We're sunsetting PodQuest on 2025-07-28. Thank you for your support!
Export Podcast Subscriptions
cover of episode HoP 460 - Trial and Error - Galileo and the Inquisition

HoP 460 - Trial and Error - Galileo and the Inquisition

2025/1/5
logo of podcast History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps

History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps

AI Deep Dive AI Insights AI Chapters Transcript
People
P
Peter Adamson
Topics
Peter Adamson: 本期节目探讨了伽利略与宗教裁判所的冲突,以及这场冲突背后的哲学问题。科学史的书写往往带有胜利者的视角,对那些压制真理的观点的人,评价更为严厉。伽利略成为日心说的殉道者,在1633年被宗教裁判所审判。哥白尼的日心说在最初几十年并没有得到广泛接受,因为它反直觉,并且存在技术上的异议,例如缺乏恒星视差。此外,还存在其他合理的模型,以及奥西安德在哥白尼著作序言中提出的折中方案,可以将日心说视为与天文观测相符的假设性结构。贝拉明认为,将日心说视为数学上的假设是安全的,但声称太阳实际上位于宇宙中心则非常危险,因为它会冒犯哲学家、神学家,并损害圣经的权威性。贝拉明认为,在没有确凿证据的情况下,教会和传统有权决定圣经的解释,而不是地球的运动本身。教会反对日心说是在反宗教改革的背景下理解的,因为新教的兴起使得教会必须坚持其在圣经解释方面的权威。贝拉明认为伽利略可以将哥白尼体系视为有用的假设。1615年,伽利略被宗教裁判所调查,贝拉明指示他不要将日心说作为“已证实的物理理论”来捍卫。望远镜的出现改变了伽利略的想法,通过望远镜的观察,他相信了日心说。伽利略通过望远镜观察到了木星的卫星、太阳黑子、金星的相位以及火星大小的变化,这些都支持了哥白尼的理论。伽利略在1611年认为行星绕太阳运行有确凿的证据,在1615年认为哥白尼的观点是确定的。洛里尼抱怨日心说不仅与圣经的传统解读相冲突,而且还“践踏了亚里士多德的哲学”,而伽利略则认为如果亚里士多德看到望远镜的观测结果,他会接受哥白尼体系。伽利略认为遵循经验观察是亚里士多德主义的更深层次的承诺,鉴于新的经验发现,继续坚持亚里士多德的宇宙观违背了亚里士多德方法论的精神。伽利略认为奥西安德的序言是外来的补充,与哥白尼的思想相悖,哥白尼的《天体运行论》的目的是确立日心说为物理现实。伽利略反驳了如果地球在旋转,物体下落时不会垂直落地的说法,他认为物体与地球一起旋转。伽利略用思想实验(例如船上的蝴蝶和鱼)来解释地球的运动不会导致地球上物体的侧向运动。伽利略认为,关于圣经段落暗示地心说的反对意见是可以驳斥的。伽利略认为圣经的解释需要专业知识,在天文问题上,数学和物理学告诉我们什么是真实的,我们必须根据这些来理解圣经。伽利略批评神学家在缺乏良好论据时诉诸谴责。伽利略并非孤军奋战,坎帕内拉为他辩护,认为伽利略的哲学方法比亚里士多德更符合圣经。坎帕内拉认为,压制科学探究最终会使教会蒙羞。1633年,宗教裁判所试图与伽利略达成某种认罪协议。伽利略出示了他与贝拉明的往来记录,证明自己一直遵守贝拉明的指示,只将日心说作为假设来讨论,但认罪协议最终失败了。现代研究认为伽利略的审判是司法不公,教会为了维护自身声誉而违反了自身的法律程序。伽利略在1632年出版的《关于托勒密和哥白尼两大世界体系的对话》激怒了教皇乌尔班八世。伽利略在对话中让“辛普利丘”重复了教皇提出的论点,这激怒了教皇。伽利略将教皇的论点放在“辛普利丘”口中,这被认为是轻率的行为。伽利略在《对话》中论证了日心说,但其论证基于潮汐的成因,这是错误的。伽利略认为潮汐是由地球自转和绕太阳公转的双重运动引起的,这是错误的。伽利略关于潮汐的解释是错误的,潮汐是由月球的引力引起的。伽利略虽然是对的,但他的一些论点是错误的,这值得我们反思双方所引用的真理标准。伽利略不认为亚里士多德是权威,他认为自己通过观察比亚里士多德看得更多。一些学者认为伽利略试图运用亚里士多德的证明方法,而另一些学者则认为他发展了新的科学方法。伽利略认为,在某些情况下,经验观察可以直接使某些事情变得显而易见,实验可以像证明一样确立命题。伽利略认为新的天文学是确定的,而其他科学努力只是可能的,例如占星术。伽利略是过渡时期的人物,他既属于16世纪,也属于17世纪。伽利略认为物体本身具有主要的品质,如延伸和形状,但不具有感官特征,如味道、气味或颜色。伽利略将太阳比作动物的心脏,这体现了文艺复兴时期的哲学观点。文艺复兴和宗教改革时期的哲学研究是理解早期现代哲学的理想准备,也是早期现代哲学研究的一部分。

Deep Dive

Key Insights

Why did the Catholic Church oppose Galileo's heliocentric theory?

The Catholic Church opposed Galileo's heliocentrism primarily because it challenged the Church's authority in interpreting Scripture. During the Counter-Reformation, the Church sought to maintain its unchallenged authority, especially against Protestantism. Heliocentrism contradicted biblical passages, such as the miracle of the sun ceasing its motion, and threatened the Church's traditional interpretation of Scripture. Cardinal Bellarmine emphasized that without definitive proof, the Church's tradition should determine the meaning of Scripture.

What evidence did Galileo use to support heliocentrism?

Galileo used telescopic observations to support heliocentrism. He observed moons orbiting Jupiter, sunspots indicating the Sun's rotation, the phases of Venus, and the varying apparent size of Mars. These observations aligned with Copernicus' predictions and convinced Galileo that heliocentrism was a proven physical reality. He argued that these empirical findings provided 'certain demonstration' that the planets orbit the Sun.

How did Galileo respond to the argument that objects would not fall straight if the Earth moved?

Galileo argued that objects fall straight because they share the Earth's rotational motion. He used a thought experiment involving a ship moving at sea, where butterflies and fish in the hold appear to move normally despite the ship's motion. Similarly, objects on Earth are already rotating with it, so their motion continues as they fall, causing them to land directly below.

What was the significance of Galileo's 'Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems'?

Galileo's 'Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems' was significant because it made his support for heliocentrism evident, despite his claim to treat it as a hypothesis. The work presented a sustained case for heliocentrism, using empirical arguments and thought experiments. However, it also provoked the Church, especially when Galileo included an argument from Pope Urban VIII in the mouth of a character named Simplicio, which was seen as mocking the Pope.

Why did Galileo's trial result in a miscarriage of justice?

Galileo's trial resulted in a miscarriage of justice because the Church violated its own legal procedures to condemn him. Despite Galileo producing a written record of his agreement with Cardinal Bellarmine to treat heliocentrism as a hypothesis, other figures in the Holy Office undermined the plea bargain. The Church's actions were driven by political and ideological motives, including the need for a scapegoat during unsettled times.

What was Galileo's view on the relationship between science and Scripture?

Galileo believed that Scripture, while always true, was often difficult to interpret, especially on matters of astronomy. He argued that mathematics and physics reveal truths about the natural world, and Scripture should be understood in light of these discoveries. He criticized theologians for condemning scientific ideas without expertise, asserting that banning Copernicanism would mean banning astronomy altogether.

How did Galileo's methodology differ from Aristotelian scientific methods?

Galileo's methodology emphasized empirical observation and direct evidence, diverging from the Aristotelian reliance on authority and logical demonstration. He argued that empirical observations, such as the phases of Venus, made heliocentrism immediately evident. While he respected Aristotle's emphasis on empirical evidence, he rejected the idea of following Aristotle as an authority, asserting that truth should be determined by arguments and observations, not by tradition.

What was Galileo's error regarding the tides?

Galileo incorrectly attributed the tides to the Earth's double motion (rotation and orbit around the Sun). He used a thought experiment involving a moving tank of water to explain his theory. However, this was wrong because the oceans are carried along with the Earth's motion. The true cause of tides, the Moon's gravitational force, was proposed by others like Kepler and later explained by Newton's theory of gravity.

Chapters
This chapter explores the historical context of Galileo's trial, examining the prevailing scientific beliefs of the time and the Church's role in suppressing heliocentrism. It highlights the complexities involved, including the lack of definitive proof for heliocentrism and the Church's need to maintain its authority in the face of the Reformation.
  • The condemnation of Galileo is viewed in the context of the history of science and the suppression of new scientific ideas.
  • The Church's actions are examined within the context of the Counter-Reformation and the need to maintain its authority.
  • Copernicus's theory faced technical objections and lacked widespread acceptance.

Shownotes Transcript

The philosophical issues at the heart of the notorious condemnation of Galileo and Copernican astronomy.