Often Times Ideological Conflict Arises Not Because Of Facts

In this paper, I will discuss how three influential scholars in this order: Augustine, Aquinas, Galileo, delimit science or the bible and the ways their beliefs overlapped or didn’t.

An important thing to remember is that is the 16th and 17th centuries, there was no separation between State and the Church. Most/all rules in the State had to do something with the Bible and how it had been interpreted, and it anyone had opposed the ideas of the Bible, they would not only get punished by the church, but also by the State. This made it laborious to try to prove an idea with science, just as Galileo was trying to do. Not even the smallest accusation about the church was taken lightly, “As you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits interpreting the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers.” (Document B). At this point Galileo had only just started his discoveries, and sharing them with the public and church. Even though Galileo never explicitly vocalized that the scriptures were wrong, just by throwing the idea out that the Earth revolved around the Sun, caused disagreement from the Church and State. The timing that Galileo started to speak about his discoveries and thoughts about the universe was not the best. He started to say his ideas only a little after Bruno. Galileo supported Bruno’s idea on how the universe worked. This was probably not the best idea for Galileo, considering that Bruno had been burned to death in 1600, for the popular belief that he was going against the Bible. The main difference between

Galileo felt that the common opinions of others should not satisfy another’s curiosity and others should not be made to believe the opinions of others. The church as well as others that interpreted or preached from the Bible distorted the information and Galileo thought that those who did this should not be allowed to speak or preach about it.

The most significant origin of the conflict between religion and science during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was the condemnation of Galileo by the Roman Catholic Church. Since Galileo supported a

When Galileo’s astronomical claims became public, it was a large blow to The Church. The Church claimed that he was undermining the power of Scripture. If it had publically accepted Galileo’s claims, the Church’s authority would be further questioned. By suggesting that the earth revolved around the Sun, Galileo was questioning centuries of what people regarded to be the “truth,” and this did not sit well with the Church leaders. However, he did explain that he was not questioning the Bible itself, but questioning the interpretation of the Bible by those in positions of spiritual authority.

“Men who were grounded in astronomical and physical science were persuaded as soon as they received my first message…” (30). Others took longer to come to terms with Galileo’s work due to how different it was from what they had come to believe. And, some were so stuck in their ways that they refused to look at the evidence and denied the truth at all cost.

Furthermore, in discussing the conflict between the Church and scientists such as Galileo, it must be noted that both parties held themselves to be unquestionably correct in the argument, because they both based themselves in what they believed to be irrefutable truth. The Church viewed the holy

Galileo Galilei was a very influential and controversial astronomer, scientist, mathematician, teacher, and physicist. His life began in the sixteenth century and ended in the seventeenth, in which he penned several books that supported the Copernican theory of a heliocentric solar system. In the words of Drake S. (1957) “... the works of Galileo are well written, and throw light upon the origins of modern science…”(Pg. 2) Although Galileo was soon deemed a heretic by the Roman Catholic church, he continued diligently challenging Aristotelian thought and doctrine and expressing his support of the Copernican theory. As he continued to make discoveries that supported this theory, the church continued to label him as a heretic, and eventually

In the history of the Catholic Church, no episode is so contested by so many viewpoints as the condemnation of Galileo. The Galileo case, for many, proves the Church abhors science, refuses to abandon outdated teachings, and is clearly not infallible. For staunch Catholics the episode is often a source of embarrassment and frustration. Either way it is undeniable that Galileo’s life sparked a definite change in scientific thought all across Europe and symbolised the struggle between science and the Catholic Church.

This previous revolution caused much more controversy than desired, but to finally accept it, it required a generous amount of open-mindedness. This liberality seems to be what Galileo is really yearning to get out of his Western audience. Essentially, this infamous letter really kicked off the start of the Scientific Revolution; Galileo proves this by being the first to acknowledge the idea of questioning the reason of what is inside the bible, something Descartes more than likely looked at as he was creating his own discourse approximately 20 years later. Although Galileo is still is a Christian and believes the bible is indeed true, as Galileo reiterates “...the Holy Bible can never speak untruth.” (57), this query seemed to be one that would pop up sooner or later, it just happened to be sooner. To be clear, this idea to separate faith and science is in fact based off of the foundation of the bible, which Galileo claims as well in his letter. Galileo even promptly says, “nor is God any less excellently revealed in Nature’s actions that in the sacred statements of the Bible.” (58) First of all, these ideas and questions couldn’t have been assumed at all without the Nature included in God’s Word Himself, and the realization to divide the two had to have derived from inquiries about unknown logic within the pair. This separation isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it’s just unheard of which would give it that negative

The Scientific Revolution not only led to countless inventions that changed the way of life, but changed people’s perspectives on many subjects such as the natural world. Copernicus changed the traditional view of the universe from an earth centered theory to a sun centered theory based on data collected from his predecessors in the field of astronomy. The key to proving this new view of the universe was the collaboration of other scientists, such as Galileo, and the usage of new astronomical instruments, particularly the telescope. The telescope allowed systematic observations of the universe, which ultimately supported the heliocentric view of the universe. This new view questioned everything that was fundamental to the Christian faith, which infuriated the Catholic Church (Spielvogel 475-480, 493).

Towards the conclusion of Galileo's letter he offers an argument of truths. The argument basically states this: if the truth of the Bible conflicts with the truth of fact, and two truths cannot contradict, then one or the other is wrong. Since the truth of fact cannot be wrong, except for ignorance, then the scientific interpretations found in the Bible may therefore be in err. Galileo's doesn't exactly feel that the Bible is wrong, he is just providing one more argument towards the difference in science and the Bible. The errors themselves, he states, are most likely due to the inability to "affirm that all

During our class discussion, we talked about one of the readings that were assigned that week. The reading was Letter to Madame Christina of Lorraine by Galileo. We were split into groups of three and we had to discuss part of the reading that we thought was interesting. Our group decided to pick the second paragraph, because it shows how if one is close minded and stuck in their beliefs, it would be very difficult to convince them of anything other than what their beliefs already are, even if there is concrete evidence to say otherwise. We believe that this is a great paragraph at explaining that there are different types of people in the world consisting of science, religion, or both, that will either accept an idea or would not consider

By resisting against the Catholic authority and publishing the Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, he demonstrated that the value of knowledge can transcend the fear of religious condemnation. From his letter to the duchess of Tuscany, it is evident that Galileo recognized and refuted the church’s application of the Bible to scientific endeavors that permeated society. As the Bible consists of allegorical fables and symbolic proverbs, its ambiguity subjects the reader to interpretation. During this time period, the church designated its own interpretation of the Bible as the quintessential perception of insight and morals that the public should abide in order to lead righteous lives, which Galileo combatted. This view allowed

The Infuriated Monk’s faith to the Bible makes him question Galileo’s theory and having doubts on Galileo’s idea. If Galileo’s research is precise, then people will lose faith in the Bible. When Galileo was in Rome, he went to Cardinal Bellarmin’s house and finding himself surrounded by scholars and astronomers. In Bellarmin’s house, the people were mocking Galileo’s idea. Bellarmin strongly disagrees with Galileo’s way of thinking and responded, “Tonight the Holy Office has decided that the theory according to which the earth goes around the sun is foolish, absurd and a heresy. I am charged, Mr. Galilei, with cautioning you to abandon these teachings.” (Brecht, 79). Cardinal Bellarmin doubts Galileo’s Heliocentric view because he believes that people should have faith in the Bible, instead of trusting a foolish person who is not chosen by God to interpret the Bible. The Cardinal wants Galileo to let go of his teachings, and have faith in the Bible. The Cardinal is expressing how heliocentric view is heresy, and is showing how devoted and faithful he is with the