I have to appauld this balanced effort at explaining the Galielo affair from an atheist with no axe to grind. :clapping:
I second that.
And a third!
There was a show that covered much of the same material some years back.; however, it had a decidedly anti Catholic bent to it, barely mentioning the 1616 agreement - I had to go look that up.
In particular I like this part part of the article:
Centuries before Galileo the Catholic Church had rejected the idea that there was something wrong with the rational analysis of the physical world, accepting the argument that since God was rational, his creation was rational and so could be apprehended by rational inquiry.
Part of the reason why St. Albert the Great is one of the saints I took for confirmation… helps me keep the proper perspective as a Chemist upon God’s creation.
Thank you for this.
A true atheist would be indifferent to the idea of religion.
And a fourth!
The Catholic Church had rejected the idea that there was something wrong with the rational analysis of the physical world, accepting the argument that since God was rational, his creation was rational and so could be apprehended by rational inquiry. This paved the way for the acceptance of the rational analysis of the world by ancient Greek philosophers and so Plato, Aristotle, Archimedes and many other Greek thinkers were enshrined in Medieval thought, establishing “natural philosophy” (what we call “science”) in the universities of Medieval Europe
That is excellent!
Some true Atheists are very troubled by the idea of religion, and feel a need to do what they can to lessen its impact on the world.
Yeah I saw the movie: youtube.com/watch?v=uPqqp8KVuQU
Great post Della.
Thanks so much.
The article mentioned how the principle of Stellar Parallax seemed to justify the Church’s rejection of Galileo’s promotion of the Copernican theory. For those who wanted more information on that, I have attempted to explain that here.
Thanks for link, John. I"m afraid it’s way over my head, but others who know the topic will benefit from it.
I liked that O’Neil attacked people who resort to “cute” phrases rather than actually looking into history. There was a BBC series called “Connections” a few years ago that also tackled the Galileo hoo-ha. It too was a fair and balanced approach. If only TV programs and the media would stop looking for the most sensational and start telling the simple truth, how much better everyone would be who tunes in to their programs/reads their columns. Oftentimes the truth is far more sensational than any story made up by those with agendas to uphold. Maybe the media should consider that the next time they favor those with faulty information who don’t know what they’re talking about outside their field of expertise.