Galileo And Religion

The common perception of science and religion is that they are totally unrelated contradictions in terms. Science is objective and relies on experimentation while religion is subjective and relies on experience. Additionally, science is linked to materialism and religion is concerned with spiritualism. However, during the time of Galileo, “this universally accepted view which came to permeate the medieval scientific and religious tradition, looked upon the earth as spherical, motionless and fixed center of the universe” (Ferngren, 109). Galileo was a scientist who while believing in religion, attempted to show that the Copernican system and the Bible were in agreement. Galileo and his conflict with the church, over these differences in beliefs

According to Maurice Finocchiaro, they are, “the approach that interprets the relationship as one of conflict, and the approach that construes the connection as one of harmony” (Finocchiaro 114). The Galileo Affair provides evidence for both viewpoints. With respect to the interpretation of the relationship as one of conflict, the Galileo Affair involves the conflict between the founders of modern science and one of the world’s greatest religions, Christianity (Finocchiaro 116). An acceptance of Galileo’s ideas would have required Galileo to provide some very conclusive proof. This proof Galileo did not have. “If Galileo had been in possession of conclusive proof of Copernicanism, then he would not have had to write this ‘Letter” or to answer criticism: he could have simply produced his proof” (Finocchiaro 122). During the time of Galileo mathematics and astronomy were not highly thought of as credible foundations for the development or support of his theory. Further, theology was considered the preeminent science for which to base theory’s and opinions. As a result, Galileo’s attempt to marry the Copernican system with the Bible was rejected due to the heavy reliance on mathematics as opposed to theology. This becomes the crux of the conflict thesis. In opposition to this conflict thesis is the harmony thesis, here Pope John Paul II is used as

It’s either one or the other. When studying the trial, historians, “bring to their subject general assumptions about the relationship between science and religion” (Finocchiaro 131). Some try to interpret the trial using the assumption that science and religion are incompatible, an interpretation seemingly illogical. Others allege the conflict is between science and philosophy, which Finocchiaro also sees as illogical. “Ultimately it may turn out that … underlying the apparent conflict between science and religion the trial of Galileo exhibits the deep structure of nothing less, and nothing more, than the conflict between conservatism and innovation” (Finocchiaro 128). As with many other events in history, we may never completely understand the full complexity of the Galileo affair. “A key flaw of both accounts is that they are really hasty generalization” (Finocchiaro 114). Therefore, it becomes crucial to always keep the wide range of factors that played into the affair in mind in an attempt to avoid dangerous generalizations such as the “conflict” or “harmony” between science and