Essay about Quest for Identity in The Life of Galileo by Brecht

Galileo is concerned with obtaining the truth about the world we live in, whether religion provides an answer or science. This is evident in the letter when he is discussing the “celestial bodies” concerning the work of Copernicus. Galileo believes that it would be wholly unjustified to ban Copernicus’ work after it has been confirmed over the years, he puts it: “in my judgement to be a contravention of the truth” if this were to occur. Basically Galileo believes if something is true, the basis of the truth either, religious or scientific is equally creditable. He further states that if scientific fact is unattainable, it must be a thing of faith and religion; “where human reasoning cannot reach” and there “is no science but only opinion of faith” the truth must be in the Scripture. This is demonstrated in the letter “whether the stars are animate” or “whether or not the heavens are spherical”. Galileo believes that ultimately that the science behind a phenomena will

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

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

The book really focuses on the conflict between Galileo and the Catholic Church, most notably Pope Urban VIII, once

In the midst of this, Cardinal Bellarmine wrote him a letter explaining why his ideas were not going to be accepted. He said: “But to want to affirm that the sun really is fixed in the center of the heavens and only revolves around itself (i.e., turns upon its axis) without traveling from east to west, and that the earth is situated in the third sphere and revolves with great speed around the sun, is a very dangerous thing, not only by irritating all the philosophers and scholastic theologians, but also by injuring our holy faith and rendering the Holy Scriptures false” (Document B). The Cardinal explains how Galileo is contradicting the teachings of the theologists, philosophers, and the Bible. Also, he is doing a dangerous deed because the Church was afraid of these contradicting ideas because they could have destroyed the perspective on the Church and caused a major decrease in power. Galileo contradicting the Church impacted the future by causing more people to begin and question the ways of life, leading to new

Brechts work is based on the concept that theatre is a means of political persuasion for the masses. He sees the theatre as a tool to manipulate the audience, and to influence their day-to-day living once that have thought about issues raised during the performance.

Brecht was not the sort of writer or director that wanted an exact portrayal from his actors of how he saw his characters. Nor did he expect the audience to take an exact interpretation from he actors. He wanted the audience to draw some sort of moral from the story that would arouse their sense of reason to affect their own

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.

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

Even though Galileos beliefs were held in practicing Catholicsim, his writings were showing evidence for “Copernican heliocentrism.” The Catholic Church, however, disapproved of heliocentricity, feeling that it was contrary to the statements in the Bible: if God created human beings as His supreme creation, He would place man at the center of His cosmos. (At that time the more literal Biblical interpretation was prevalent with the church fathers, especially among the Dominican Order, facilitators of the Inquisition)2 However, real power layed with the Church, and Galileo's arguments were most fiercely fought on the religious level. Cardinal Robert Bellarmine insisted that Galileo furnish more adequate proof of his new theories before he would be allowed to teach them as true or even as probably true.

for people to accept. But when the actual facts are looked at it is very easy

The scientific revolution was one of the greatest times in the 16th century and its ideals have proved to last to this very day. The great minds of the scientific revolution brought forth new concepts and vastly complex while each one is rooted in a basic fundamental. Some of these ideas and fundamentals were of the outside world, aka space, the planet and the stars, motion, and physics. One of the best minds of this time was, of course, Galileo Galilei. This great astronomer was a marvel at his work, he introduced controversial concepts that the church did not accept but those that he believed were to be true. Written by Galileo himself, this letter to the Grand Duchess professed his great discoveries and how they changed old ideas and

Galileo debates with the Little Monk how the Church is not justified in lying to the people and making them suffer under their order.

Brecht later in his life contemplated on his decision of denying the history completely. His works such as Life of Galileo Galilee had traditional traits. Though in his work he projected the problems of the proletariat class against the Pope, the hegemonic power and social hierarchy, he did not provide an absolute truth. Brecht contradicted Lucas further stating that his works were based on Balzac’s theory of realism, and were too narrow to include the works of Kafka, Joyce and Beckett. Brecht is perchance as a reformer who has a wider vision for realism. His views and ideas may not be clear and objectified as compared to Lucas, who had a more constricted and vivid explanation about what socialist realism was to him.