Galileo - Debunking the Myths + Best Book

[timoneill]

Since I'm getting weary of all the Jesus Myth shenanigans of late, I took advantage of a question on Quora to smite some myths about the Galileo Affair. The question was "What is the most misunderstood historical event?" and I set out some of the misconceptions about the Affair in what I hope is an accurate and fair-handed account.

The reaction has been very good, with 58 "upvotes", making it by far the highest ranking answer to the question. My answer has also been posted on the "Quora's Greatest Hits" page, which is rather nice. There has been some minor snarkiness in the comments section on my answer (Bruno was invoked, of course) but the feedback has been positive on the whole.

One commenter asked for recommended reading, and I suggested Numbers' Galileo Goes to Jail and James' book. But I was wondering what single account of the Affair or biography of Galileo people would recommend. I'm looking for one that is scholarly and detailed and accurate and objective - neither inclined to the Draper-White or to the Catholic apologist ends of the spectrum. Suggestions?

[fortigurn]

A very even handed article, presented in an accessible form.

[hawkinthesnow]

I enjoyed your article as well Tim. I too would like to know if there are any good books out there on the Galileo affair.

[himself]

De Santillana, Giorgio. The Crime of Galileo. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955.
Rowland, Wade. Galileo's Mistake. New York: Arcade Publishing, 2003.
Shea, William R. & Mariano Artigas. Galileo in Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Also of interest, though not relative to the Affair per se:
Christie, Thony. But it doesn’t move! June 22, 2011. thonyc.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/but-it-doesn%E2%80%99t-move/ (accessed April 4, 2012).
—. Extracting the Stopper. June 2, 2010. thonyc.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/extracting-the-stopper/ (accessed April 4, 2012).
—. Galileo’s great bluff. Nov. 12, 2010. thonyc.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/galileo%E2%80%99s-great-bluff-and-part-of-the-reason-why-kuhn-is-wrong/ (accessed April 4, 2012).

[labarum]

I remember being taught the "conventional wisdom" as a fact at various points in twelve years of public schooling and only discovering there was another side to the story from reading Koestler's The Sleepwalkers which pictured Galileo as a brilliant though tempermental diva who often alienated those who were sympathetic to his teachings.

Particularly revealing were his attacks upon a young Jesuit astronomer who had made some discoveries concerning comets that countered Galileo's insistence upon circular orbits. Galileo was as vicious as he was wrong, the Jesuits closed rank and went from being Galileo's supporters to being his foes, and the rest is history. When Galileo placed the words of the pope who had supported him in the mouth of a character named Simplicio who was then subjected to ridicule (remember this was the same pope who had encouraged Galileo to write the book), the result was inevitable.

I have read other works on the subject since then and it has only confirmed the point that Galileo, regardless of his brilliance, had an oversized ego. I think it could be argued that his own arrogance prevented him from going further to something akin to the triumph that would be Newton's. He had already arrived at many of the results of mechanics but his clinging to circular orbits prevented earthly and celestial mechanics from being reconciled. If he had accepted the possibility of eliptical orbits, the gulf separating the two realms would have begun to evaporate sooner than they did.

[wraggy]

On the Galileo Affair, I note that Ken from Open parachute and secularnewsdaily.com is back posting on ThonyC's blog.

Ken, as usual when confronted with a question on the history of science, a subject of which you obviously know very little and understand even less, your answer consists of a lot of hand waving and a minimal amount of dubious or inaccurate facts.

Which aspects of the geocentric model are ad hoc? Instead of parroting Alan Chalmers, who is by the way a fairly poor historian of science to put it charitably, make specific statements. Give factual descriptions to back up your claim..........

Thony's response @ June 10, 2012 at 6:01 pm is an interesting read and Tim you may be interested in this post as it deals with ken's "evidence" for the superiority of Copernicus over Ptolemaeus.

thonyc.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/an-interesting-question/#comment-3144

see Ken's article @

www.secularnewsdaily.com/2011/06/galileos-revolutionary-contribution/

openparachute.wordpress.com/

[wraggy]

And interesting, and maybe a little heated, discussion is taking place between Ken and Baerista at the moment on Thonyc's blog.

[neodawson]

Not a book, but David Lindberg gives a decent overview of the issue(as well as science vs religion altogether) here:
www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1987/PSCF9-87Lindberg.html

The details of Galileo's condemnation need not detain us long.25 Galileo's campaign on behalf of Copernicanism was halted abruptly in 1616, when the Holy Office declared the heliocentric doctrine heretical- though at the time Galileo faced no physical threat. Eight years later Galileo received permission from the new pope, the scholarly Urban VIII, to write about the Copernican system as long as he treated it as merely hypothesis. After many delays, Galileo's Dialogue Con- cerning the Two Chief World Systems appeared in 1632. In it, Galileo not only unambiguously defended the heliocentric system as physically true, but also made the tactical mistake of placing the pope's admonition about its hypothetical character in the mouth of the slow-witted Aristotelian, Simplicio. Although the official imprimatur of the church had been secured, Galileo's enemies, including the now angry Urban VIII, determined to bring him to trial. The inquisition ulti- mately condemned Galileo and forced him to recant. Although sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his life, he lived comfortably in a villa outside Florence. He was neither tortured nor imprisoned-simply silenced. The Galileo affair was a multi-faceted event. Certainly it raised serious questions about the relationship between reason and revelation and the proper means of reconciling the teachings of nature with those of scripture. Nonetheless, it was not a matter of Christianity waging war on science. All of the participants called themselves Christians, and all acknowledged biblical authority. This was a struggle between opposing theories of biblical interpretation: a conservative theory issuing from the Council of Trent versus Galileo's more liberal alternative, both well precedented in the history of the church. Personal and political factors also played a role, as Galileo demonstrated his flair for cultivating enemies in high places.26