{"id":172,"date":"2014-03-05T15:39:31","date_gmt":"2014-03-05T20:39:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/?p=172"},"modified":"2014-06-06T12:15:58","modified_gmt":"2014-06-06T16:15:58","slug":"dan-cohen-on-galileo-and-the-essence-of-modern-science-by-andrew-jones","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/2014\/03\/05\/dan-cohen-on-galileo-and-the-essence-of-modern-science-by-andrew-jones\/","title":{"rendered":"Dan Cohen on “Galileo and the Essence of Modern Science” by Andrew Jones"},"content":{"rendered":"

On a Wednesday evening in March, Professor Dan Cohen hosted a lecture titled, \u201cGalileo and the Essence of Science\u201d.\u00a0 A crowd of around thirty people took their seats in a Lovejoy classroom, awaiting Mr. Cohen\u2014a man who seems to find everything <\/em>interesting.\u00a0 However, considering that his talk would be about philosophy, I couldn\u2019t help but contemplate what dry, scientific information I would take away from the talk; Galileo has the effect of boring some, to be frank.\u00a0 His passion and extensive knowledge, about not only Galileo and his groundbreaking tendencies but also Aristotle\u2014a man Galileo himself looked up to during the early stages of his life\u2014led me to find the topic more fascinating.\u00a0 Cohen\u2019s zeal in everything Galilean inspired me to analyze Galileo in more depth and led me to some interesting parallels between the concept of censorship and scientific ingenuity.<\/p>\n

During the address, Cohen made it clear from the beginning that, during the 17th<\/sup> century, Aristotle<\/strong> was considered to be the<\/em> man.\u00a0 During that time the study of the natural world was considered to be completely under the domain of Aristotle\u2014the whole scientific worldview was, more or less, Aristotelian.\u00a0 Aristotle and his supporters believed in a stable understanding of the world, and a human\u2019s place in it.\u00a0 For instance, Aristotelian science makes a clear distinction between form and matter. Aristotle believed that matter comes in 4 different types of elements: earth, air, fire and water.\u00a0 These elements are generated by two pairs of the opposites (e.j. hot mixed with cold; wet mixed with dry).\u00a0\u00a0 Aristotle was primarily concerned about all matters of truth and finding the essential knowledge behind what something is, and many considered his teachings as accurate.<\/p>\n

This is where Cohen\u2019s talk picked up steam: the emergence of Galileo.\u00a0 Galileo, another independently minded scholar, was one of the first to challenge Aristotle\u2019s laws and one of the first to push the scientific envelope by raising more questions concerning the validity of a hypothesis.\u00a0 For example, on the concept of projectile motion, Aristotle pondered the question of what keeps a ball in motion after it leaves one\u2019s hand. In true maverick spirit, upon looking at the same subject of projectile motion, Galileo asked an entirely different question than Aristotle, \u201cwhat causes the throwing rock to stop, after one puts it into motion?\u201d\u00a0 This different interpretation of the question by Galileo, led to concepts of momentum, laws of conservation, and inertia\u2014concepts that Aristotle would not recognize.\u00a0 Additionally, Galileo believed that there should be a study of the accidents that permeate the world. This view staunchly opposes Aristotle, who thought that knowing information about the accidents in the world is superfluous, unnecessary\u2014Aristotle was just concerned about knowing the fundamental truth.\u00a0 That being said, in terms of motion, Galileo found ways to get past the air imperfections that consequently slow down motion, since these imperfections are very much a part of the world.\u00a0 When Galileo first arrived in the scientific community, form versus matter and essence versus accident were conceptual vocabularies of physics. By the time he left, the scientific community was thinking in terms of space and time and mass and momentum.\u00a0 It really is hard to fathom how extraordinary an accomplishment that was.<\/p>\n

I offer the question, to what extent does censorship<\/strong> withhold potentially ingenious ideas, especially scientific explanations?\u00a0 When he was relevant, Galileo encountered individuals attempting to thwart his principles.\u00a0 His belief in Heliocentrism<\/strong> (originally presented into society by the Copernicus, a Catholic monk), or the model in which the Earth and surrounding planets revolve around a stationary Sun, led him to banishment from the Church.\u00a0 The Church\u2019s belief was that the earth was the center of God\u2019s salvific work, therefore anything going against their belief was wrong\u2014it was also the belief of the Church that anyone who challenged the Church\u2019s ideology should be suppressed.\u00a0 This knowledge of Galileo\u2019s censorship makes me respect that man even more.\u00a0 He had questions for just about everything, and his inquiries were rightfully justified.\u00a0 Before him, no one had bothered to ask the question, \u201cwhat causes the ball to stop moving?\u201d Why was this?\u00a0 Because people were hardwired not to ask such unnecessary questions\u2014well, Galileo did not follow that script.\u00a0 His consequence of not following script led him to being credited with ushering in new conceptions of science.\u00a0 We should applaud Galileo for his courage in the face of suppression. \u00a0I guess it never hurts to be the guy to ask, \u201cBut why?\u201d<\/p>\n

\"galielo-galilei-libray-of-congress\"<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"On a Wednesday evening in March, Professor Dan Cohen hosted a lecture titled, \u201cGalileo and the Essence of Science\u201d.\u00a0 A crowd of around thirty people …","protected":false},"author":1706,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1706"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=172"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":272,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172\/revisions\/272"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=172"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=172"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/censorshipeventsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=172"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}