Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
posted by chromas on Tuesday February 12 2019, @03:41PM   Printer-friendly

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

The truth about Galileo and his conflict with the Catholic Church

Today virtually every child grows up learning that the earth orbits the sun.

But four centuries ago, the idea of a heliocentric solar system was so controversial that the Catholic Church classified it as a heresy, and warned the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei to abandon it.

Many people believe that Galileo was hounded by the church for almost two decades, that he openly maintained a belief in heliocentrism, and that he was only spared torture and death because his powerful friends intervened on his behalf. But an examination of the fine details of Galileo’s conflict with church leaders doesn’t bear that out, according to English department distinguished research professor Henry Kelly.

In an article published this month in the journal “Church History,” Kelly clarifies some popularly held notions around Galileo’s travails with the church.

“We can only guess at what he really believed,” said Kelly, who for his research undertook a thorough examination of the judicial procedure used by the church in its investigation of Galileo. “Galileo was clearly stretching the truth when he maintained at his trial in 1633 that after 1616 he had never considered heliocentrism to be possible. Admitting otherwise would have increased the penance he was given, but would not have endangered his life, since he agreed to renounce the heresy — and in fact it would have spared him even the threat of torture.”

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the beginning of the Catholic Church’s investigation into Galileo.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @10:13PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @10:13PM (#800364)

    > suspension of disbelief
    AKA belief

    No, suspension of disbelief: basically, telling yourself "OK, I know this is stupid, but let's say it's real..." in order to accept what follows. You don't actually believe it, but you're willing to stipulate that something false is true for a given scenario, else the scenario is implausible. Generally you only do it for a brief time.

    It's like going to the movies or watching TV. "OK, I know people can't actually fly/aren't invulnerable/can't turn into giant rage-monsters/can't gain the proportionate strength and agility of a spider by being bit by one, but..." in order to enjoy the latest superhero blockbuster; "OK, I know people aren't generally that stupid, but..." to enjoy the latest slasher movie; etc.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 13 2019, @05:49PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 13 2019, @05:49PM (#800668)

    Bot's neural net is incapable of processing double negatives or contractions.