Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7471045" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>Sure he did. But moons around Jupiter aren't the same as a non-Earth-centric cosmos, nor was that discovery contested at the time. Galileo saw moons and jumped to a conclusion which, for Galileo, was true because he thought of it not because there was evidence for it. Again, if the Earth went around the Sun, why didn't the stars show parallax? They <em>observably </em>did not, ergo, they revolved around Earth. There was much stronger observational evidence in favor of an Earth-centric cosmos at the time, even with Galilean moons. The apocryphal stories about the Church suppressing Galileo have added to this myth that Galileo was the first real scientist and that he discovered the Helio-centric nature of the solar system. But, as noted, that's largely bullhockey. Galileo actually had a great deal of favor in the Church - the Pope himself was a fan and patron of his model. However, they told Galileo that he couldn't publish his model as truth because he lacked evidence -- evidence that wouldn't exist for another 100 years upon which the Church adopted a helio-centric model. Instead they told him he had to publish it as a mathematical prediction model, not the true nature of the world. Galileo thought that everyone should just listen to him, so he wrote a book where a character that clearly favored Galileo explained how the theory was true to a dunce of a character clearly modeled after the Pope -- even with an extremely similar name! For this Galileo was punished, but even there his close ties to the Church got him a very lenient sentence of house arrest which would have been lifted if Galileo publicly stated his theory had no evidence (it did not) and was just a mathematical astrology model (it was).</p><p></p><p>Galileo has his myth enchanced by the fact he was otherwise widely published and he caused quite a scandal. Oh, and also that he had guessed a theory that was close to what turned out to be true. Helio-centrism wasn't new at the time, Gelileo just made it a huge news splash at that time and still couldn't prove a thing. Kepler, who independently developed a helio-centric model that was far better than Galileo's at about the same time is largely ignored by pop-culture because he didn't get in trouble with the Church for insulting the pontiff while self-aggrandizing. Kepler also had a huge advantage in publishing in that he was Lutheran, and so did not require Church approval of his theories.</p><p></p><p>The Church occupied an interesting position at the time. Contrary to popular belief, the Church did not have Earth-centrism as dogma, meaning it wasn't held as absolute religious truth. Instead, it was in the body of work that was held as truth that did not contradict dogma. Helio-centrism didn't contradict dogma, either, but the Church actually held a standard that proof was required prior to adjusting what the Church held out as understood truth (as opposed to dogma, which is mandated truth). At the time, the observable scientific proof was on the side of Earth-centrism. That's hard for people to swallow these days because the evidence we have now is so overwhelmingly in the other direction, but it's absolutely true that at the time it was nearly impossible to detect that evidence (as I said above, telescope tech was really poor due to the inability to grind lenses precisely enough). The evidence that could be detected strongly pointed to Earth-centrism or didn't point to helio-centrism. The Church was actually defending science at the time, not suppressing it. Funny how our myths get made, though -- it's easy to make the Church the villain and we like to champion the underdog. The truth is that Galileo, while brilliant, was a blowhard most of the time and a rather unpleasant fellow when thwarted and the Church was involved in good science. Weird, yeah?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7471045, member: 16814"] Sure he did. But moons around Jupiter aren't the same as a non-Earth-centric cosmos, nor was that discovery contested at the time. Galileo saw moons and jumped to a conclusion which, for Galileo, was true because he thought of it not because there was evidence for it. Again, if the Earth went around the Sun, why didn't the stars show parallax? They [I]observably [/I]did not, ergo, they revolved around Earth. There was much stronger observational evidence in favor of an Earth-centric cosmos at the time, even with Galilean moons. The apocryphal stories about the Church suppressing Galileo have added to this myth that Galileo was the first real scientist and that he discovered the Helio-centric nature of the solar system. But, as noted, that's largely bullhockey. Galileo actually had a great deal of favor in the Church - the Pope himself was a fan and patron of his model. However, they told Galileo that he couldn't publish his model as truth because he lacked evidence -- evidence that wouldn't exist for another 100 years upon which the Church adopted a helio-centric model. Instead they told him he had to publish it as a mathematical prediction model, not the true nature of the world. Galileo thought that everyone should just listen to him, so he wrote a book where a character that clearly favored Galileo explained how the theory was true to a dunce of a character clearly modeled after the Pope -- even with an extremely similar name! For this Galileo was punished, but even there his close ties to the Church got him a very lenient sentence of house arrest which would have been lifted if Galileo publicly stated his theory had no evidence (it did not) and was just a mathematical astrology model (it was). Galileo has his myth enchanced by the fact he was otherwise widely published and he caused quite a scandal. Oh, and also that he had guessed a theory that was close to what turned out to be true. Helio-centrism wasn't new at the time, Gelileo just made it a huge news splash at that time and still couldn't prove a thing. Kepler, who independently developed a helio-centric model that was far better than Galileo's at about the same time is largely ignored by pop-culture because he didn't get in trouble with the Church for insulting the pontiff while self-aggrandizing. Kepler also had a huge advantage in publishing in that he was Lutheran, and so did not require Church approval of his theories. The Church occupied an interesting position at the time. Contrary to popular belief, the Church did not have Earth-centrism as dogma, meaning it wasn't held as absolute religious truth. Instead, it was in the body of work that was held as truth that did not contradict dogma. Helio-centrism didn't contradict dogma, either, but the Church actually held a standard that proof was required prior to adjusting what the Church held out as understood truth (as opposed to dogma, which is mandated truth). At the time, the observable scientific proof was on the side of Earth-centrism. That's hard for people to swallow these days because the evidence we have now is so overwhelmingly in the other direction, but it's absolutely true that at the time it was nearly impossible to detect that evidence (as I said above, telescope tech was really poor due to the inability to grind lenses precisely enough). The evidence that could be detected strongly pointed to Earth-centrism or didn't point to helio-centrism. The Church was actually defending science at the time, not suppressing it. Funny how our myths get made, though -- it's easy to make the Church the villain and we like to champion the underdog. The truth is that Galileo, while brilliant, was a blowhard most of the time and a rather unpleasant fellow when thwarted and the Church was involved in good science. Weird, yeah? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
Top