Mr. Sloan made some pretty interesting arguments about how in the case of Galileo religion was not the enemy. I think this very much depends on what definition of religion we use. Was Galileo convicted because he was challenging the word of God? I don’t think so. But one definition of religion is “an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group.” (Merriam-Webster) Under this definition, I think his trial very much was a matter of science versus religion. Galileo was challenging the beliefs of essentially the whole world. People don’t like to be wrong, they don’t like to be told they’re wrong, and more than anything people don’t like change. Right or wrong people will cling to their way of life and refuse change until it is forced upon them. Galileo knew he was right and maybe he thought he could spark the change in people’s minds. In that regard, at least, he was wrong. Was Galileo fighting against the Catholic Church? Perhaps, perhaps not. Was Galileo fighting against religion? I believe he was.
2 thoughts on “True enemies?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
That is an interesting distinction between Church and religion and I do think that you are very right in separating the two. However, I don’t really know if I agree with the Merriam-Webster definition of religion. I mean, wouldn’t for example vegetarianism be a religion then? And I’m not saying it’s definitely not, but I am not convinced that it is either. What do you think?
It is an interesting argument you pose but I’d imagine it is a bit of a stretch to conclude on what is basically semantics. It is undoubtedly true that people are resistant to change and the desire to maintain the status quo, particularly for the church, were major oppositions to Galileo’s ideas but I still think the important conclusion to be made is how religion is not a direct opponent to science. Besides it is not the whole world that was against Galileo, but rather the church and since Christianity is the religion and Christianity doesn’t necessarily oppose science and Professor Sloan pointed out, Galileo’s case wasn’t a matter of science vs. religion.