Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Galileo Myth Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_galileo_myth#15689 Post contents: >> A case-study of the connection is Newton, who wrote far more on theology than he did on science. Kari Konkola, had Newton confined his work to religious questions we would not be talking about him now. >> argumentum ad verecundiam No, Andrew Capp, that was not an argumentum ad verecundiam, i.e., an appeal to authority. Had I written: we should believe what So-and-So says because he has a PhD, that would have been an argumentum ad verecundiam. But when I wrote that I had a PhD that was merely stating my credentials. As a scientist I am amused at Mr. Spencer’s attempt to differentiate between Islamic and Christian (Catholic) attitude towards and historic influence on science. It is true that at present Islam is more restrictive, prescriptive and repressive than Christianity, and that this has implications for all human activity including the creation of science. However the overthrowing of the social power of religious dogma in the West was a centuries-long battle. The approach to knowledge developed by the likes of Galileo, Newton and Darwin was fought tooth and nail by the Christian authorities. Their ideological bankruptcy is described very well by Thomas Paine’s 18th century The Age of Reason. As to Islam, there was a long period between the 8th and 13th centuries when it tolerated knowledge and rational thought much better than Christianity as practiced at the time. There is a fundamental conflict in the approach of religion and science. One is authoritarian, relying on claimed divine revelation while the other is rooted in methodic observation, rational thought and assertions always open to being falsified. From that perspective all religions, specifically Judaism, Christianity and Islam are much closer to each other than any of them is to science. Sent at: 2008 12 02