Monday, December 6, 2010

Galileo Free Response #1

Why are the trials and tribulations of Galileo often considered both predicative of the future of Western Civilization as well as a perfect encapsulation of the context of his own time?


Galileo was a brilliant scientist who lived in early 17th century papal Europe. He is sometimes even referred to as the father of modern science because of his discoveries in mathematics, physics and astronomy. He was an apt supporter of the ideas of the astronomer Copernicus which contradicted the scriptural theory of geocentricism. This was the idea that the Sun moved around the Earth instead of the reality which is a heliocentric universe. Galileo’s trials and tribulations both point to the future of Europe and show the harsh realities of the time he lived in.

In 17th century Europe to go against openly the ideas of scripture and the Catholic church could be dangerous, even deadly. Galileo was one such man. When he learned of Copernicus’ theory that the Earth and planets orbited the sun rather than the sun and the planets orbiting Earth he became a supporter of the idea. Galileo went on to adopt an unorthodox approach to scripture. He believed that scripture should not be taken literally when one was looking at poetry creative works in scripture as they may not necessarily be true. This was a very uncommon way to look at the bible during his time because most scholars took scripture literally word for word. In 1616 even though the Pope specifically asked Galileo to publish a book with voiced the arguments for Geocentricism and Heliocentricism equally so as not to seem to advocate Heliocentricism Galileo published an argument for heliocentric ideas. The Catholic Church tried Galileo for heresy and he was forced to denounce his beliefs and put to house arrest for the rest of his life.

17th century Europe was not the time to be questioning the ideas of men who studied and took each and every word of scripture literally. The story of Galileo is of a man who was forced to renounce his beliefs and writings because of the time he lived in. Galileo’s ideas, which stemmed from Copernicus’ theories, contradicted scripture. In summary, Scriptures basically said that the Earth did not move and that the universe revolved around it. Because of this Galileo’s writings and ideas about a heliocentric universe were taken by many as heretical nonsense. Also during this time most of the educated men were men of the church, this meant that most of Galileo’s peers followed the biblical view of the universe so Galileo had very little support. Galileo was a man whose ideas were ahead of his time.

Although Galileo was confined to house arrest for the rest of his life his trials and tribulations can be considered predicative of the future of Western civilization. The Catholic Church was actually considering his ideas but because of how brashly he published them after the Pope specifically told him to make his book objective he was tried for heresy. This can be indicative of what the future held for Europe in terms of new scientific discoveries that contradicted scripture. The Church was willing to revise its ideas as long as there was concrete proof that the writings of scripture were incorrect. Although Galileo was indeed tried for heresy after pressure by his enemies the way the Church interpreted the ideas of scripture was more flexible than it had ever been before. Catholic Europe would still be completely under the thrall of the Popes for some time but ways were opening for new scientific discovery.

Galileo and his life are an example of science coming at odds with the church and his example would not be the last. His persecution stemmed from publishing ideas that contradicted scripture, his story showed that the future of Europe would still be under heavy papal influence for some time and he lived much too ahead of his time.

4 comments:

  1. 6- Thesis merely restates the question prompt. Support is good, if not a bit redundant.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 5
    - needs a stronger thesis
    - historical information adequate but needs to be broader

    ReplyDelete
  3. 4. Thesis was too short and sweet
    good facts though, but needs more

    ReplyDelete
  4. Completely generic thesis statement. You are just repeating the question in the affirmative. There is no argument. 2

    ReplyDelete