Interdisciplinary Studies in Letters & Science

Chabot College

Galileo's Letters to the Grand Duchess Christina

Page 175- 215

Questions of the Day:

How does Galileo differentiate between the study of physical science and the study of theology? What differences does he see between them?

Does Galileo seem to believe in God? What view does he have of the Bible? Why might this view upset Church authorities?

What does Galileo think supports scientific "truth" and what supports religious "truth"?

How does Galileo's argument in this document support the progress of scientific enquiry?

What were Galileo's views on the authority of the Church?

Is there a difference between faith in religion and faith in science? If so, what is the essence of that difference?

If your work was condemned by an authority that did not understand it, how would you react? Would you fight? How?

Pages
Quote
Interpretation/Comments

175 "They [academic philosophers] seemed to forget that the increase of known truths stimulates the investigation, establishment, and growth of the arts; not their diminution or destruction. Galileo believes that philosophers should thank him for discovering new "truths" even if they are contradictory to what had been believed previously.

176
"...and together with the truth of the facts, there has come to light the great difference in attitude between those who simply and dispassionately refused to admit the discoveries to be true,

and

those who combined with their incredulity some reckless passion of their own. "

Galileo distinguishes between "men who were well grounded in astronomical and physical science",

"others who remained in doubt only because of [the discoveries'] novel and unexpected character, and because they had not yet had the opportunity to see for themselves", and finally

"some...possess I know no what fanciful interest in remaining hostile not so much toward the things in question as toward their discoverer."

177 "They know that as to the arrangement of the parts of the universe, I hold the sun to be situated motionless in the center of the revolution of the celestial orbs while the earth rotates on its axis and revolves about the sun. They know also that I support this position not only by refuting the arguments of Ptolemy and Aristotle, but by producing many counterarguments, some which relate to physical effects whose causes can perhaps be assigned in no other way." Galileo is never shy about sharing his convictions, here with the mother of the rule of Florence, and arguably one of the most powerful women in Italy at the time.

177 "...these men have resolved to fabricate a shield for their fallacies out of the mantle of pretended religion and the authority of the Bible." By the third page of the letter, the battle is clear; Galileo is not against the Church or the Bible, but against people who would interpret the scriptures "incorrectly" against the discoveries and truths he had shared.

177 "and hoping (though vainly)_ that this seed which first took root in their hypocritical minds would send out branches and ascend to heaven, ..." Who says a scientist can't be a poet, too? Consider this writing style in light of his purpose, and his audience.

179 "Contrary to the sense of the Bible and the intention of the holy Fathers, if I am not mistaken, they would extend such authorities until even in physical matters - where faith is not involved - they would have us altogether abandon reason and the evidence of our sense in favor of some biblical passage, though under the surface meaning of its words this passage may contain a different sense." Is faith not involved in science, or physical matters? I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow - is that different than faith in religion, or God?

180 "Such are the people who labor to persuade us that an author like Copernicus may be condemned without being read, and who produce various authorities from the Bible, from theologians, and from Church Councils to make us believe that this is not only lawful but commendable." Consider this statement not just in light of the science of Galileo, but of any time, including our own.

181 "And if not, let my book be torn and burnt, as I neither intend nor pretend to gain from it any fruit that is not pious and Catholic." Proof that Galileo was pious and devout?

182
"This being granted, I think that in discussions of physical problems we ought to begin not from the authority of scriptural passages, but from sense-experiences and necessary demonstrations; for the holy Bible and the phenomena of nature proceed alike from the divine Word, the former as the dictate of the Holy Ghost and the latter as the observant executrix of God's commands. "

"But Nature, on the other hand, is inexorable and immutable; she never transgresses the lawas imposed upon her, or cares a whit whether her abstruse reasons and methods of operation are understandable to men."
Galileo is regarded as one of the first philosopher-scientists who support the proposition that the Church and Science can coexist, as long as the sense experiences and experiments we do are not ignored.

183
"I should judge that the authority of the Bible was designed to persuade men of those articles and propositions which, surpassing all human reasoning, could not be made credible by science, or by any other means than through the very mouth of the Holy Spirit."

"But I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them."

This is often paraphrased as, "The Bible tells men how to go to Heaven, not how Heaven goes."

Galileo again makes clear that we should trust our intellect and senses in experimentation about the world, rather than trust the opinions of others who have interpreted scripture, but not done the experiments.

185
"Now if the Holy Spirit has purposely neglected to teach us propositions of this sort as irrelevant to the highest goal (that is, to our salvation), how can anyone affirm that is obligatory to take sides on them, and that one belief is required by faith, while the other side is erroneous.

Can an opinion be heretical and yet have no concern with the salvation of souls?"
Galileo makes a interesting argument here about why his discoveries should NOT create concern within the Church - they are irrelevant to the key concern the Church should have.

187 "Who indeed will set bounds to human ingenuity? Who will assert that everything in the universe capable of being perceived is already discovered and known?

192 "They [law writers and some theologians] add further that if in the inferior sciences [to theology] any conclusion should be taken as certain in virtue of demonstrations or experiences, while in the Bible another conclusion is found repugnant to this, then the professors of that science should themselves undertake to undo their proofs and discover the fallacies in their own experiences, without bothering the theologians and exegetes." Is this any different today? Should we bother the government when science shows that Global Warming is attributable to increased CO2 emissions from industrialized society, and yet they deem it economically unfeasible to deal with the problem, so the data must be wrong in the first place?

193
"...then her professors [of theology] should not arrogate to themselves the authority to decide on controversies in professions which they have neither studied nor practiced."

"Again, to command that the very professors of astronomy themselves see to the refutation of their own observations and proofs as mere fallacies and sophisms si to enjoin something that lies beyond any possibility of accomplishment."

195 "To carry out such a decision [to banish the opinion in question] it would be necessary not only to prohibit the book of Copernicus and the writings of other authors who follow the same opinion, but to ban the whole science of astronomy. Furthermore, it would be necessary to forbid men to look at the heavens..."

196 "Not to abolish and censure [Copernicus'] whole book , but only to condemn as erroneous this particular proposition, would (if I am not mistaken) be a still greater detriment to the minds of men, since it would afford them occasion to see a proposition proved that it was heresy to believe."

200 "Among a thousand ordinary men who might be questioned concerning these things, probably not a single one will be found to answer anything except that it looks to him as if the sun moves and the earth stands still, and therefore he believes this to be certain." This is probably still somewhat true today; see "A Private Universe" from Harvard regarding the pre-, and mis-conceptions even very educated people have about seasons, phases of the moon, and eclipses.

203 "But the mobility or stability of the earth or sun is neither a matter of faith nor one contrary to ethics." Galileo suggest that what is really prohibited by the Church is the "perverting into senses contrary to that of the holy Church or that of the concurrent agreement of the Fathers those passages, and those alone, which pertain to faith or ethics, or which concern the edification of Christian doctrine."

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/galileo-tuscany.html

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/virtual/reading/core4-04r02.htm

Pages	Quote	Interpretation/Comments
175	"They [academic philosophers] seemed to forget that the increase of known truths stimulates the investigation, establishment, and growth of the arts; not their diminution or destruction.	Galileo believes that philosophers should thank him for discovering new "truths" even if they are contradictory to what had been believed previously.
176	"...and together with the truth of the facts, there has come to light the great difference in attitude between those who simply and dispassionately refused to admit the discoveries to be true, *and* those who combined with their incredulity some reckless passion of their own. "	Galileo distinguishes between "men who were well grounded in astronomical and physical science", "others who remained in doubt only because of [the discoveries'] novel and unexpected character, and because they had not yet had the opportunity to see for themselves", and finally "some...possess I know no what fanciful interest in remaining hostile not so much toward the things in question as toward their discoverer."
177	"They know that as to the arrangement of the parts of the universe, I hold the sun to be situated motionless in the center of the revolution of the celestial orbs while the earth rotates on its axis and revolves about the sun. They know also that I support this position not only by refuting the arguments of Ptolemy and Aristotle, but by producing many counterarguments, some which relate to physical effects whose causes can perhaps be assigned in no other way."	Galileo is never shy about sharing his convictions, here with the mother of the rule of Florence, and arguably one of the most powerful women in Italy at the time.
177	"...these men have resolved to fabricate a shield for their fallacies out of the mantle of pretended religion and the authority of the Bible."	By the third page of the letter, the battle is clear; Galileo is not against the Church or the Bible, but against people who would interpret the scriptures "incorrectly" against the discoveries and truths he had shared.
177	"and hoping (though vainly)_ that this seed which first took root in their hypocritical minds would send out branches and ascend to heaven, ..."	Who says a scientist can't be a poet, too? Consider this writing style in light of his purpose, and his audience.
179	"Contrary to the sense of the Bible and the intention of the holy Fathers, if I am not mistaken, they would extend such authorities until even in physical matters - where faith is not involved - they would have us altogether abandon reason and the evidence of our sense in favor of some biblical passage, though under the surface meaning of its words this passage may contain a different sense."	Is faith not involved in science, or physical matters? I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow - is that different than faith in religion, or God?
180	"Such are the people who labor to persuade us that an author like Copernicus may be condemned without being read, and who produce various authorities from the Bible, from theologians, and from Church Councils to make us believe that this is not only lawful but commendable."	Consider this statement not just in light of the science of Galileo, but of any time, including our own.
181	"And if not, let my book be torn and burnt, as I neither intend nor pretend to gain from it any fruit that is not pious and Catholic."	Proof that Galileo was pious and devout?
182	"This being granted, I think that in discussions of physical problems we ought to begin not from the authority of scriptural passages, but from sense-experiences and necessary demonstrations; for the holy Bible and the phenomena of nature proceed alike from the divine Word, the former as the dictate of the Holy Ghost and the latter as the observant executrix of God's commands. " "But Nature, on the other hand, is inexorable and immutable; she never transgresses the lawas imposed upon her, or cares a whit whether her abstruse reasons and methods of operation are understandable to men."	Galileo is regarded as one of the first philosopher-scientists who support the proposition that the Church and Science can coexist, as long as the sense experiences and experiments we do are not ignored.
183	"I should judge that the authority of the Bible was designed to persuade men of those articles and propositions which, surpassing all human reasoning, could not be made credible by science, or by any other means than through the very mouth of the Holy Spirit." "But I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them."	This is often paraphrased as, "The Bible tells men how to go to Heaven, not how Heaven goes." Galileo again makes clear that we should trust our intellect and senses in experimentation about the world, rather than trust the opinions of others who have interpreted scripture, but not done the experiments.
185	"Now if the Holy Spirit has purposely neglected to teach us propositions of this sort as irrelevant to the highest goal (that is, to our salvation), how can anyone affirm that is obligatory to take sides on them, and that one belief is required by faith, while the other side is erroneous. Can an opinion be heretical and yet have no concern with the salvation of souls?"	Galileo makes a interesting argument here about why his discoveries should NOT create concern within the Church - they are irrelevant to the key concern the Church should have.
187	"Who indeed will set bounds to human ingenuity? Who will assert that everything in the universe capable of being perceived is already discovered and known?
192	"They [law writers and some theologians] add further that if in the inferior sciences [to theology] any conclusion should be taken as certain in virtue of demonstrations or experiences, while in the Bible another conclusion is found repugnant to this, then the professors of that science should themselves undertake to undo their proofs and discover the fallacies in their own experiences, without bothering the theologians and exegetes."	Is this any different today? Should we bother the government when science shows that Global Warming is attributable to increased CO2 emissions from industrialized society, and yet they deem it economically unfeasible to deal with the problem, so the data must be wrong in the first place?
193	"...then her professors [of theology] should not arrogate to themselves the authority to decide on controversies in professions which they have neither studied nor practiced." "Again, to command that the very professors of astronomy themselves see to the refutation of their own observations and proofs as mere fallacies and sophisms si to enjoin something that lies beyond any possibility of accomplishment."
195	"To carry out such a decision [to banish the opinion in question] it would be necessary not only to prohibit the book of Copernicus and the writings of other authors who follow the same opinion, but to ban the whole science of astronomy. Furthermore, it would be necessary to forbid men to look at the heavens..."
196	"Not to abolish and censure [Copernicus'] whole book , but only to condemn as erroneous this particular proposition, would (if I am not mistaken) be a still greater detriment to the minds of men, since it would afford them occasion to see a proposition proved that it was heresy to believe."
200	"Among a thousand ordinary men who might be questioned concerning these things, probably not a single one will be found to answer anything except that it looks to him as if the sun moves and the earth stands still, and therefore he believes this to be certain."	This is probably still somewhat true today; see "A Private Universe" from Harvard regarding the pre-, and mis-conceptions even very educated people have about seasons, phases of the moon, and eclipses.
203	"But the mobility or stability of the earth or sun is neither a matter of faith nor one contrary to ethics."	Galileo suggest that what is really prohibited by the Church is the "perverting into senses contrary to that of the holy Church or that of the concurrent agreement of the Fathers those passages, and those alone, which pertain to faith or ethics, or which concern the edification of Christian doctrine."