Religion is of no use to science.

all devout theists who put their lives in danger of religious persecution for getting their ideas out
 
S.A.M. said:
Jokes aside, I believe religious people are more creative in their thinking. All of the biggest breakthroughs in scientific thought have been by the religious or during periods of religious renaissance.
Click to expand...

That is a gigantic crock.
 
cmon, even you know that was very weak
I mean, how to respond to such a wild assumption?
 
You mean, like this:

all devout theists who put their lives in danger of religious persecution for getting their ideas out
Click to expand...

I'd be interested to her what all of them were persecuted for.
 
Athiests have indeed been historically persecuted; not so much any more.

If you doubt this, there's not much point.
 
Not at all. Galileo was an SOB who thought it superfluous to support his hypothesis with evidence. The scientists of his day chucked him out for making an ass of himself. If it was to happen today, he would never have an academic career and definitely, not be given the means to carry on his research after he was kicked out. It just so happened that his major fundraiser was the Pope whom he insulted in public. Obviously the Pope did not take too kindly to this [neither would the NIH, today]. However, he still gave him the means to write and research for the remainder of his life [which the NIH would not do]. Now if only Galileo had read Keplers work [collecting dust on his shelves] instead of being too arrogant to do so, he would have found the evidence he needed. However, as a devout Christian, he was unlikely to oppose the church.

Here is detailed account of it:

http://www.ips-planetarium.org/planetarian/articles/mythofgalileo.html

I just read while searching for the link that there is another newer theory:

In the middle of the Thirty Years' War between the Holy Roman Empire and almost every major power in Europe, tensions were high between Tuscany and Rome. The Tuscan Duke of Medici had refused to aid Rome in its war efforts against France. Pope Urban VIII decided to punish the Duke by arresting the Duke's personal friend, Galileo.

Whatever its motivation, the Roman court found Galileo guilty of heresy and placed him under house arrest. He spent the first five years of his sentence in a small house near Florence, where he continued to publish work on the science of motion, and the next—and last—four years of his life confined to another home in Florence closer to his doctors.

"No other historian in the 350 years after the trial has ever proposed the theory" that the Pope persecuted Galileo to punish the Duke of Medici, Wilding says. Written only 20 years after Galileo's death, the newfound biography represents one of the earliest explanations for the trial ever recorded. "To me, it feels right," Wilding says. The idea "might provide some closure to a still-festering wound."
Click to expand...
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/galileo-reconsidered.html?c=y&page=3

Will need to confirm this though.
 
Last edited:
well, he wasn't trialed for poor research, he was trialed for heresy

from wikipedia
With the loss of many of his defenders in Rome because of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. The sentence of the Inquisition was in three essential parts:

* Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy", namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[87]
* He was ordered imprisoned; the sentence was later commuted to house arrest.
* His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.[88]
Click to expand...
 
Yeah I know. You can read the links I provided. There are better sources out there if you care for independent research. Most stories about Galileo "omit" the fact that he wanted to be a monk [was actually an unfrocked priest I think] and was actually looked down upon by the scientific elite of his day who circulated rumors about him.

For example, Salusbury parrots rumors of the time that Galileo was an illegitimate child, and that his wife tore up many of his scientific papers at the request of a nefarious priest. Modern scholars know both claims are false; in fact, Galileo never even married. But these inaccuracies point to the rampant anti-Catholic, misogynistic sentiments of many in the Italian scientific circle at the time, Wilding says. "For them, it was, 'Bad priest! Stupid women!'"
Click to expand...
 
S.A.M. said:
Yeah I know. You can read the links I provided. There are better sources out there if you care for independent research. Most stories about Galileo "omit" the fact that he wanted to be a monk [was actually an unfrocked priest I think] and was actually looked down upon by the scientific elite of his day who circulated rumors about him.
Click to expand...

that doesn't mean much
hell, I would like to be a monk if I lived back then
 
but in the end you're just threading the discussion away from the fact that the only thing linking religion to science back then was tons of money
 
Galileo was an interesting character, I think. He was a devout Catholic till he died, but never married the mother of his children; his contract as a uni lecturer was not renewed because he was rude and inappropriate with his students. Because he refused to marry his lover, his daughters were illegitimate and could not get married. So they were forced to live in a convent all their lives. :D

Varda said:
but in the end you're just threading the discussion away from the fact that the only thing linking religion to science back then was tons of money
Click to expand...

Not at all, who outside of the monks and all, was even interested in research? Galileo for example, was debt ridden all his life and only lived and worked on the charity of the church. Without them, none of his work would have even beeen produced, let alone survived [it also survived because of other monks wrote about him]
 
I mean... would the pope have sponsored galileo if he wasn't a professed christian?
 
Varda said:
I mean... would the pope have sponsored galileo if he wasn't a professed christian?
Click to expand...

No idea. But why should they? It would appear though that the Italian scientific community was anti-Catholic and clung tenaciously to Aristotle's models. Which brings me to the point that it takes a theist to think creatively. ;)
 
S.A.M. said:
Galileo was an interesting character, I think. He was a devout Catholic till he died, but never married the mother of his children; his contract as a uni lecturer was not renewed because he was rude and inappropriate with his students. Because he refused to marry his lover, his daughters were illegitimate and could not get married. So they were forced to live in a convent all their lives. :D



Not at all, who outside of the monks and all, was even interested in research? Galileo for example, was debt ridden all his life and only lived and worked on the charity of the church. Without them, none of his work would have even beeen produced, let alone survived [it also survived because of other monks wrote about him]
Click to expand...

and you can't see a link between that and galileo's interest in becoming a monk?
who outside the church could afford to research?
 
The entire anti-Catholic scientific community apparently, not to mention his friend teh Duke of Medici.
 
I'm not sure of what you are trying to say, but I would like you do address the core of my argument, that is, explaining how the church's richness back then is the reason why it was conected to scientifical development

the post you ignored:


Varda said:
Yes, along with the nobility, were the only people who could afford to fund research.
Does that translate as a special quality of the religious mind to you?
Maybe the wit to manipulate people into sponsoring their comfortable existence so they could ponder about the universe and shit.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top