Morgoth schreef op 14 december 2002 @ 03:34:
[nohtml]
Om precies te zijn gaf ik er drie, drie van jouw posts wel te verstaan. Dat waren de argumenten. Jij deed daar boude beweringen zonder deze te staven, dat was mijn punt.
de beweringen waren alles behalve boud en dat er geen bewijs bij staat is nog geen reden om ze als wartaal te kwalificeren. Er is voor jou toch eigenlijk geen reden om je op deze manier in de discussie te mengen. Soms lijkt het wel eens of Captain proton, Lord Deamon en Morgoth samen de drie musketiers vormen. Een voor allen en allen voor een. Jullie delen nogal wat standpunten, maar deze manier van discussie voeren vindt ik oneerlijk te meer daar jullie ook nog moderator zijn.
Dit is een visie over 'het leven van galileo' die totaal anders is dan de standaard opvattingen omtrent dat. En om nu te zeggen dat je dat op discovery zag maakt je beweringen niet erg sterk (aangezien discovery toch altijd wel erg vrij speculeert, vermakelijk ja, wetenschappelijk nee). Dus hier zou ik graag wat goede bronnen van zien, van deze boude beweringen.
Je zou voor de aardigheid eens de verschrikkelijke onzin moeten lezen die vooral astronomisiche en wetenschappelijke sites over Galileo schrijven, waarin de kerk wordt aangevallen en Galieo tot wetenschappelijke martelaar wordt verheven. Dat doet je meteen besefffen dat wetenschappers helemaal niet meer waarheidslievend zijn als andere mensen, maar net zo goed hun eigen stokpaardjes berijden en elkaar na blaten. Ik belangrijke stukken vet gemaakt omdat het een erg lang stuk is.
http://www-gap.dcs.st-and...thematicians/Galileo.html
However, Galileo showed a marked tendency to use all his discoveries as evidence for Copernicanism, and to do so with great verbal as well as mathematical skill.
He seems to have made a lot of enemies by making his opponents look fools. Moreover, not all of them actually were fools.
There eventually followed some expression of interest by the Inquisition. Prima facie, Copernicanism was in contradiction with Scripture, and in 1616 Galileo was given some kind of secret, but official, warning that he was not to defend Copernicanism. Just what was said on this occasion was to become a subject for dispute when Galileo was accused of departing from this undertaking in his Dialogue concerning the two greatest world systems, published in Florence in 1632. Galileo, who was not in the best of health, was summoned to Rome, found to be vehemently suspected of heresy, and eventually condemned to house arrest, for life, at his villa at Arcetri (above Florence). He was also forbidden to publish.
By the standards of the time he had got off rather lightly
http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/Bio/narrative_7.html
Galileo's belief in the Copernican System eventually got him into trouble with the Catholic Church. The Inquisition was a permanent institution in the Catholic Church charged with the eradication of heresies. A committee of consultants declared to the Inquisition that the Copernican proposition that the Sun is the center of the universe was a heresy. Because Galileo supported the Copernican system, he was warned by Cardinal Bellarmine, under order of Pope Paul V, that he should not discuss or defend Copernican theories.
In 1624, Galileo was assured by Pope Urban VIII that he could write about Copernican theory as long as he treated it as a mathematical proposition. However, with the printing of Galileo's book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo was called to Rome in 1633 to face the Inquisition again. Galileo was found guilty of heresy for his Dialogue, and was sent to his home near Florence where he was to be under house arrest for the remainder of his life. In 1638, the Inquisition allowed Galileo to move to his home in Florence, so that he could be closer to his doctors. By that time he was totally blind. In 1642, Galileo died at his home outside Florence.
Het meest gedetailleerde verslag hoe de onuitstaanbare Galileo zich in de nesten werkte vind je hier: hieruit blijkt dat Galileo's werk vooral is verworpen doordtat hij a) de andere wetenschappers van zijn tijd tegen zich in het harnas jaagde b) zijn theorie onvoldoende kon bewijzen. Boven blijkt er uit dat de kerk best bereid was om de geloofsopvattingen aan te passen zou galileo toch gelijk mogen hebben. Verder blijkt hieruit dat de kardinaal zowel als de later paus zijn vrienden waren en Galileo alles behalve als een gevangene werd behandeld maar beslist een voorkeurspositie hand.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06342b.htm
Galileo resolutely and vehemently set himself, with the result that he not only soon discredited many beliefs which had hitherto been accepted as indisputable, but aroused a storm of opposition and indignation amongst those whose opinions he discredited;
the more so, as he was a fierce controversialist, who, not content with refuting adversaries, was bent upon confounding them. Moreover, he wielded an exceedingly able pen, and unsparingly ridiculed and exasperated his opponents. Undoubtedly he thus did much to bring upon himself the troubles for which he is now chiefly remembered. As Sir David Brewster (Martyrs of Science) says,
"The boldness, may we not say the recklessness, with which Galileo insisted on making proselytes of his enemies, served but to alienate them from the truth."
...
It was not until four years later that trouble arose, the ecclesiastical authorities taking alarm at the persistence with which Galileo proclaimed the truth of the Copernican doctrine. That their opposition was grounded, as is constantly assumed, upon a fear lest men should be enlightened by the diffusion of scientific truth, it is obviously absurd to maintain.
On the contrary, they were firmly convinced, with Bacon and others, that the new teaching was radically false and unscientific, while it is now truly admitted that Galileo himself had no sufficient proof of what he so vehemently advocated, and Professor Huxley after examining the case avowed his opinion that the opponents of Galileo "had rather the best of it". But what, more than all, raised alarm was anxiety for the credit of Holy Scripture, the letter of which was then universally believed to be the supreme authority in matters of science, as in all others. When therefore it spoke of the sun staying his course at the prayer of Joshua, or the earth as being ever immovable, it was assumed that the doctrine of Copernicus and Galileo was anti-Scriptural; and therefore heretical. It is evident that, since the days of Copernicus himself, the Reformation controversy had done much to attach suspicion to novel interpretations of the Bible, which was not lessened by the endeavours of Galileo and his ally Foscarini to find positive arguments for Copernicanism in the inspired volume. Foscarini, a Carmelite friar of noble lineage, who had twice ruled Calabria as provincial, and had considerable reputation as a preacher and theologian, threw himself with more zeal than discretion into the controversy, as when he sought to find an argument for Copernicanism in the seven-branched candlestick of the Old Law.
Above all, he excited alarm by publishing works on the subject in the vernacular, and thus spreading the new doctrine, which was startling even for the learned, amongst the masses who were incapable of forming any sound judgment concerning it. There was at the time an active sceptical party in Italy, which aimed at the overthrow of all religion, and, as Sir David Brewster acknowledges (Martyrs of Science), there is no doubt that this party lent Galileo all its support.
In these circumstances, Galileo, hearing that some had denounced his doctrine as anti-Scriptural, presented himself at Rome in December, 1615, and was courteously received. He was presently interrogated before the Inquisition, which after consultation declared the system he upheld to be scientifically false, and anti-Scriptural or heretical, and that he must renounce it. This he obediently did, promising to teach it no more. Then followed a decree of the Congregation of the Index dated 5 March 1616, prohibiting various heretical works to which were added any advocating the Copernican system. In this decree no mention is made of Galileo, or of any of his works. Neither is the name of the pope introduced, though there is no doubt that he fully approved the decision, having presided at the session of the Inquisition, wherein the matter was discussed and decided. In thus acting, it is undeniable that the ecclesiastical authorities committed a grave and deplorable error, and sanctioned an altogether false principle as to the proper use of Scripture. Galileo and Foscarini rightly urged that the Bible is intended to teach men to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. At the same time, it must not be forgotten that, while there was as yet no sufficient proof of the Copernican system, no objection was made to its being taught as an hypothesis which explained all phenomena in a simpler manner than the Ptolemaic, and might for all practical purposes be adopted by astronomers. What was objected to was the assertion that Copernicanism was in fact true, "which appears to contradict Scripture".
It is clear, moreover, that the authors of the judgment themselves did not consider it to be absolutely final and irreversible, for Cardinal Bellarmine, the most influential member of the Sacred College, writing to Foscarini, after urging that he and Galileo should be content to show that their system explains all celestial phenomena -- an unexceptional proposition, and one sufficient for all practical purposes -- but should not categorically assert what seemed to contradict the Bible, thus continued:
I say that if a real proof be found that the sun is fixed and does not revolve round the earth, but the earth round the sun, then it will be necessary, very carefully, to proceed to the explanation of the passages of Scripture which appear to be contrary, and we should rather say that we have misunderstood these than pronounce that to be false which is demonstrated.
By this decree the work of Copernicus was for the first time prohibited, as well as the "Epitome" of Kepler, but in each instance only donec corrigatur, the corrections prescribed being such as were necessary to exhibit the Copernican system as an hypothesis, not as an established fact. We learn further that with permission these works might be read in their entirety, by "the learned and skilful in the science" (Remus to Kepler). Galileo seems, says von Gebler, to have treated the decree of the Inquisition pretty coolly, speaking with satisfaction of the trifling changes prescribed in the work of Copernicus. He left Rome, however, with the evident intention of violating the promise extracted from him, and, while he pursued unmolested his searches in other branches of science, he lost no opportunity of manifesting his contempt for the astronomical system which he had promised to embrace. Nevertheless, when in 1624 he again visited Rome, he met with what is rightly described as "a noble and generous reception".
The pope now reigning, Urban VIII, had, as Cardinal Barberini, been his friend and had opposed his condemnation in 1616. He conferred on his visitor a pension, to which as a foreigner in Rome Galileo had no claim, and which, says Brewster, must be regarded as an endowment of Science itself. But to Galileo's disappointment Urban would not annul the former judgment of the Inquisition.
After his return to Florence, Galileo set himself to compose the work which revived and aggravated all former animosities, namely a dialogue in which a Ptolemist is utterly routed and confounded by two Copernicans. This was published in 1632, and, being plainly inconsistent with his former promise, was taken by the Roman authorities as a direct challenge. He was therefore again cited before the Inquisition, and again failed to display the courage of his opinions, declaring that since his former trial in 1616 he had never held the Copernican theory. Such a declaration, naturally was not taken very seriously, and in spite of it he was condemned as "vehemently suspected of heresy" to incarceration at the pleasure of the tribunal and to recite the Seven Penitential Psalms once a week for three years.
Under the sentence of imprisonment Galileo remained till his death in 1642.
It is, however, untrue to speak of him as in any proper sense a "prisoner". As his Protestant biographer, von Gebler, tells us, "One glance at the truest historical source for the famous trial, would convince any one that Galileo spent altogether twenty-two days in the buildings of the Holy Office (i.e. the Inquisition), and even then not in a prison cell with barred windows, but in the handsome and commodious apartment of an official of the Inquisition." For the rest, he was allowed to use as his places of confinement the houses of friends, always comfortable and usually luxurious. It is wholly untrue that he was -- as is constantly stated -- either tortured or blinded by his persecutors -- though in 1637, five years before his death, he became totally blind -- or that he was refused burial in consecrated ground. On the contrary, although the pope (Urban VIII) did not allow a monument to be erected over his tomb, he sent his special blessing to the dying man, who was interred not only in consecrated ground, but within the church of Santa Croce at Florence.
[
Voor 3% gewijzigd door
Verwijderd op 14-12-2002 05:57
]
/u/1630/crop686a8405a8388_cropped.png?f=community)
:strip_exif()/u/23160/Oscar.gif?f=community)
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/64678/KoenigseggCC.jpg?f=community)
/u/30388/Sesame50.JPG?f=community)
) al naar de kerk, niet met tegenzin maar ook niet graag, integendeel. Ik weet van allebei niet wat ik moet geloven, ik heb veel natuurkunde gehad, heb veel gehoord over God. Toch klinkt het allebei even onlogisch. Want het gaat er bij mij niet in dat alles via een oerknal is ontstaan, maar dat de wereld pas 6000jaar oud zou zijn, terwijl er weetikveel wat voor fossielen worden gevonden van 3 miljard jaar oud, da's wel erg frappant... Maarja daar ben je mens voor he, om de zin van het leven te ontdekken :strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/2032/rorty2.jpg?f=community)
:strip_exif()/u/10422/bows.gif?f=community)
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/3095/nietzsche.jpg?f=community)
Maar als je engels gebruikt, gebruik dan correct engels. :strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/26541/Mike-small.jpg?f=community)
.:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/8563/Yinyang60.jpg?f=community)
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/30234/sponsbob.jpg?f=community)
Zo kun je eindeloos door blijven gaan, maar wij als mensen zullen zoiets nooit begrijpen, als eerste omdat we er nooit achter zullen komen en als tweede dat als we het weten het nooit zullen begrijpen.
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/23647/Untitled-2.jpg?f=community)
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/67932/387397184.jpg?f=community)
:strip_exif()/u/47543/jpcplanet.gif?f=community)
/u/21498/minimoog.png?f=community)