theory that the sun is the center of our solar system. However, it was 400 years
“Galileo has been depicted variously as a cynical opportunist, patient genius or lucky engineer, and dies a coward or a modern Socrates.” I agree that he is a patient genius, and lucky engineer, but I do not agree that he is a cynical opportunist, coward or a modern Socrates.
Scholarly Life in the 16th-century After reading On The Revolutions Of The Heavenly Spheres, Nicolaus Copernicus's dedication to Pope Paul III, it can be gathered that the life of a scholar was something of a mission, a crusade if you will, to achieve knowledge of the unknown. Like a crusade, scholarly life contained hardships but also achievements and even more importantly and sometimes most strived for, notoriety. Scholarly life in the 16th -century was no simple task, but a task that took much drive and ambition, and after that, a task that underwent much scrutiny from disapproving colleagues as well as outsiders.
Although Galileo’s heliocentric ideas were supported by many, he is considered a heretic for his contradictory opinion regarding the orthodox views of the Catholic Church. A heretic is defined as an opinion profoundly at odds with what is generally accepted. Without the father of modern science and all of the discoveries that Galileo made, our society would not be as advanced as it is today.
In order to understand and analyse this source, the letter needs to be in its 17th century context. During this period, the Catholic Church had a firm grip on power concerning social thoughts . It was common practice for people to not have read the bible due to illiteracy. The letter itself is very important to establish a different viewpoint of the importance of astronomy with regards to religion. His support of Copernican explanations of motion of the Earth would create controversy because it went against the Churches official view of the rules of motion by taking a literal meaning of the words of scripture.
Even if a scientist set out to prove the church wrong and show some very strong evidence contrary to popular belief, he was usually shunned and his ideas denounced publicly. It is not until many people have similar evidence and findings do they gain any credibility with normal people and the church. Nowadays people believe that if a scientific view is false, then by continuing study and research the truth may be discovered. one may conclude that if no one presented new ideas, then intelligent thought would have no place in a society like that.
According to Bishop, science has come to a higher position than before. "And the fruits of scientific inquiry have vastly enlarged human knowledge" (237). Regardless of that, people have formed their beliefs about science into two categories. Some people criticized science in being harm for human kind. In the other hand, there are those who belief that humanity needs science in order to reach a better way of life. I believe there has been a misunderstanding about the issue of science because people do not know how scientists think. People only likes to be observers and do not like to get involve in science. I believe that those who benefit from the results of science should ask themselves what moves the minds of the scientists to invent and seek for answers? I asked myself, is it their ego, knowledge, ambition, or simple curiosity?
In 1633, Galileo Galilei was placed on trial for suspicion of heresy by the Roman Catholic Church of the era. The trial was in response to Galileo’s publication of Dialogue, a book which propounded Copernicus’ theory of heliocentrism, or more simply known as the Earth’s movement around the sun. The church believed the common biblically founded view that the Earth could not be moved. Copernican theory is common knowledge these days, and Galileo’s efforts to prove the theory have earned him the title of father of science, but the Church’s opposition to science has remained largely unchanged. America is a largely religious nation, and nearly 40% of the nation believes the world is less than 10,000 years old. Throughout history the religious counterparts of society have shown little understanding for the natural world. Instead they have clung to a very precise viewpoint of their dogma, but this lack of understanding is fatal because it obstructs scientific progress, and dissociates the individual from the realities of our modern world.
When Copernicus discovered the earth revolved around the sun it changed science and human perception forever. Earth had been believed to be the center of the universe for 12 centuries. This idea was profound and not accepted well at first. Copernicus was ridiculed and scorned for his novel ideas at the time, but, eventually he was vindicated with his published work De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelesium. When Copernicus finally received recognition with a published manuscript of his revolutionary work he was seventy years old, most likely on his death bed, and it was 1543. Other scientists and explorers of the time weren’t so lucky. Scientists of his day that eluded to the idea that the universe and its inhabitants might have a scientific origin and not a necessarily religious one were at risk of being tortured or executed. One courageous soul who risked life and limb in the name of science was Andreas Vesalius who, like Copernicus, turned the scientific world on its head with his work De Humanis Corporis Fabrica.
Although across the world there were pockets of scientists in China, India and Arabia, the basis of modern science and technology was established by people like Copernicus, Galileo and Descartes in 15th Europe. But the Church controlled the freedom to think. The Church governed most everything, including scientific theories. Scientists like Galileo and Copernicus pushed ideas that went against the doctrines established by the Church. The Bible was the word of God and therefore could not be wrong. Copernicus said that the Earth was not the center of the solar system, but rather the sun; this was considered heresy. Copernicus had to then refute his findings by swearing on the Bible(Fact Check). Over hundreds of years, many scientists continued to build on their predecessor’s findings disprove the way the Church was interpreting the Bible. Once the Church backed down, progress was able to
The Catholic Church was not justified in attempt to stifle Galileo’s scientific views. The Catholic church should have not imprisoned Galileo because of his findings. It was and still is morally wrong to blame an individual because they have corrected history. The Catholic Church believed that their word and beliefs were right, even when they weren’t scientifically correct. Enforcing incorrect views on individuals just to benefit your religion is morally and socially wrong. The political aspect falls in place when the Catholic Church uses their authority to imprison Galileo.
Nicolaus Copernicus and Galileo Galilei were two rising scientists in the 1600s who pushed for the reasoning of science. Both acknowledged the existing role of religion and understood that their ideas could not advance until they were somehow compromised. For Copernicus, his discovery of heliocentrism made significant impacts to the realm of science and ideas as he states in his work, On the Revolution of the Heavenly Spheres. However, he initially “hesitated for a long time and even resisted” from publishing his theories. Because of the major religious status quo during the 1500s, Copernicus felt uncertain and ambivalent about progressing his scientific ideas forward. He also felt “fear on account of the novelty and unconventionality of [his] opinion” which almost led him to “abandon completely the work which [he] had undertaken”. New scientific beliefs emerged, but as Copernicus mentions, these ideas seemed too different and unorthodox. This illustrates the great extent Copernicus took to settle his ideas while tolerating religious values. The strong religious ties had impeded society’s acceptance of new scientific theories; therefore, a compromise in the advancement of these scientific beliefs had to be made to sustain the prominent religious
With this power, they were at the top of the food chain while the scientist was near the bottom. With that realization, most scientists held back their work in fear of being excommunicated from the church. “The council of Trent prohibits interpreting scripture against the common census of the Holy Fathers.” (Bellarmine p.g. 34) “They wanted the beautiful thoughts to be attained by great men of deep devotion not to be ridiculed by those reluctant to exert themselves.” (Copernicus p.g. 22). The scientists had a thirst to study and discover but their fear of excommunication from the church caused them to halt their
The following tutorial is specific to the box “Does Science Threaten Religion”. This article is connected to the structural-functional approach because it is a primary example of the outlook being based around stability even if that involves conflict. The Roman Catholic Church is demonstrating that mentality and approach in this case. When Galileo presented his quantitative and qualitative data of his new findings regarding astronomy and physics, this directly contradicted the beliefs of the Church. In attempts to maintain stability and control the Church opposed Galileo’s work and demanded he retract his findings and stop conducting research. This direct display of conflict against Galileo is an example of how the Roman Catholic Church is