furthermore, when Copernicus introduced is theory in 1543, the book was dedicated to the Pope. The Galileo affair was made by enemies of Galileo who used the Inquisition to prosecute him. That was wrong, but it was certainly not the whole Catholic Church. [0] Summa Theologica, I, q.32, a.1 ad.2 Link: http://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa/FP/FP032.html#FPQ32OUTP1 http://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa/FP/FP032.html#FPQ32OUTP1 (under reply to objection 2) [edit: formatting]
- nyc111 8y ago>> Galileo was executed by the Inquisition, > Was only arrested at home, for 10 years (but wrongly convicted) My mistake obviously. I was trying to say “Galileo was tried by the Inquisition. The point was that the Church had jurisdiction over academia and had the power to enforce its dogmas by force if necessary.
- nyc111 8y ago> I recommend reading [Summa Theologica], particularly... You want me to read Summa Theologica? What for?
- FranzFerdiNaN 8y agoThe church was plenty interested in debating scientific theories. The church played a massive part in advancing science ever since the middle ages. They did expect scientific theories to fit both the scientific as well as the religious knowledge available, something that seems absurd now, but was perfectly workable based on the number of scientific discoveries made the past 1500 years.
- nyc111 8y agoI agree. This is why I wrote: “The church was the main supporter of astronomy because of their interest in maintaining an accurate calendar. Christoph Scheiner mentioned in the article was a Jesuite astronomer respected by Galieleo and the two corresponded.” But here the subject is astronomy. I am not sure what other science the Church supported. But the fact that the Church was uncompromising about defending its cosmogonic dogmas is also proved by the burning of Giardano Bruno. They did not try to argue with Bruno and they did not try to reach a compromise. They just burned him. List of people burned as heretics (there are a quite a few of them): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_burned_as_heretics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_burned_as_heret... Not everyone in the list were cosmogonical heretics but my point is that the Church was uncompromising when it came to challenges to its dogmas.
- teilo 8y agoThis only shows that just as there are religious myths about the history of science, there are also atheist myths about the history of science, and both sides have their "true believers" who will not be swayed by the historical record. The idea that the Catholic Church was on some monolithic crusade pitting scientific inquiry against scripture is a-historical. It wasn't true in the case of Galileo. (For the record, it wasn't true in the case of Columbus either.)
- ConceptJunkie 8y agoThe biggest problems with the whole "Church vs. Galileo" had to do with politics, and the fact that Galileo was an arrogant jerk (despite being essentially right). The Church was in the wrong, but not the way most people think, and Galileo did everything he could to make the situation worse. It's kind of like the sack of Constantinople... it was entirely wrong and is in no way justified, but the Byzantines went out of their way to make the situation worse.
- nyc111 8y agoWhat about Giardano Bruno? The Church was ruthless against people who questioned its dogmas. How is this a-historical?