Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. Bruno was NOT burned at the stake for scientific heresy. That is utter claptrap. He was a pantheist and pretty much an asshole in general. Now, that doesn't mean he should have been burned, no one is advocating that... but he was persecuted for his RELIGIOUS beliefs that had nothing to do with science.
He also wasn't some poor suffering martyr. Playing fast and loose with historical facts is a sure fire way to lose credibility in my book.
And now it calls into question all the very REAL science that is being taught by giving the whackos a legitimate LIE told by the show as "proof" that the whole thing is questionable. Stick to the ****ing facts, it's not hard to do.
|
Ding Ding Ding. Winner Winner, chicken dinner.
Quote:
Here's the thing: Even "Cosmos" points out that Bruno had no scientific basis for his theories. "His vision of the cosmos was a lucky guess," says Tyson. So why is the long-dead philosopher important enough to rate hero status? That would be because "Cosmos" takes his case as one of "martyrdom."
What "Cosmos" does not point out to its audiences that the Catholic Church didn't really care about Bruno's views on the Earth moving around the Sun. His crimes -- the ones for which he was executed -- were theological. Several actual scientists in this period happily investigated the ideas of Copernicus' theories without running into trouble. Even Galileo only got in trouble when he published books that directly mocked the Church's adherence to the Earth being at the center.
Why does this matter?
So what if Giordano Bruno wasn't a scientist and wasn't executed for science? There are three big reasons why this does, in fact, matter and why it hurts "Cosmos" to get it wrong.
1. To borrow one of Tyson's famous quotes, the good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. The same goes for history. Getting the history of science wrong hurts science itself. Why believe the science if other parts of the show are inaccurate?
2. Making Bruno into a martyr for science basically makes 100 years of historical research useless. The idea of Giordano Bruno as a scientific hero only originated in the 19th century, when he was championed by several historians. Since then, most have classified him as a philosopher sharing dangerous ideas in a dangerous time.
3. It's an unstated goal of "Cosmos" to champion science and scientific reasoning over superstition and religious dogmatism. But you're not going to win over anyone by vilifying religion in the face of science. Add in Bruno flying into space in an overtly crucifixion stance almost seems like giving religion the finger. You don't win arguments that way, "Cosmos."
|
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethe...the-world.html
Generally a positive review, but, like AustinChief, nails the Bruno thing on the head.