IDNLearn.com is designed to help you find accurate answers with ease. Ask your questions and receive reliable and comprehensive answers from our dedicated community of professionals.
Sagot :
In 1615, Galileo wrote a letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany in order to show how one could argue for the heliocentric system without necessarily contradicting the Bible. At the time this letter was written, the Scientific Revolution was beginning to present problems for religion. One of these problems regarded how to interpret the passages in which the Scriptures speak of the motion of the Sun and the firmness of the Earth. If these passages are to be interpreted literally, then only the geocentric worldview, based on the works of Aristotle and Ptolemy, could be held by faithful Christians. Furthermore, much of the theology of the Church that had arisen during scholasticism employed concepts from Aristotelian philosophy. If any of Aristotle’s teachings were undermined, it would call into question his credibility and cause unrest concerning theological doctrines.
Galileo objects to using the Bible as a source of knowledge of physical things. He quotes the famous words of Cardinal Baronius, “The intention of the Holy Spirit is to teach how one goes to heaven, not how the heavens go.” Galileo says that the Bible is written in such a way that it is intended not to confuse common people when it mentions physical realities. “These things in no way concern the primary purpose of the sacred writings, which is the service of God and the salvation of souls.” He points out that people have not made a practice of turning to the Bible first for knowledge of geometry, astronomy, music, or medicine before looking to the works of Archimedes, Ptolemy, Boethius, or Galen. It is incoherent, then, to be so skeptical of the De revolutionibus of Copernicus that it be inquired whether it contradicts the Scriptures. If the objective of the Church were to avoid all possible contradictions to the literal interpretation of the Scriptures, then it would be necessary “to ban the whole science of astronomy.”
Galileo resolves the tension between religious belief and individual reason by saying that to “abandon reason and the evidence of our senses in favor of some biblical passage” would be “contrary to the sense of the Bible and the intention of the holy Fathers.” A passage in the Bible that does not agree with science and reason must be interpreted differently. Galileo says that Copernicus also “knew very well that if his doctrine were proved, then it could not contradict the Scriptures when they were rightly understood.” When there is an apparent conflict, therefore, the previously held religious understanding must give way to a solidly proven scientific understanding, and religious authorities must take up the responsibility to show that they do not contradict the Scriptures. If any physical truths are merely asserted, however, without being demonstrated, and these contradict the Scriptures, then they cannot be true, and they should be shown to be false so that people are not led astray.
Galileo’s view of the relation between reason (which includes science) and faith can be seen as in the tradition of St. Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas taught that faith and reason do not contradict each other, but are in harmony. Likewise, Galileo, who was also a Catholic, states that two truths cannot contradict each other. This makes sense in the Catholic understanding of reality. The God who created the universe and made it intelligible also revealed some truths to humankind. Thus there are two distinct ways of coming to knowledge of the truth, reason and faith; but only one source of the truth, God, who is the Truth. If the legend is true that religious authorities at the time refused to look through the lens of the telescope, therefore, then they are the ones who did not follow in the tradition of Aquinas, but rather favored a fideistic approach to reality. Galileo’s approach was more coherent:
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or necessary demonstrations."
Thank you for participating in our discussion. We value every contribution. Keep sharing knowledge and helping others find the answers they need. Let's create a dynamic and informative learning environment together. IDNLearn.com is your reliable source for accurate answers. Thank you for visiting, and we hope to assist you again.
