A view on Religion.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-01-2012, 08:35 AM (This post was last modified: 07-01-2012 08:42 AM by Chas.)
RE: A view on Religion.
(07-01-2012 07:01 AM)Sharks9 Wrote:  
(06-01-2012 09:10 PM)Chas Wrote:  It was pretty conclusive, and other astronomers didn't threaten him with death or imprisonment. When the church had temporal power, they used it to the detriment of free thought.

Not entirely though. Not to mention the Tychonic system was a viable alternative at the time. In some small instances yes, but on a larger scale the Church encouraged free thought and scientific discovery throughout the "Dark" Ages.

Well, if you mean that destroying Greek manuscripts that didn't agree with holy writ is free thought and scientific discovery, then yes, they supported it.Dodgy
(06-01-2012 11:32 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(06-01-2012 09:10 PM)Chas Wrote:  It was pretty conclusive, and other astronomers didn't threaten him with death or imprisonment. When the church had temporal power, they used it to the detriment of free thought.

Galileo didn't get super conclusive evidence for Earth round Sun afaik. He got lots of interesting results but didn't quite manage to prove it, although he *claimed* he had. It is a popular account, but reading Galileo's Daughter by Dava Sobel was an eye-opener into the attitudes of the church. This is what I remember of that book (could be wrong but generally right and I'm lazy to check Tongue faith based reasoning - I'm being infected Tongue ).

Basically Galileo was mates with the new pope when he published his book "Starry Messenger", attacking the theory that Earth is stationary. Two things: 1: He cast his mate the pope as the simpleton Simplicius who was the only guy in his 3 person dialog who spoke up for the current theory, and it was a recognizable caricature. 2: He *had* actually promised that he wouldn't publish on the subject or teach on it under the administration of the *previous* pope. Now yeah, that's the Church opposing free thought alright. But Galileo didn't just break his agreement, he *shattered* it, like a tit. His mate the pope's hands were pretty much tied as to what to do about it - he *couldn't* let the churches authority be challenged in such a blatant way, so Galileo had to be publicly humiliated - that's just politics. Add to that that Pope Leo was pretty pissed to be publicly known as the fool and Galileo was lucky not to get toasted. Galileo (idiot) thought he was in good with the pope so nothing would happen. Big mistake.

You have mixed up two books and gotten the order of events wrong. Try again.

Quote:He could def have been a bit less confrontational - perhaps applied to the new pope for permission to teach/publish on the Copernican theory before just breaking the agreement. It *is* true that the Church tried to suppress the theory and a big hero-myth grew up around Galileo's opposition, which was probably not what they hoped for Tongue But they were just acting as any government with temporal power acts today when it feels threatened. And they did actually apply a bit of restraint - by the standards of the day Galileo got off really lightly. Others who went up against the church were not half so lucky.

So his crime was being confrontational? And who the hell gave the pope the right or power to do any of this? This is precisely why there is a wall of separation between church and state in the U.S.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2012, 10:04 AM (This post was last modified: 07-01-2012 10:28 AM by morondog.)
RE: A view on Religion.
(07-01-2012 08:35 AM)Chas Wrote:  So his crime was being confrontational? And who the hell gave the pope the right or power to do any of this? This is precisely why there is a wall of separation between church and state in the U.S.

Who gives medieval kings the right to cut off people's heads? Pope was roughly the same. Galileo took a big risk and paid a price. He was a bit thick in matters political. Pope = Bob Mugabe. Now tell me, a man who writes a book and publishes it calling Bob Mugabe a fool - what can that man expect from said potentate?

Just personal opinion, possibly badly informed personal opinion. If you look I did actually state that. Feel free to correct me with your superior knowledge.
err... me being all snarky *and* in the wrong Sad

Shouldn't have posted like I was some kinda wise man if I wasn't gonna bother to check my facts. Sorry Chas.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2012, 11:49 AM
RE: A view on Religion.
(07-01-2012 08:35 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-01-2012 07:01 AM)Sharks9 Wrote:  Not entirely though. Not to mention the Tychonic system was a viable alternative at the time. In some small instances yes, but on a larger scale the Church encouraged free thought and scientific discovery throughout the "Dark" Ages.

Well, if you mean that destroying Greek manuscripts that didn't agree with holy writ is free thought and scientific discovery, then yes, they supported it.

What manuscripts are you talking about?

James 1:27
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world"

"Atheists express their rage against God although in their view He does not exist." C.S. Lewis
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2012, 12:04 PM
RE: A view on Religion.
(07-01-2012 11:49 AM)Sharks9 Wrote:  What manuscripts are you talking about?

The Gnostic texts, the 'heretical' gospels, the book of Elxai, works of medicine and science. Some of these are know to have existed due to palimpsests - the erasing of a document and over-writing it with a different one.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2012, 05:33 PM
RE: A view on Religion.
If you don't like theology then you best develop your own naive philosophy and make it consistent, otherwise you are just spinning your wheels.

Nothing wrong with ranting; it was good rant. The philosophy needs improvement. KC came up with some good pointers. From where I sit, a lot of atheists fire up the rant-o-cannon and unload, with a naive belief that truth will out. What is truth? Electricity. Beyond that, it is a moral argument. I have a moral conviction that science provides all the answers this philospher requires; anything I write under that conviction is only ever gonna be philosophy. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: