Augustine, Galileo and natural science
#11
(06-20-2011, 10:20 AM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-20-2011, 03:07 AM)wulfrano Wrote: Thank you, Rosarium, for pointing out some of the flaws in Galileo's thesis.

I could go into more detail, but the fact is that his work prior to his arrest was by their standards, and our standards, completely rubbish.

It was his work after his arrest that gets him praise.

The Church, in this case, was more for science. Galileo was trying to turn back scientific understanding.

The Galileo affair is only brought up when one expects others to be ignorant. It is never used by serious attackers of the Church.

Galileo certainly wasn't flawless but ultimately he was right and ultimately there were Churchmen that forbade him to discuss heliocentrism. If you're going to condemn the former for some of his errors then you certainly have to condemn the later.

It is common historical knowledge that those who were most fiercely opposed to Galileo were heavily influenced by Protestant literalism.

Why are so many Catholics here espousing something that the Church has never espoused?

Literal readings of Scripture are not the same as literalism, which is the SIMPLEST meaning of a text and not part of sound exegesis. There is God, who inspired the Scriptures, and human authors, who St. Thomas and Augustine say wrote in the common language of the people, that make it difficult to understand the actual divine truth being conveyed in matters of natural science.
Reply
#12
(06-20-2011, 06:03 PM)Alabama Trad Wrote: Galileo certainly wasn't flawless but ultimately he was right and ultimately there were Churchmen that forbade him to discuss heliocentrism. If you're going to condemn the former for some of his errors then you certainly have to condemn the later.
He was not right. Kepler was right. Galileo rejected Kepler's work. 

Quote:It is common historical knowledge that those who were most fiercely opposed to Galileo were heavily influenced by Protestant literalism.
It is common historical knowledge that common knowledge is often wrong or misguided.

Quote:Why are so many Catholics here espousing something that the Church has never espoused?
I am for science. Galileo was wrong. Kepler was right.

Quote:Literal readings of Scripture are not the same as literalism, which is the SIMPLEST meaning of a text and not part of sound exegesis. There is God, who inspired the Scriptures, and human authors, who St. Thomas and Augustine say wrote in the common language of the people, that make it difficult to understand the actual divine truth being conveyed in matters of natural science.
This has nothing to do with scripture. You are unjustly attacking the Church and promoting bad science.

Reply
#13
(06-20-2011, 10:20 AM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-20-2011, 03:07 AM)wulfrano Wrote: Thank you, Rosarium, for pointing out some of the flaws in Galileo's thesis.

I could go into more detail, but the fact is that his work prior to his arrest was by their standards, and our standards, completely rubbish.

It was his work after his arrest that gets him praise.

The Church, in this case, was more for science. Galileo was trying to turn back scientific understanding.

The Galileo affair is only brought up when one expects others to be ignorant. It is never used by serious attackers of the Church.


The Church did not object Heliocentrism.  What the Church disliked was Galieo saying that Scripture was  wrong.  If only he had said "The holy writers used popular language", I don't think he would have gotten into trouble.
Reply
#14
(06-20-2011, 12:39 PM)Pilgrim Wrote: If I recall correctly, I was once told that much of the mythology surrounding the Galileo Affair that is taught as history comes out of the French Enlightenment. Can anyone comment on this?

Only to say that it's probably true, and yet another reason on a long list of reasons to hate the Enlightenment.
Reply
#15
(06-20-2011, 10:56 PM)LausTibiChriste Wrote:
(06-20-2011, 12:39 PM)Pilgrim Wrote: If I recall correctly, I was once told that much of the mythology surrounding the Galileo Affair that is taught as history comes out of the French Enlightenment. Can anyone comment on this?

Only to say that it's probably true, and yet another reason on a long list of reasons to hate the Enlightenment.

The so-called Enlightenment started with Satan being let out of prison in the XVI century.
Reply
#16
(06-19-2011, 11:58 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Galileo in many ways got what he deserved.  Most of the people pushing the Heliocentric view of the universe did so as a way to discredit scripture and to undermine the church.  Nonetheless, Pope Urban VIII asked Galileo to privately a compose a book dealing with the controversy, Galileo rather than politely fulfilling his request wrote a caustic and mocking book that depicted Urban VIII as a simpleton and then published the book in Italian for the public to see.  The fact that he published in Italian was a big deal as it was seen as an attempt to undermine the authority of the Pope by going directly to the people.

That's what got Galileo in hot water.  Not his scientific views, but that he was a disrespectful ass toward the Holy Father. Instead of sharing his scientific views on the universe privately with the Pope, as the Pope had requested, Galileo decided to be mocking and belligerent. 

In short, if Galileo could have posted on these forums he would have banned for belligerency and then complained that he was persecuted for his views.

Thank you for that simple explanation. I am woefully uninformed on this issue, but trusted in people like you who have said there was much more to the story. However, you are the first person to explain it very clearly and briefly. Would you happen to have a link to a simple explanation for this? My soon to be 4th grader was in a situation where his teacher told the class, after watching a film, that the Roman Catholic Church was the bad guy in this saga. I would like to read it to him as he did defend his Faith, but unfortunately, I was not able to give him what he was really after. Except to say that the story has been twisted. It sufficed for the moment, but he needs more.

Reply
#17
(06-26-2011, 02:35 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote:
(06-19-2011, 11:58 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Galileo in many ways got what he deserved.  Most of the people pushing the Heliocentric view of the universe did so as a way to discredit scripture and to undermine the church.  Nonetheless, Pope Urban VIII asked Galileo to privately a compose a book dealing with the controversy, Galileo rather than politely fulfilling his request wrote a caustic and mocking book that depicted Urban VIII as a simpleton and then published the book in Italian for the public to see.  The fact that he published in Italian was a big deal as it was seen as an attempt to undermine the authority of the Pope by going directly to the people.

That's what got Galileo in hot water.  Not his scientific views, but that he was a disrespectful ass toward the Holy Father. Instead of sharing his scientific views on the universe privately with the Pope, as the Pope had requested, Galileo decided to be mocking and belligerent. 

In short, if Galileo could have posted on these forums he would have banned for belligerency and then complained that he was persecuted for his views.

Thank you for that simple explanation. I am woefully uninformed on this issue, but trusted in people like you who have said there was much more to the story. However, you are the first person to explain it very clearly and briefly. Would you happen to have a link to a simple explanation for this? My soon to be 4th grader was in a situation where his teacher told the class, after watching a film, that the Roman Catholic Church was the bad guy in this saga. I would like to read it to him as he did defend his Faith, but unfortunately, I was not able to give him what he was really after. Except to say that the story has been twisted. It sufficed for the moment, but he needs more.

Also keep in mind that the idea that the earth is stationary is true according to modern science.

Movement is only relative. To us and many models scientists use, the earth is stationary while all else moves about. There is no basis for using a perspective besides our own. Physics works regardless of the perspective. For those who say the earth moves, one could say "demonstrate it". We have all the evidence in the world that the earth does not move. All else moves. Modern scientific theories prove this. We do not experience the effects of movement, but we experience the effects of bodies moving around us.

Reply
#18
(06-26-2011, 03:00 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-26-2011, 02:35 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote:
(06-19-2011, 11:58 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Galileo in many ways got what he deserved.  Most of the people pushing the Heliocentric view of the universe did so as a way to discredit scripture and to undermine the church.  Nonetheless, Pope Urban VIII asked Galileo to privately a compose a book dealing with the controversy, Galileo rather than politely fulfilling his request wrote a caustic and mocking book that depicted Urban VIII as a simpleton and then published the book in Italian for the public to see.  The fact that he published in Italian was a big deal as it was seen as an attempt to undermine the authority of the Pope by going directly to the people.

That's what got Galileo in hot water.  Not his scientific views, but that he was a disrespectful ass toward the Holy Father. Instead of sharing his scientific views on the universe privately with the Pope, as the Pope had requested, Galileo decided to be mocking and belligerent. 

In short, if Galileo could have posted on these forums he would have banned for belligerency and then complained that he was persecuted for his views.

Thank you for that simple explanation. I am woefully uninformed on this issue, but trusted in people like you who have said there was much more to the story. However, you are the first person to explain it very clearly and briefly. Would you happen to have a link to a simple explanation for this? My soon to be 4th grader was in a situation where his teacher told the class, after watching a film, that the Roman Catholic Church was the bad guy in this saga. I would like to read it to him as he did defend his Faith, but unfortunately, I was not able to give him what he was really after. Except to say that the story has been twisted. It sufficed for the moment, but he needs more.

Also keep in mind that the idea that the earth is stationary is true according to modern science.

Movement is only relative. To us and many models scientists use, the earth is stationary while all else moves about. There is no basis for using a perspective besides our own. Physics works regardless of the perspective. For those who say the earth moves, one could say "demonstrate it". We have all the evidence in the world that the earth does not move. All else moves. Modern scientific theories prove this. We do not experience the effects of movement, but we experience the effects of bodies moving around us.

Please quote scientists living today who say that the Earth is stationary and that the sun and planets revolve around the Earth.  Thank you.
Reply
#19
(06-26-2011, 04:21 PM)wulfrano Wrote:
(06-26-2011, 03:00 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-26-2011, 02:35 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote:
(06-19-2011, 11:58 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Galileo in many ways got what he deserved.  Most of the people pushing the Heliocentric view of the universe did so as a way to discredit scripture and to undermine the church.  Nonetheless, Pope Urban VIII asked Galileo to privately a compose a book dealing with the controversy, Galileo rather than politely fulfilling his request wrote a caustic and mocking book that depicted Urban VIII as a simpleton and then published the book in Italian for the public to see.  The fact that he published in Italian was a big deal as it was seen as an attempt to undermine the authority of the Pope by going directly to the people.

That's what got Galileo in hot water.  Not his scientific views, but that he was a disrespectful ass toward the Holy Father. Instead of sharing his scientific views on the universe privately with the Pope, as the Pope had requested, Galileo decided to be mocking and belligerent. 

In short, if Galileo could have posted on these forums he would have banned for belligerency and then complained that he was persecuted for his views.

Thank you for that simple explanation. I am woefully uninformed on this issue, but trusted in people like you who have said there was much more to the story. However, you are the first person to explain it very clearly and briefly. Would you happen to have a link to a simple explanation for this? My soon to be 4th grader was in a situation where his teacher told the class, after watching a film, that the Roman Catholic Church was the bad guy in this saga. I would like to read it to him as he did defend his Faith, but unfortunately, I was not able to give him what he was really after. Except to say that the story has been twisted. It sufficed for the moment, but he needs more.

Also keep in mind that the idea that the earth is stationary is true according to modern science.

Movement is only relative. To us and many models scientists use, the earth is stationary while all else moves about. There is no basis for using a perspective besides our own. Physics works regardless of the perspective. For those who say the earth moves, one could say "demonstrate it". We have all the evidence in the world that the earth does not move. All else moves. Modern scientific theories prove this. We do not experience the effects of movement, but we experience the effects of bodies moving around us.

Please quote scientists living today who say that the Earth is stationary and that the sun and planets revolve around the Earth.  Thank you.

I did not say the sun and planets revolve around the Earth.

And scientists wouldn't put it that way. Just study modern physics and you'll see.

And drop assumptions about what I meant. I am not saying that ancient ideas are true. I am pointing out the big picture based on modern science.

Reply
#20
This is just an observation from a guy that used "applied science" all of his life as a mfg. tool engineer. Where folks go wrong is they think science is easily accessible and some sort of "big theory" can be discovered and we should all accept it as fact. Science is continously being upgraded. Our understanding of the laws behind our observations is mostly incomplete. Sir Issac Newton was replaced by Einstein, that's classical mechanics with relativity. Today quantam physics is doing the same to Einstein, who incidentally fought this notion till his death. . But  wait, we still use Newtonian physics, though it's superceded. How can that be ? It is because "science" is a just a place holder for the current state of our imperfect knowledge of the world the Almighty has created. Grand theories aside sometimes we stumble on great laws and the inverse square law is one of these. It has application in grvitation, electrostatics, light, and other electro-magnetic forces. What it does is show us behind things are elegant little gems of science. What we humans do is make rube goldberg rules with apppendages sticking out at any angle making for a very inelegant hodge podge of our vaunted smarts. I've realized it's just like everything else in God's world he respects the small and the humble because that is how He likes it, including laws of science. When I get to heaven, I'm going to corner one of the Angels that are in charge of a big galaxy like the Crab Nebulae, and jaw bone him till I understand the underlying principles God has in this magnificent Creation, till then I'll be happy with force equals mass times acceleration.

tim
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)