Search Results

Augustinian Synthesis to Aristotelian Amalgam

Stephen Gaukroger

in The Emergence of a Scientific Culture: Science and the Shaping of Modernity 1210-1685

In the 13th century, natural philosophy changed status from an enterprise of marginal significance into one that formed the principal point of entry into the understanding of the world and our place ... More

In the 13th century, natural philosophy changed status from an enterprise of marginal significance into one that formed the principal point of entry into the understanding of the world and our place in it. This was effected through the introduction of Aristotelianism into the University of Paris at the beginning of the 13th century where, in its new role as a philosophical foundation for systematic theology, natural philosophy became the single point of entry into natural knowledge of the natural and supernatural realms. The compatibility of Aristotelian natural philosophy was never wholly resolved, however, and matters came to a head at the beginning of the 16th century on the question of the immortality of the soul, where Aristotelian natural philosophy and Christian teaching were in conflict. In many ways, this conflict, which centred around the work of Pomponazzi, provided a model for the later Copernicanism disputes.Less

Reconstructing Natural Philosophy

Stephen Gaukroger

in The Emergence of a Scientific Culture: Science and the Shaping of Modernity 1210-1685

Many of the perceived failures of Aristotelian natural philosophy in the late 16th and early 17th centuries were put down to his conception of method. In fact, both defenders of Aristotle and his ... More

Many of the perceived failures of Aristotelian natural philosophy in the late 16th and early 17th centuries were put down to his conception of method. In fact, both defenders of Aristotle and his critics took his method of presentation for a method of discovery, the former trying to establish how it could act as a method of discovery, and the latter replacing it with something new. Bacon attempted to provide a radical alternative to Aristotelianism, though in some respects, it was locked into the same programme as Aristotle. Of more immediate significance were disputes over the hypothetical standing of Copernicanism, disputes in which Kepler and Galileo were major players.Less

Historical Constellations and Copernican Contexts

Karl Ameriks

in Kant and the Historical Turn: Philosophy as Critical Interpretation

This chapter discusses methodological issues concerning the most extensive research on this era, the massive ‘Jena Project’ directed by Dieter Henrich (who, along with Hans-Georg Gadamer, was one of ... More

This chapter discusses methodological issues concerning the most extensive research on this era, the massive ‘Jena Project’ directed by Dieter Henrich (who, along with Hans-Georg Gadamer, was one of Manfred Frank's teachers). After decades of very productive traditional scholarship on Kant and Hegel, Henrich turned to devoting most of his energy to guiding a detailed exploration of the various ‘constellations’ out of which the best-known German philosophies developed. The methodology of the Jena Project reflects three central features of the study of constellations in general: it emphasized groups, rather than isolated individuals, it worked to identify stars of enduring significance, and it aimed to discern patterns that are at first hidden.Less

Robert Bellarmine and the Catholic Church: Questions of Power and Authority

Stefania Tutino

in Empire of Souls: Robert Bellarmine and the Christian Commonwealth

The final chapter closes back on the Roman Curia, and it explains how, in Bellarmine’s view, the dynamics and mechanics of its power worked. The first section of this chapter illustrates the ... More

The final chapter closes back on the Roman Curia, and it explains how, in Bellarmine’s view, the dynamics and mechanics of its power worked. The first section of this chapter illustrates the implication of Bellarmine’s theory for the development of the political and administrative structure of the Roman Curia. The second section of this chapter focuses on Bellarmine’s position on Copernicanism and on the Galileo affair, and it argues that Bellarmine’s opinions on natural philosophy were consistent with his politico-theological view of the Pope as the spiritual and intellectual leader of Christianity. The third and final section of this chapter presents some concluding remarks on the significance of Bellarmine’s theory for our understanding of ‘modern’ notions of power and authority, and it proposes a theoretical reading of Bellarmine’s theory against Carl Schmitt’s notion of territorial sovereignty and Antonio Gramsci’s understanding of hegemony.Less

Galileo's Telescope

Howard Marchitello

in The Machine in the Text: Science and Literature in the Age of Shakespeare and Galileo

This chapter discusses one of the great revolutions in early modern cosmology: the discovery of blemishes on the sun. In his Letters on Sunspots, Galileo understood these spots to constitute ... More

This chapter discusses one of the great revolutions in early modern cosmology: the discovery of blemishes on the sun. In his Letters on Sunspots, Galileo understood these spots to constitute definitive proof against the Aristotelian belief in a perfect universe. The detection of sunspots was enabled by Galileo's adaptation of the terrestrial telescope to celestial observation. But within this set of technical practices, sunspots are made “real” only by the very technology that enabled observation in the first place. Sunspots were “invented” by the telescope and the technologies of representation deployed in order to make them manifest both to the observer and—through print—to his readers. Galileo's sunspots trouble the conventional understanding of the relation between vision and belief. Rather than serving as an instance of sight conferring belief, these sunspots demonstrate the ways in which belief is first required in order that there can be a confirming vision.Less

Compromises: Viviani, Auzout, Leibniz (1654–1704)

Maurice A. Finocchiaro

in Retrying Galileo, 1633-1992

This chapter investigates what might be called a third wave of reactions to Galileo's trial, covering the period between 1654 and 1704 and most significantly represented by the figures of Vincenzio ... More

This chapter investigates what might be called a third wave of reactions to Galileo's trial, covering the period between 1654 and 1704 and most significantly represented by the figures of Vincenzio Viviani, Adrien Auzout, and Gottfried W. Leibniz. Viviani account focused on Galileo's work in astronomy and physics and on his personality. Auzout suggested that while he might be willing to accept the prohibition on public support, he did not think there was anything wrong with the private pursuit of Copernicanism. Leibniz's 1689 argument was an attempt to make both sides happy; and he thought he could accomplish this by means of a reinterpretation of the situation. In Leibniz, someone who was temperamentally and methodologically moderate, bipartisan, diplomatic, and ecumenically minded was found; he attempted several such moves, and it may have been their failure that led him to a relatively pro-Galilean position in his most mature and public pronouncement.Less

Incompetence or Enlightenment?: Pope Benedict XIV (1740–1758)

Maurice A. Finocchiaro

in Retrying Galileo, 1633-1992

Prospero Lambertini was elected Pope Benedict XIV; he reigned until 1758. His reputation for enlightenment was generally well deserved. It was during his papacy that two important events in the ... More

Prospero Lambertini was elected Pope Benedict XIV; he reigned until 1758. His reputation for enlightenment was generally well deserved. It was during his papacy that two important events in the subsequent Galileo affair occurred: in 1744 Galileo's Dialogue was republished for the first time with the Church's approval as the fourth volume of the Padua edition of his collected works; and in 1758 the new edition of the Index dropped the prohibition against “all books teaching the earth's motion and the sun's immobility.” Pope Benedict XIV enlightenment may have encouraged church officials to adopt toward the issue of the scientific (philosophical) authority of Scripture an attitude similar to that adopted toward the issue of the earth's motion. It is clear that Jesuit Pietro Lazzari was addressing not the issue of the condemnation of Galileo but that of the condemnation of Copernicanism.Less

From Brass Instruments to Textual Supplements

in Galileo's Instruments of Credit: Telescopes, Images, Secrecy

This book proposes radical new interpretations of several key episodes of Galileo's career, including his early telescopic discoveries of 1610, the dispute over sunspots, and the conflict with the ... More

This book proposes radical new interpretations of several key episodes of Galileo's career, including his early telescopic discoveries of 1610, the dispute over sunspots, and the conflict with the Holy Office over the relationship between Copernicanism and Scripture. Galileo's tactics during this time shifted as rapidly as his circumstances, and the pace of these changes forced him to respond swiftly to the opportunities and risks posed by unforeseen inventions, further discoveries, and the interventions of his opponents. Focusing on the aspects of Galileo's scientific life that extend beyond the framework of court culture and patronage, the author offers a revisionist account of the different systems of exchanges, communication, and credibility at work in various phases of Galileo's career.Less

The First Jewish Copernican: Rabbi Joseph Solomon Delmedigo

Jeremy Brown

in New Heavens and a New Earth: The Jewish Reception of Copernican Thought

This chapter examines the life and legacy of Joseph Delmedigo (1591-1655). Delmedigo studied medicine in the University of Padua, where he was a student of Galileo. In 1628 Delmedigo published Sefer ... More

This chapter examines the life and legacy of Joseph Delmedigo (1591-1655). Delmedigo studied medicine in the University of Padua, where he was a student of Galileo. In 1628 Delmedigo published Sefer Elim in Amsterdam, in which he adopted the Copernican model. Delmedigo thus became the first Jewish Copernican, but exactly how Delmedigo learned of the Copernican model is not clear, and various possibilities are discussed. The chapter then discusses the Copernicanism of another Jew with an Amsterdam connection, the great philosopher Spinoza.Less

“Copernicus is the Son of Satan.” The First Jewish Rejections of Copernicus

Jeremy Brown

in New Heavens and a New Earth: The Jewish Reception of Copernican Thought

This chapter discusses the first Jewish rejections of Copernicus. It opens with Fernando Cardoso (1604-1683) who was born in born in Portugal and raised as a Catholic, but ended his life living in ... More

This chapter discusses the first Jewish rejections of Copernicus. It opens with Fernando Cardoso (1604-1683) who was born in born in Portugal and raised as a Catholic, but ended his life living in the ghetto of Verona as a Jew. Cardoso wrote Philosophia libera in which he rejected the Copernican model. After analyzing this book, the chapter discusses Tuviah Cohen and his illustrated Hebrew enclycopedia Ma’aseh Tuviah, published in 1708. Cohen saw himself an iconoclast, willing to break with some, but not all, traditional Jewish teaching about the natural world, and replace it with the latest knowledge being taught in the universities of his time. His book contains the first illustration of the Copenican model in a Hebrew book, but Cohen rejected the model on both scientific and religious grounds, and called Copernicus “the son of Satan.” His book is compared to contemporary Jesuit writings that also rejected Copernicus on both of these grounds. The chapter ends with a comparison of other contemporary Jewish works that discussed Copernicus, Moses Gentili’s Melekhet Mahashevet, and Isaac Lampronti’s Pahad Yizhak.Less

The Eighteenth Century: Jews and Copernicus in the Newtonian Era

Jeremy Brown

in New Heavens and a New Earth: The Jewish Reception of Copernican Thought

By 1700 the Newtonian model, which included the heliocentric solar system, was being taught at Yale and Oxford, although Copernicanism was much slower to gain acceptance elsewhere. There was still ... More

By 1700 the Newtonian model, which included the heliocentric solar system, was being taught at Yale and Oxford, although Copernicanism was much slower to gain acceptance elsewhere. There was still considerable hesitation in religious circles about these changes, causing a tension between those with an intellectual openness to scientific ideas, and those with an affinity towards traditional religious beliefs. This chapter describes how the new astronomy found its way into the thoughts and writings of several of the most prominent rabbinic leaders of the time. These works demonstrate not only the tension between an openness to science and an allegiance to religious demands, but also the different conclusions that were drawn among those who grappled with the new astronomy. Included in the chapter are Raphael Levi of Hannover (1685), and Judah Hurwitz, as well as two of the most famous rabbis of the generation: Jonathan Eybeschuetz (1690-1764) rejected the heliocentric model while Jacob Emden (1697-1776) exhibited a changing approach to the model of the period of his lifetime. Finally we examine the writings of Moses Sofer (1762-1839, better known as Hatam Sofer) and his students on the whether a Jew may believe in the Copernican model.Less

Conclusion

Jeremy Brown

in New Heavens and a New Earth: The Jewish Reception of Copernican Thought

The conclusion opens with a review of the current state of the science-religion debate in both the US and internationally, and shows that the rejection of scientific theories like evolution is ... More

The conclusion opens with a review of the current state of the science-religion debate in both the US and internationally, and shows that the rejection of scientific theories like evolution is widespread, while the contemporary atheists are equally enthusiastic in their attacks on religion. However this study of the Jewish reception of Copernicanism has shown that after some four centuries of action and reaction, accommodation, attack, defense and rehabilitation, Judaism, in all its various contemporary forms, has accepted the heliocentric model. Using the four imperatives of the historian David Livingstone, (pluralize, localize, hybridize and politicize) the encounter of Judaism with the Copernicanism is reevaluated, and the importance of the power of the personality in the transmission of scientific ideas is emphasized. Religious and scientific rationality are then compared, and the conclusion ends by taking the historical lessons learned and applying them to predict how science and Judaism will interact in the future. Judaism, like Christianity and Islam, will need to provide its adherents with a religiously satisfying way to address issues that are raised by many scientific models of understanding the universe which are currently popular in academia and well represented on the best seller lists. The history of the Jewish reception of Copernican thought suggests that both secular scientists and the religiously observant have room to be optimistic.Less

Kepler Sets the Earth in Motion

in Fictions of the Cosmos: Science and Literature in the Seventeenth Century

This chapter examines Johannes Kepler's book about the movement of Earth called Dream. It suggests that this book is inseparable from the context of an abstract space of hypotheses and that it ... More

This chapter examines Johannes Kepler's book about the movement of Earth called Dream. It suggests that this book is inseparable from the context of an abstract space of hypotheses and that it belongs to the Keplerian enterprise of defending Copernicanism. This chapter contends that the book's enunciative strategy can be seen in its ridiculing of one vision of the world before demonstrating a new one.Less

Two Legends

Andrew Steane

in Faithful to Science: The Role of Science in Religion

Two historical episodes are presented: the trial of Galileo and the Wilberforce/Huxley ‘debate’ (really a brief exchange). The legendary versions are put to one side while taking a brief look at what ... More

Two historical episodes are presented: the trial of Galileo and the Wilberforce/Huxley ‘debate’ (really a brief exchange). The legendary versions are put to one side while taking a brief look at what actually happened. In both cases the empirical evidence, at the time, was far from complete and left the scientific issue genuinely unclear. Galileo’s trial was an argument between one group of Christians and another; Galileo himself and all his chief supporters were committed followers of Jesus, with a better grasp of the Bible than his opponents. Some further comments on biblical cosmology are added. In the case of Wilberforce and Huxley, Wilberforce’s arguments were scientific, and expressed in scientific terms, but his motivation probably did include the fear that human value would be diminished. Huxley latched on to this encouraging incident because it was a victory over established interests in the politics of science.Less

A Commotion over Motion

David S. Sytsma

in Richard Baxter and the Mechanical Philosophers

This chapter addresses Baxter’s response to Copernicanism, substantial forms, Descartes’s laws of motion, and Henry More’s variant of mechanical philosophy. Baxter was far more concerned about ... More

This chapter addresses Baxter’s response to Copernicanism, substantial forms, Descartes’s laws of motion, and Henry More’s variant of mechanical philosophy. Baxter was far more concerned about changing notions of substance and causality than he was about Copernicanism. His objections to mechanical philosophy stemmed from a desire to affirm secondary causes as intrinsic sources of motion, which he regarded as important to a correct understanding of God and creation. He defended a concept of substantial form and objected to the theological foundation of Descartes’s first law of motion. Baxter also argued for the plausibility of various kinds of nonliving principles of motion against Henry More’s restriction of motion to spiritual beings.Less

Free Philosophizing

Roger Wagner and Andrew Briggs

in The Penultimate Curiosity: How Science Swims in the Slipstream of Ultimate Questions

This chapter focusses on Galileo’s support for Nicholas Copernicus’ idea that the Earth and the other planets all revolved around the Sun. His theologically informed intellectual optimism made him ... More

This chapter focusses on Galileo’s support for Nicholas Copernicus’ idea that the Earth and the other planets all revolved around the Sun. His theologically informed intellectual optimism made him particularly anxious that the Church not condemn Copernicanism. In his Letter to Castelli, Galileo argued that there was no contradiction between science and Scripture. Holy writ was given to teach us the path to salvation but it was not necessary ‘to believe that the same God who has furnished us with senses, language and intellect would want to bypass their use and … the information we can obtain with them’. He then argued that the passage in the Book of Joshua, which describes God lengthening a day of battle by making the Sun stand still (which was used by opponents of the Copernican theory to show it contradicted Scripture), actually made better sense if Copernicus was right.Less