Science and Religion Three-Way Blog

In my first journal entry, I really had no idea what the trial of Galileo actually consisted of. I didn’t realize that Galileo’s writings and lectures concerning the Copernican model were what caused such a controversy. I thought, originally, that Galileo had some new or original method of thinking that sent shockwaves through the religious and scientific communities. Furthermore, I didn’t know that Galileo was held in contempt because of his refusal to obey the 1616 ruling of the Pope and later because of his publications regarding the Copernican theory. This theory had as many political implications as it did scientific ones with Galileo losing favor in the eyes of the pope, whereas I thought that his trial was merely scientific in nature.
After learning of the trial of Galileo through both reading and discussion, I find myself having little respect for the scientific legend as a man. His argument for the Copernican theory was based not in fact but in thickheaded belief. He had no proof that the Copernican theory was any more scientifically accurate than Tycho’s or Kepler’s, but he avidly ridiculed anyone who offered a position for any belief other than his own. Galileo was a bully, and used prolific debating skills instead of valid scientific reasoning to assert his views.
The trial itself was not one regarding the validity of the Copernican system, but instead one that questioned whether Galileo had defied the pope’s order not to teach it or argue for it as more than a theory. In this respect, I believe that the trial was just. Galileo did indeed defy the orders of the pope and quite vocally advocated the Copernican model of the universe. Furthermore, he did so in a tactless and pompous manner, inciting the negative attention onto himself that he deserved.
Hindsight is 50-50, however, and in retrospect Galileo was scientifically correct. The universe is heliocentric as Copernicus suspected and because of that I believe that Galileo has gained respect from those looking back on his trial. Yes, he had no real proof and went about it the wrong way, but in the end his views became the accepted norm. Because of this, those who know little about the subject will often consider Galileo the victim in the trial instead of the actual offender that he was. I believe that the Pope made the correct decision in ruling Galileo guilty, but I can also understand that his forbidden words were accurate.
This trial is significant because it highlights an instance in which the church wields its power to silence the voices of those in their opposition. It represented the beginning of an era in which the church would continue to voice its opinions on scientific matters but also highlighted the fact that the church can be wrong. These two realizations paved the way for a new battle ground for the forces of science and religion.