Aristotle And The Universe Reflection Paper

Ptolemy, a Roman astronomer came up with the theory that the universe revolved around Earth and all the creatures inhabiting it (Doc. C). This theory, The Geocentric Universe of Ptolemy, was adjusted by most of the people during The Middle Ages. However, much later on, Nicolaus Copernicus, a Polish astronomer, disagreed with Ptolemy’s theory. With his use of math and reason, he came up with a new theory called The Heliocentric Universe of Copernicus (Doc. C). He said that the universe & Earth itself revolves around the sun. The Church denied this theory because they did not want to be proven wrong. If the Church was wrong about this part of the universe, this would then cause man to wonder what else they could be wrong about, or even lied to them about. This new theory taught men to think for themselves and not to rely on the Church for

In concordance with Christian doctrines, this system implies that heaven and the throne of God lie beyond the tenth sphere. On the other hand, during the first half of the 16th century, Polish cleric Copernicus developed an astronomical model which positions the motionless Sun at the center of the universe, with the Earth, the moon, and six other planets revolving at a constant speed around it. He argues that all stars were at rest and that their nightly movements are simply indications of the earth’s rotation. However, members of the Church, especially Protestants, who interpreted the Bible literally, refused to grant Copernicus credit for his theory. Nevertheless, once released among the population, the Copernican theory raised support from various scholars, a few of whom, such as Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo, went on to dedicate their career to solidify its legitimacy. With their use of mathematical reasoning, instead of antic philosophy, the Copernican theory finally became justified among the population. Pertaining to its influence among laypeople, the Copernican theory raised various questions against the

Aristotle’s model by today’s standards can easily be picked apart, but at the time, it was the best explanation that could be made with so little technology and insight. Although his theories have long since been replaced, they created a base for future scientists to work off of and challenge. Over time many great scientists began to question Aristotle’s theories. Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), for example, contested the absolute significance of the earth, and he did not agree that it should be viewed as the center of the entire universe (Lizhi & Youquan, 1987). He plotted the earth at the center of the universe and created a heliocentric system just as mathematically complicated as the Ptolemaic system (one that also improved on Aristotle’s), but it explained a number of anomalies, including resolving the issue of retrograde motion (Ede, A. & Cormack, L., 2004). The problem was that Aristotle’s physics of ‘natural motion’ fell apart without the earth in the center of everything.

The Scientific Revolution changed society with the birth of “modern science”; it changed the way people thought about the physical world around them. The same spirit of inquiry that fueled the Renaissance, led scientists to question traditional beliefs about the workings of the universe. The conflict all began with Copernicus’ heliocentric model being introduced to the world- going against the Church’s traditional teachings. Nicolaus Copernicus developed the heliocentric model of the universe- stating that the sun is the center, and that other planets revolve around it. Despite his calculations, people disagreed and kept on believing in Ptolemy’s geocentric model.

A Polish scientist brought a new idea that would make many people think. “Nicolaus Copernicus believed that the center of the Universe was the sun or the Heliocentric View” (Document D). This illustrates that many people discovered new aspects of science. As a result, more ideas will spark from others, coming off of Nicolaus’s new speculation. Next, the famous “Renaissance Man” studies this sophisticated topic.

Aristotle’s model of the universe was a geocentric universe. This meant that the Earth was at the centre of the universe and that all stars were on a celestial sphere. A celestial sphere is an imaginary sphere which acts as a dome around the Earth from which you can see the stars and the universe. Although Aristotle’s model was good for its time it could not explain retrograde motion of the planets.

When writing an essay, different drafts are created that can change the original idea on what the essay should be about multiple times. The same is true for many different things; including the views on the structure of the universe and Earth’s place in it. Many different people have studied and come up with idea about the universe, but two people who challenged what they were told and changed everyone’s minds were Copernicus, and Galileo.

During the 1500s, scientific ideas were primarily based on ancient and medieval ideas. Earlier ideas about the universe were based on Aristotle’s principles, which postulated that the earth was stationary and was at the center of the universe. Later Copernicus overturned the medieval idea of the universe by postulating that the earth revolved around the sun. Scholars like Brahe, Galileo refined the Copernicus model by experimenting and collecting evidence. Even though there were several fundamental breakthroughs by Galileo and other scientists, the new findings failed to explain the forces that controlled the movement of the planets and falling of objects on Earth, and Sir Isaac Newton challenged to solve this ambiguity.

Aristotle had refuted heliocentricity , and by Galileo's time nearly every major thinker subscribed to a geocentric view. Copernicus had delayed the publication of his book for years because he feared not the censure of the Church, but the mockery of academics. It was the hide-bound Aristotelians in the schools who offered the fiercest resistance to the new science. Aristotle was the Master of Those Who Know; perusal of his texts was regarded as almost superior to the study of nature itself. The Aristotelian universe comprised two worlds, the superlunary and the sublunary. The former consisted of the moon and everything beyond; it was perfect and

Galileo’s Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems uses powerful logic and simply described concepts to overcome the Aristotelian bias of the populous and argue in favor of Copernicus’ heliocentric view of the universe. Copernicus theorized that the earth, along with the other planets in the sky, is in motion around the sun. The Aristotelian’s geocentric worldview, that the earth is the motionless center of the universe, was deeply ingrained into the minds of the people and the teachings of the church. Galileo’s argument had to be not only incisive and logical to have any sway, but it also had to avoid offending or denying the ancient principles of thought proposed by Aristotle. He walked this delicate line between educating the public and

(Frova 41) Galileo’s confirmation of Copernican’s heliocentric theory explained through logical arguments and mathematical laws clearly the answers to these difficulties.

Johannes Kepler was a German astronomer and mathematician who lived between 1671-1630. Kepler was a Copernican and initially believed that planets should follow perfectly circular orbits (“Johan Kepler” 1). During this time period, Ptolemy’s geocentric theory of the solar system was accepted. Ptolemy’s theory stated that Earth is at the center of the universe and stationary; closest to Earth is the Moon, and beyond it, expanding towards the outside, are Mercury, Venus, and the Sun in a straight line, followed by Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and the “fixed stars”. The Ptolemaic system explained the numerous observed motions of the planets as having small spherical orbits called epicycles (“Astronomy” 2). Kepler is best known for introducing three

The basic assumption of Aristotelian physics was that the natural state of terrestrial matter is at rest, and that earth air and water would continually strive to reach their natural place at the center of the earth unless impeded by an impenetrable surface like the ground or a ceiling. He assumed that the natural resting place of fire was somewhere above the earth but below the moon. this model held that the complicated nature of the circulation of the air was a result of the conflict between fire, which was trying to

The Catholic Church played an important role at the time when all the works in which the movement of the earth was admitted, Catholics were forbidden to teach, and even read, the Copernican theories. The “Copernican Theory” modeled some problems of enormous importance for Christian’s obviously theological nature. Leaders like Martin Luther and John Calvin told us that Scripture brandished against Nicolaus Copernicus and provoked repression against its followers, but generally abandon the fight Protestantism once the “Theories of Copernicus” were confirmed with indisputable evidence. In this paper, I will first evaluate the history about how “Copernican Theory” and its model of the earth came into existence. I will also analyze the “Copernican Theory” in light of Churches idea of the earth being flat. I will ultimately argue that Nicolaus Copernicus played an important role in the history of Philosophy of Science.

Aristotle believed that the goal of all human life is to achieve ultimate happiness. Happiness is the final Utopia or the end of “a life worth living.” Human instinct is characterized by achieving personal fulfillment, thus leading to happiness. Aristotle warns against going astray and “preferring a life suitable to beasts” by assuming happiness and pleasure are equal. Living a life preferred by beasts incapacitates a person from achieving the end Utopia. Even though Aristotle does not equate the two, he does stress that minimal pleasure is required to achieve happiness. Someone lacking in vital necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter are not capable of achieving happiness due to their lack of pleasure.