Galileo is generally considered the father of modern science. His conflict with the Catholic Church has, over the centuries, earned him widespread public admiration. Reviewing this controversy, science and culture writers have generally portrayed Galileo as a hero - and the Church as a villain. However, this episode illustrates something that is often overlooked or dismissed: that scientists can become polemicists for a chosen scientific theory, abandoning impartial, objective scientific inquiry in the process. And this reality must be considered in judging their credibility. Furthermore, if even a Galileo could have such a lapse, the public is surely on notice to scrutinize the claims of lesser minds.
Galileo and The Catholic Church
To understand Galileo's lapse, some historical background is necessary. When Galileo was writing the book that landed him in trouble (his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems) Europe was being torn apart by religious war. The Catholic Church was fighting desperately to remain the only authoritative source on what it claimed was God's word. And that word, according to the Church, mandated the view that the sun revolves around a fixed, immovable earth.
Consistent with Church dogma, Galileo was ordered not to "hold or defend" as true (i.e., as a proven fact of nature) the Copernican hypothesis which placed the sun at the center and the planets revolving around the sun (1) in circular orbits and (2) at uniform speeds. Galileo flouted the Church's order. But, in doing so, was he a hero of intellectual integrity? Did a commitment to scientific truth compel him to hold or defend the Copernican hypothesis as a proven fact of nature?
Galileo Ignores Theories of Kepler and Brahe
By the time Galileo wrote his book, Johannes Kepler had provided plausible evidence that the planets move in elliptical, nor circular orbits, and not at uniform speeds, but variable speeds, depending on their distance from the sun. This seriously challenged the Copernican view. Galileo knew about Kepler's work but ignored it in the Dialogue - not for scientific reasons, since he couldn't refute Kepler. He simply rejected Kepler's view, clinging instead to the ancient belief that circular motion was "beautiful" and, therefore, privileged.
Furthermore, Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe, had offered a radically different astronomical theory that was not only widely supported by astronomers, but, more significantly, was (even with a telescope) empirically indistinguishable from Copernicus' view. Galileo doesn't even mention Brahe's theory in the Dialogue.
Galileo believed dogmatically in the Copernican view, not merely as a good starting hypothesis, or true subject to possible modifications, such as those offered by Kepler. Galileo was committed to a partisan view of the matter and dismissed respected contrary evidence and theories. Presenting all of the evidence would have required Galileo to admit that there was no conclusive proof that the Copernican theory was "true" - meaning a proven fact of nature. (Such an admission would not only have been more honest intellectually, but likely would have spared him the wrath of the Church.)
Scientists and Public Policy
Galileo's lapse should constitute a warning. America faces major unresolved scientific and public policy issues such as climate change, stem cell research, energy issues, technology issues, etc. The citizens' ability to make informed, intelligent judgments in these matters depends, in part, on the reliability of the evidence presented by scientists.
Galileo's case should remind us that even a scientific genius can be seduced into a partisan view of an issue. This can lead to the dissemination of flawed or incomplete information, seriously impairing the public's ability to participate optimally in major policy debates.
Sources:
Bronowski, J. The Ascent of Man. Boston, Little Brown and Company, 1973.
Galilei, Galileo. Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems: Ptolemaic and Copernican. New York, The Modern Library, 2001.
Goldman, Steven. What Scientists Know and How They Know It. Chantilly, The Teaching Company, 2006.
Scott Rosmarin - After graduating from the University of Pennsylvania with a B.A. in political science, and Rutgers Law School, Scott practiced law for ...
Join the Conversation