But the following was the actual discussion, read carefully:As far as I can see, the historical consensus is that Galileo was indeed persecuted by the Church.
You: Galileo was persecuted/ex-communicated for "promoting rationality"
Me: Galileo was actually free to publish any hypothesis while the Church promoted science.
You: Galileo was indeed persecuted
But your own source or any other will show you Galileo was free to publish his ideas and was even encouraged for most of it by that Church. The dispute was not about Galileo being reasonable but about his blunt attacks on Aristotelian science, the one which official theology approved of and also about his attacks on interpretations of biblical passages. Mind you, he was not dismissing the absolute truth value of the Book itself, which would have been a most reasonable thing, but he was voicing how certain sacred texts had to mean something else than the Church said it did. And he promoted that as truth beyond the speculative, in effect stating, in the eyes of many, that he had God-like authority on theological matters.
An admirer and patron of Galileo became even The Pope (Urban VIII) -- the head of the Church! The only warning this pope gave (and it's a recurring request made to him) is to treat the Copernican theory only hypothetically and there was great support.
And lets not paint the picture too dark when "imprisonment" was mentioned. He even kept writing and researching afterwards! Lke this passage:
- It should be noted that Galileo was never in a dungeon or tortured; during the Inquisition process he stayed mostly at the house of the Tuscan ambassador to the Vatican and for a short time in a comfortable apartment in the Inquisition building. After the process he spent six months at the palace of Ascanio Piccolomini (c. 1590–1671), the archbishop of Siena and a friend and patron, and then moved into a villa near Arcetri, in the hills above Florence
In effect, Galileo's sin was mainly political and in no way he was discouraged or prevented to work on "reason" or scientific hypothesis. This can all be found in the Encyclopædia Britannica article or in the Wikipedia entry.
As for Bruno:
Lets see what is meant with "tenacity" and "unorthodox ideas" here.the tragic death he suffered at the stake because of the tenacity with which he maintained his unorthodox ideas at a time when both the Roman Catholic and Reformed churches were reaffirming rigid Aristotelian and Scholastic principles in their struggle for the evangelization of Europe.......
Apparently he has trouble "reaffirming the philosophical character of his speculation". Again this is a case of stating a view as authoritative and these also included some views on biblical matters: the concept of God, the nature of Jesus, if Jesus was magical son of a magical god or just a magician who possessed magical abilities. That level. Pure theology!
What's missing from the Britannica article is more clarity on the exact reasons the Church had frictions with him.
Was it his emphasis on the magical and the occult? Speculation on other worlds? Original documents are still lost. Some reference are there to blasphemy, immoral conduct, and heresy in matters of dogmatic theology. Nothing about scientific work though, plurality of worlds and their eternity believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the human soul into brutes; dealing in magics and divination. (From wikipedia: Luigi Firpo, Il processo di Giordano Bruno, 1993
General cosmology was at least not it Stanford Encyclopedia:
- Thus, in 1600 there was no official Catholic position on the Copernican system, and it was certainly not a heresy. When Giordano Bruno (1548–1600) was burned at the stake as a heretic, it had nothing to do with his writings in support of Copernican cosmology,
Nobody is suggesting this false dilemma though. Somehow the extremes are creating higher contrasts, one can see them both more clear for what they are. Which is for me the value of the dispute around the Trump presidency. Some contrasts are increased.David Quinn wrote: But if my opposition to the left-wing cancer is supposed to require me to become involved with the madness which is the right-wing cancer - then forget it. I will never do that. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
But the actual "undermining American and Western society" has little to do with the elected President. That process is far bigger, older and more involved. At best Trump's election shows you the rotting process and the emotional energies moving around. But also Hillary Clinton as candidate, in contrast, shows the same issue. But as usual, people have a harder time seeing the issue in that direction. Appearances prove to be remarkably deceptive!If the Islamic jihadists wanted to install their own puppet government in the White House with the express intent of undermining American and Western society from within, then they couldn’t have picked a better dupe to lead it than Donald Trump.
Confronting and reasoning might not help but I hate to bring it to you: guiding and reassuring would simply mean perpetuating the whole Woman modus operandi: how social evolution created the dynamic in the first place! There's no reason for hostility and no reasonable person has been suggesting it. But for some reason you "feel" it to be operating here somewhere, amongst philosophers?Woman’s proneness to being spooked is a reality that has to be dealt with. We can’t just ignore it, not if we actually want to resolve the issue. If we continue to pretend that this feature of feminine psychology doesn’t exist and continue to confront these left-wing women in a hostile manner, then they will simply dig their heels in and refuse to budge. No amount of reasoning will change their minds.But after David promoting the guiding and reassuring of women so that they can become, in a smooth, painless way, more masculine (and by GOD lets not even spook them) ...
It can be stopped at any time, David! And usually with realizing how it's not the other who has the most pressing problems.This is people venting uselessly at each other and creating karmic conditions for even more violence to take place.