The copernican revolution - Essay Example

THE COPERNICAN REVOLUTION The article on the Copernican Revolution shows two separate segments that frame the divisiveness of scientific advancementin the 1500s and 1600s. The first section talks about Copernicus himself, who was afraid to release his own scientific works for publication for fear of the controversy they would create. When he did release his works toward the end of his life, controversy did follow as he predicted. His works surmised that the earth revolved around the sun, and the moon revolved around the earth, both at great speeds.

As a result of these claims, many religious leaders were angered. They made arguments against Copernicus’ writings, whether they were Protestant or Catholic, and overall agreed to condemn them in a religious manner. In addition, these leaders found that Copernicus’ writings disagreed with the ancient theories of Aristotle and Ptolemy, giving their objections not only a religious aspect but an alternative scientific explanation that was more consistent with their beliefs. They showed quotations from the Bible such as Psalm 93 that indicated that the earth was station, also claimed that the science behind Copernicus’ arguments was impossible regardless of the scriptural conflict.

Cardinal Bellarmine’s letter comes after Galileo supported Copernicus’ writings. The Cardinal writes to the leader of the Carmelites, who attempted to reconcile the Copernican theories with Catholic scripture. The Cardinal pointed out that making this claim was bound to cause more controversy, and could be dangerous. He also insisted that even if some conflicts could be resolved, it would be most difficult to reconcile all scriptural passages with the science, and thus the science would have to be wrong.

He warns against the heresy of misinterpreting scripture, and says that there still is no real scientific evidence behind Copernican theory. If historians were to read this article, they would notice that the sections come from two different time periods but show that the same argument was still alive in two different centuries. They would learn that religious leaders and institutions had an inherent opposition to Copernican theory and saw it early on as well as later on as contrary to what is said in scripture, and thus met this science with the strongest opposition.

Historians would also learn that science and religion were not as separate as they are today, and were at the time considered to be the same basic subject, which is the human method of explaining existence and how the universe works. People such as Martin Luther and Cardinal Bellarmine believed that scientific theories were direct assaults in the belief of God’s power over nature and the world. Historians might also learn that the attitudes of the churches discouraged scientists from spreading their knowledge.

Copernicus was intimidated by the religious establishment, and Galileo faced the same intimidation. Even the leader of the Carmelites was lightly scolded for his attempts to reconcile religion and science, as the Cardinal essentially tried to suppress the development of this viewpoint. Finally, historians may also learn that the reason science was better able to succeed and spread was because some people in the church began to take an interest in it and find a way to make it less controversial, and that in the end science and religion worked together rather than as a rivalry.