spin

There's a statue in the middle of Campo de' Fiori in Rome. The statue is of a man called Giordano Bruno. It marks the spot where Bruno was burnt at the stake because, amongst other things, he championed the unpopular ideas of Nicholas Copernicus that the earth was not the centre of the universe. It was the catholic church which promoted the spectacular. You see that most experts agreed that the earth was in the centre and it doesn't matter what the evidence says when most experts agree. Giordano Bruno ended his life as a crisp.

Moral to the story: listen to what most experts agree on; it's safer.


spin

Bede

This is not actually true. As familyman and I have discussed there is no evidence that Bruno's heliocentric views had any impact during his trial. This is a classic myth where Bruno's non-scientific views about the earth moving are first demystified and then turned into a reason he was convicted. Read something like Frances Yates for a good introduction to Bruno's actual views and what went wrong.

Moral of the story: rationalists are just as inclined to their myths as theists are to theirs.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Family Man

Is this really necessary?

Toto

Not really necessary, but since he mentioned it, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition by Frances Yates - the reviews will give the objection Bede raises.

End of subject. Start a new thread if you want to discuss this (or link to a previous thread.)

spin

Le accuse che gli vennero mosse, secondo la ricostruzione che ne ha fatto Luigi Firpo, si possono riassumere nei seguenti dieci punti: «1) Di avere opinioni avverse alla S. Fede e di aver tenuto discorsi contrari ad essa e ai suoi ministri. 2) Di avere opinioni erronee sulla Trinità, la divinità di Cristo e l’incarnazione. 3) Di avere opinioni erronee sul Cristo. 4) Di avere opinioni erronee sulla transustanziazione e la S. Messa. 5) Di sostenere l’esistenza di molteplici mondi e la loro eternità. 6) Di credere alla metempsicosi ed alla trasmigrazione dell’anima umana nei bruti. 7) Di occuparsi dell’arte divinatoria e magica. 8) Di non credere alla verginità di Maria. 9) Di indulgere nel peccato della carne. 10) Di aver soggiornato in paesi eretici, vivendo alla lor guisa».

This is the scholarly opinion. I think it comes under points 1 and 5.


spin

Bede

Hello spin,

Could you give us a reference for this? Also, the English is something like this (Altavista amended by me):

"1) Having opinions adverse to holy truth and having made speeches contrary to it and its ministers. 2) Of having erroneous opinions on the Trinity, the divinity of Christ and incarnation. 3) Of having erroneous opinions on the nature of Christ. 4) Of having erroneous opinions on the transubstatiation and the holy mass. 5) supporting the eixistance of multiple worlds and the eternity of the world. 6) beliving it reincarnation and transmigration of souls. 7) using the divining and magical arts. 8) not to believing in the virginity of Mary. 9) Allowing meat to be eaten in Lent. 10) Having relations with countries ruled by heretics."

Where is heliocentricism mentioned?

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

PS: I took spin's 'moral' as an unjustified dig at respectable scholarship on the NT, but as usual, only my theist remark was picked up on.

Vorkosigan

Was spin taking a dig at NT scholars? I didn't read that. I thought he was just being playful about the power of expertise. Not everything is a dig at NT scholars, you know.

Anyway, there is nothing wrong in pointing out that rationalists have their myths and theists have theirs, since, AFAIK, it is true. Fair enough?

Finally, burning Bruno was a crime regardless of the reason. He may have been a nut, but nobody deserves to be burnt for their opinions, however insane. The Church's position on intellectual freedom was an ethical outrage, regardless of what Bruno was burnt for.

Here is a good review article of the issues surrounding Bruno and heliocentricism.

http://www.setileague.org/editor/brunoalt.htm

Bede's position is entirely correct. It seems highly unlikely that heliocentricism was the source of Bruno's troubles. As the account suggests, the Church burned him because he was an irrascible jackass.

Vorkosigan

joedad

Here?edit: I've never associated Bruno's demise with heliocentrism specifically either. But nor do I rule it out. As the official record has been purged, we will never know whether Copernican views were involved. For a man as read as Bruno, it may well have been part of the mix.

spin

The subject of the thread was "Most experts agree...", a phrase used three times in my sort message.

The source is:

Luigi Firpo, Il processo di Giordano Bruno, edited postumously by Diego Quaglioni (Roma, Salerno 1993, pp. XXVI-378)

Heliocentrism, I didn't actually mention, just that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe (hence man wasn't the centre). Multiple worlds, in #5, deals with other planets acting just like ours does, robbing ours of its wrongful uniqueness with all the church sponsored claptrap. (The church didn't object to the theoretical idea of the Copernican revolution, just the putting of it into practice by astronomers.)

Bruno's last words:

"Perhaps you are more afraid, in condemning me, than I am, in suffering the condemnation."

Experts are more the problem than the advocacy of new ideas. One goes by the evidence, not what the experts say.


spin

Family Man

I think everyone can conclude, regardless of the reason, that the execution of Bruno was not a high point in Church history.