精华 学习历史：黑暗的中世纪?

[qwerty0]

http://10000067214.8.sunbo.net/show_hdr.php?xname=F6BCL41&dname=8EVIM41&xpos=2&cname=&cpos=10

历史是客观的。1991年4月知识出版社出版了一本天文学家专著《当代国外天文学哲学》。该书第五部分有蒂普勒著的《地外智慧生物概念简史》一篇长文（260-278页，译自Quart J.Roy Astr soc）,文中对布鲁诺的评价是这样说的：“人们通常认为，布鲁诺是科学的殉道者，然而，他为哥白尼辩护不是出于科学的理由，而是出于宗教的原因。实际上他轻视哥白尼的严密数学逻辑推理，而仅仅是热衷于用哥白尼的学说去攻击基督教的某些基本信条，他否定基督教的历史观点。布鲁诺被判处死刑，是由于他对基督教进行了令人难以理解的攻击，而不是由于他信奉世界多元性或为哥白尼进行辩护。布鲁诺远远不是科学的殉道者，而实际上是损害了科学。”

文章接着说：“开普勒和伽利略是哥白尼日心革命时期的两位重要的先驱者，他们实际上反对布鲁诺所提倡的可居世界的多元性的思想。”《火刑》以及无数效尤的文章，都极力吹捧布鲁诺大大发展了哥白尼的学说。究竟他有什么创见呢？充其量不外有两点：一是“他非常大声的提出，在别的行星上也有生物，甚至有像人一样有智慧、会思索、按理性生活的动物。”另一个是“在他面前是无边无际的，广阔的空间，世界是没有尽头的。”这 第一个学说早已被证明是荒谬的，后一学说也毫无科学根据。人们挖空心思只能找出布鲁诺的这点“科学成就”，怎么也看不出他有什么发展或推进了哥白尼的学说。相反，他轻视哥白尼的严密数学推理，“并且损害了科学。”他引用哥白尼的学说，单是用来攻击天主教的信条。当时，各国法庭都定了严厉法律来对付教义上的异端分子。法庭起初对布鲁诺很宽松，只是把他从意大利驱逐出去。但他回来后仍然坚持反天主教的立场，法庭仍没有严厉制裁而是等待了他七年，每星期一神父去劝导他。但布鲁诺一味顽固下去，最后终于被法庭判处火刑。

为了进一步了解布鲁诺的死因，这里再引证一本科学性很强的历史书。1966年出版的德国杜宾根大学教授比尔梅耶博士著的《教会史》中关于布鲁诺写道：
“离开多明我会的诺拉的布鲁诺（1548-1600）主张哲学完全独立于教会的权力，他拒不承认‘道成肉身’和一些别的信条，并宣传一种自然主义的泛神论。他用一种亵渎的诗句和诽谤的言论攻击神职界和教会体制，因此引起了公愤。最后落到最可悲的众人唾弃的下场。他被监禁七年，自始至终固执己见，终于1600年2月17日作为异端分子被烧死。”

地心说或日心说并未妨碍天主教的教义。天主教的教义只是告诉人们：宇宙是天主造的，宇宙中的规律是天主安排的。太阳和地球都是来自天主。至于谁绕着谁转。那是科学研究的问题。不属于神学的范围，天主教的教义从来没讲过这个问题。

至于教会对破坏分子施以火刑是否违背情理或太严厉则是另一问题。我们知道社会是不断进步的，古代的思想和生活方式与现在的大不相同。用今天的眼光去评判古人的行为是不合辨证法的。具体来说，这里有两点应该注意：一是古代世界各国的刑罚，以今天的眼光看，都是较残忍的。就拿我们中国来说，除了五刑之外，还有砍脚、腰斩、车裂以及刀剐凌迟等等酷刑。欧洲虽以烧死为最残酷，但较我国的凌迟就显得轻多了。二是中古时的欧洲是一种政教合一的社会。扰乱教会就是扰乱整个国家和社会。倡导邪说，造谣诽谤，都构成破坏社会秩序之罪。前面说布鲁诺用秽词恶毒诽谤神职和教会体制，引起了公愤，被众人唾弃，足见对社会危害之大，因此受到惩处。在中国这样的实例多的是，而且有礼法可循，《礼记：王制》上说：“析方破律，乱名改作，执左道以乱政，杀。”布鲁诺正式执左道乱政而被杀的。

 

[cvictor]

'日心说'和'地心说'其实都是正确的，只是以那里为静止的原点作参考点而已。画太阳系的天体图，以日为中心，和以地球为中心，都是可以的。可以用坐标转换一下，得出相同的直观图来。
至于争得个你死我活，那是用各自的偏见当成真理，而去压制对方。这也是一知半解的基督徒的通病之一。都想当神的代言人，对不服从的就来个火烧，死刑什么的。因为是宗教主宰政府社会，甚至控制了皇帝，所以基督徒（包括有的帝王）又来争主教的位置，经常是闹得个你死我活的。
话说'中世纪'的千把年间，其'黑暗'是相对于近代的发展来比较出来的。要是从人的'非正常死亡'的情况来看，中世纪的欧洲社会结构还不算最坏，毕竟是教皇还在那里稳稳的坐着，下面的教主的争斗，对异端邪说的惩罚，以及对小小的不服造反的打击，当然有'非正常的死亡'。可以来比较在中国的的那千把年里，那是人在主宰。'大逆不道'是最大的罪，也就是反皇帝。那么谁是皇帝呢，谁都可以是，如卖草鞋的刘备，官二代的李渊，要饭的朱元璋，吃奶的娃娃。所以，谁都可以杀人。这样，整个中华社会就象烙烧饼，隔三差五地就有什么大的动荡，不死上几十万几百万甚至几千万，是不得消停的。
相对于那个年代的中华大地的快刀子杀人如麻，中世纪的欧洲简直还算不上是慢刀子割肉。所以，人治还是比神治杀地狠杀得多。
中世纪死人多的一是鼠疫，可能是养狗吧，病毒从鼠毛到狗腿再到人身。再就是十字军东征，傻呼呼的大堆大堆的穷基督徒们被主教忽悠就上了战车，最后是大败，能回家的就不错。打败了穆S吗，没有。同现在的阿富汗伊拉克的情形一样，穆S的一派是倒了，但穆S却是扩散了。希拉里到阿富汗要带头巾，可有那穆S女到了美国就是不露面。所以神治与神治的相互杀戮，还在进行，一时是看不到胜负的。
'阿门'看起来是打胜了，可是'阿拉'的地盘越来越大。中世纪如此，近代也一样。美洲大陆好像是救了基S的一命，但长远来看，不容乐观吧。中世纪的'黑暗'黑不到穆S那里去，中世纪的'光明'也照不到穆S那里。
中世纪的黑暗以后，'光明'是来了，如殖民地如卖黑奴，如一战二战，如东正教新教摩门教，如达赖喇嘛法轮功，这都是基S的果。
唏嘘，不禁要问，'黑暗'的基S的中世纪和发达的基S的现在，孰是孰非？

 

[qwerty0]

之所以耐着性子将布鲁诺一生的年表列出来，希望可以更多地了解他究竟是一个什么样的人？阿Q认为至此可以轻易得到几个结论：

1、布鲁诺得罪的不仅仅是教会，他同时得罪的包括世俗的世界，包括几乎所有他呆过的大学里的学者。最后将他出卖的也是他身边的人

2、1600年欧洲的学术气氛貌似较浓，已经有很多现代意义上的大学，学术交流似乎也不少

3、出版管制不严，布鲁诺的书要不是宣传异端宗教思想，就是抨击天主教会，或者抨击世俗社会，但是他的书仍然能够出版。尽管不清楚后来有没有被禁

4、同时，布鲁诺在欧洲“游历”十几年，并没有真正碰到麻烦。最后被宗教裁判所逮捕是因为他的学生以“宣传异端和不端的个人行为”两个理由将他出首，否则他仍然可能继续四处晃荡

5、天主教会、宗教裁判所的权威并不是跟中国皇帝、官僚老虎须拔不得的。在德国，得罪/冒犯路德教会后，得到的处分是被驱逐。在威尼斯被捕后，前后7年，天主教会希望他收回他的言论，被坚决拒绝后才被处死

6、最后天主教会对他宣布死刑之后，交由世俗机构处理。不清楚他们的权力分工，不清楚火刑是宗教裁判所的决定还是世俗机构的决定

再补充一点，来自wiki： In the 16th century dedications were, as a rule, approved beforehand, and hence were a way of placing a work under the protection of an individual。哥白尼的《天体运行论》就是献给教宗保祿三世的

 

[qwerty0]

布鲁诺的全部关于天文的著作就是1584年出版的三本书，柏拉图对话录类似格式的对话。同时代的哥白尼主要依赖数学研究天文，伽利略数学+观测，布鲁诺呢？

这是他最重要的一本书片段和包含全文的英文翻译本链接，有兴趣的可以看看布鲁诺是怎样“发展”哥白尼的日心说：

论无限宇宙和世界

Elpino. The Peripatetics would say that the outermost heaven is a containing body in virtue of the concave and not of the convex surface thereof, and that in virtue of the concave surface it is a space.

Fracastoro. And I would add that therefore the surface of a containing body need not be a position in space. [6]

Philotheo. In short then, to come straight to my proposition, it appeareth to me ridiculous to affirm that nothing is beyond the heaven, and that the heaven is contained in itself and is in place and hath position only by accident, that is, by means of the parts thereof. And however Aristotle's phrase by accident be interpreted, he cannot escape the difficulty that one cannot be transformed into two, for the container is eternally different from the contained, [7] so different, indeed, that according to Aristotle himself, the container is incorporeal while the contained is corporeal; the container is motionless while the contained hath motion; the container is a mathematical conception while the contained hath physical existence. [8]

Thus let this surface be what it will, I must always put the question, what is beyond? If the reply is Nothing, then I call that the Void or emptiness. And such a Void or Emptiness hath no measure and no outer limit, though it hath an inner; and this is harder to imagine than is an infinite or immense universe. For if we insist on a finite universe, we cannot escape the void. And let us now see whether there can be such a space in which is naught. In this infinite space is placed our universe (whether by chance, by necessity or by providence I do not now consider). I ask now whether this space which indeed containeth the world is better fitted to do so than is another space beyond?

Fracastoro. It certainly appeareth to me, not so. For where there is nothing, there can be no differentiation; where there is no differentiation there is no distinction of quality and perhaps there is even less of quality where there is naught whatsoever.

 

[qwerty0]

这是另一本“天文学”著作的英译本全文：The Ash Wednesday Supper，我们可以看看布鲁诺对哥白尼和数学的态度是怎样

Smi. Please, let me know, what is your opinion of Copernicus?

THE. He was possessed of a grave, elaborate, careful, and mature mind; a man who was not inferior, except by succession of place and time, to any astronomer who had been before him; a man who in regard to natural judgment was far superior to Ptolemy, Hipparchus, Eudoxus, and all the others who walked in the footsteps of these; a man who had to liberate himself from some false presuppositions of the common and commonly accepted philosophy, or perhaps I should say, blindness. But for all that he did not move too much beyond them; being more intent on the study of mathematics than of nature, [21. This criticism of Copernicus strikes the keynote of Bruno's scientific posture. Disdainful of mathematics to a very high degree, he claims supreme expertise in 'physical astronomy', about which he rightly notes that it is of overriding importance for a real explanation of the physical universe. But his version of physical astronomy or his explanation of the motion of the earth and of other celestial bodies bogs down in gross animism (to say nothing of his Hermetism), which vitiates much of the forcefulness of his 'assertion of the infinity of the universe.] he was not able to go deep enough and penetrate beyond the point of removing from the way the stumps of inconvenient and vain principles, so as to resolve completely the difficult objections, and to free both himself and others from so many vain investigations, and to set attention firmly on things constant and certain. For all that, who can fully praise the great mind of that German, [22. This is not the only identification of Copernicus as a German in the early literature, a point which gave rise to much chauvinistic controversy, and which shall be kept alive by alI those unable to see long past situations in proper historical context.] who with little concern for the foolish multitude, stood solidly against the torrent of the opposite persuasion? And though deprived of effective reasons, he seized those rejected and rusty fragments which he could have from the hands of antiquity, and repolished, matched and cemented them to such an extent with his more mathematical than physical discourse, that there arose the argument once ridiculed, rejected and vilificd, [23. The reference might be also to Ptolemy's ridiculing Aristarchus for his advocacy of the earth's motion, in addition to the derision which greeted from several corners the publication of Copernicus' work.] but now respected, appreciated and possessed of greater likelihood than its contrary, and certainly more convenient and useful for theory and for computational purposes. Thus this German, though he did not have sufficient means to become able not only to thwart, but also to fight, to vanquish, and to suppress sufficiently the false hood, [24. The falsehood is the closed, spherical world, with the earth testing immobile at its center. While Bruno reproaches Copernicus for having retained the sphere of the fixed stars, he fails to realize that he is even more Aristotelian than Copernicus in explaining the physics of the motion of the earth. It is also to be noted that Bruno's high praises of Copernicus serve as a convenient backdrop to bring out more forcefully his own supercminent greatness.]

 

[qwerty0]

这是布鲁诺的另一部“天文”著作。Q不学无术，哪一本都看不懂，实在没有耐心拜读了，有兴趣的自便吧：

Concerning the Cause, Principle, and One

对于这个命题，如果布鲁诺不是为科学献身，是不是他是为自由思想，还是为他的泛神论的信仰献身？从14楼列出布鲁诺的生平和著作列表，以及对他的两本“科学”著作的浏览，阿Q自己已经得出结论，这里直接采用下面链接的结论。

http://shc2000.sjtu.edu.cn/0512/bulunuo.htm

从上述观点出发，耶兹认为：布鲁诺就是位具有强烈宗教改革意识的激进的赫尔墨斯法术传统的追随者，是古埃及法术宗教的信仰者，他本身就是一位法术师。他试图通过法术的方式发现自然的秘密，以便控制、利用自然，他所有的哲学和“科学”层面的探讨都从属于其宗教使命。不论什么思想，只要与他的复兴古埃及法术宗教的使命相合就都会为其所用，为此他丝毫不理会当时基督教的禁忌。无疑，正是这一点在很大的程度上导致了宗教裁判对他的反感。
　　比如他毫不避讳地推崇督教禁忌的巫术（demonic magic），还坚持当时尚未被基督教完全接受的新柏拉图主义，强烈反对当时已与基督教融合的亚里士多德主义，并对其冷嘲热讽，把他们斥为只懂文法、却不会深刻地思考自然本质，也就根本无法获得灵智的“学究”。他甚至还“得寸进尺”地宣称现行的基督教是作伪且作恶的宗教，就连基督教的圣物十字架在他看来也是基督教从古埃及人手里偷来的。
　　耶兹还举出了诸多例子，并引用了历史学家阿·梅尔卡蒂的研究，指出当时的宗教裁判所关注的更多的是他的神学问题，基督教对布鲁诺的种种质询很少是从哲学或科学的意义上提及的。布鲁诺热衷于赫尔墨斯法术宗教的复兴，期望以此替代败坏了的基督教，他的种种思想和作为都是为这一目的服务的，比如他坚持自己对“三位一体”的解释，将神迹视作实行法术后的结果，而不理会基督教的权威解释；他反对教皇、僧侣、反对敬拜偶像，并总是率性而为对他们极尽冷嘲热讽之能事；他还去过异端的国家，与异端有过亲密接触等等，这些都是宗教裁判所足以定他神学异端，并处死他的有力罪证。
　　由此，可以进一步推测，布鲁诺很可能是一名以在整个欧洲传播法术、实现宗教改革为己任的赫尔墨斯式法术师。在当时的宗教裁判所眼里，他就是一个胆大妄为、不知悔改的宗教异端者，也就是说他并不像人们惯常所认为的那样，是为了捍卫科学真理而被宗教裁判所处死的。他是为了他毕生信仰、追随的赫尔墨斯法术传统而死的。（[1],389－290页）。

３．４　耶兹眼中的布鲁诺形象
　　我们可以看出，耶兹眼中的布鲁诺形象与以往将其视作“科学真理的殉道士”“一位唯物主义者”的形象有了很大的不同。在她看来，布鲁诺并不具有我们现代意义上的科学观念，历史中的布鲁诺更倾向于符合当时历史与境下的法术师形象，他的思想、命运都围绕着赫尔墨斯法术传统而展开。他坚持哥白尼日心说、发展“宇宙无限”学说，也都是从属于他的宗教使命的。他惨烈的人生结局也主要是因为他对赫尔墨斯主义的坚持，宣扬哥白尼学说也仅是他坚持赫尔墨斯主义中的一部分。
　　同时我们也可以看出，他与哥白尼革命的相关性，也恰恰说明了文艺复兴时期的“科学”、宗教以及赫尔墨斯法术之间边界的模糊、不确定性。这同时也说明了文艺复兴时期的科学与宗教问题并不像传统的理解那样简单，在他们之间还掺杂着更为古老的法术传统，这三者之间与其他社会文化因素交织在一起、相互影响渗透，共同构成了文艺复兴特定的社会文化历史与境。在这样复杂的历史与境下，任何一种对当时发生的历史事件的简单化、片面化的理解都是有失偏颇的。

 

[qwerty0]

关于伽利略，这里有一个老帖子：伽利略

百度百科--伽利略事件, 摘录如下：

“伽利略事件”——罗马教廷于1633年对伽利略进行的审判。虽然学者们对于伽利略为何被宗教裁判所审问这件事还没有达成共识，但几乎所有的历史学家都同意，伽利略并不是因为相信哥白尼的日心说才遭受审判。

当伽利略1616年在罗马逗留时，得到了来自某些有权力的自由主义神学家的支持。特别是枢机主教Roberto Bellarmine 和 Maffeo Barberini，他们辩解道，如果有一天哥白尼的宇宙体系被证明是正确的，那么教会将不得不重新解释那些看起来与之矛盾的经文。无论如何，他们都支持伽利略最后的妥协方案：在能拿出最终的证明之前，伽利略应该承认日心说仅仅是一种假设，并不把它作为对宇宙的真实描述加以推广

时间到了1624年，伽利略认为自己已经找到了苦苦寻觅的证明。更妙的是，他的旧盟友，Maffeo Barberini此时已加冕成为教皇乌尔班八世。这一年，伽利略回到罗马，六次觐见了新教皇。在会谈中，伽利略向教皇保证，他已经找到了地球运动的证据。乌尔班对这种实证可能带来的影响更有兴趣。他忧虑的是教会该如何处理这一证明带来的神学方面的问题。他同意伽利略就日心说问题进行写作，但是不许他将日心说描述为事实（而仅仅是一个有用的假设），除非他真的能证明日心说。

　1632年，当伽利略确信自己掌握着日心说所需要的证明，并且感到教皇本人已批准了他的工作后，便出版了他的《两种世界体系的对话》一书。这是一本写得很机智的书，书中内容以三个人物的对话展开——Simplicio（主张地心说的亚里士多德主义者），Salviati（主张日心说的哥白尼主义者）和Sagredo（在这场辩论中持中立态度的博学智者）。在这场对话中，Salviati系统地驳斥了Simplicio的所有观点，并得出了伽利略所主张的，富有挑战性的关于地球围绕太阳运转的证明。Sagredo最终总结道，睿智的Salviati（其实就是伽利略本人在书中的投影）是正确的。亚里士多德错了。然后三人退下，享受餐点和美酒。

--补充凡是涉及到教皇的论断都出自“Simplicio”(意大利语“蠢货”)，此文是意大利文写作

到了1633年，伽利略被召回罗马以回应这些指控。对他的审判是一场拉锯式的战斗，牵涉到了包括教会法律、神学、数学在内的许多技术细节，最后由类似于陪审团的机构来裁决。在随后的辩护书中，伽利略承认自己在没有充分证据的情况下，将日心说作为事实来推广是走得太远了。他承诺再也不这样做了。控辩双方同意达成一个顾全面子的折衷方案。然后，几乎就在最后一刻（原因仍是一个谜），宗教裁判所驳回了这个控辩合约，宣布了最终裁决。这个判决出人意料地刺耳：伽利略被判有罪，因为他是“异端般地持怀疑态度”（这虽然没有直接被称为“异端”那么糟，但仍然比违抗指令和推行与《圣经》向左的教义严重得多），并要求他公开发誓放弃对日心说的信仰。1633年6月，伽利略在宣布自己以前言论无效的声明上签了字。（作者注：我应该指出，伽利略从来没有被投入地牢监禁或者在审讯中受到拷打，虽然不少人有这样的错觉。按当时人的说法，他身处的环境其实相当令人羡慕。）
　　经过这次审判，伽利略回到了他在佛罗伦萨郊外的别墅。在那里他颇有为巧妙地渡过了生命中的最后十年。舒适的居家生活背后是软禁和不得写作物理方面文章的禁令。为了表明对他的判决是被何等严厉地执行，在他的余生里，伽利略经常住在托斯卡纳的贵族兼赞助人的宫殿中。不仅如此，他还公开违背了箝制言论自由的裁定，写出了《论两种新科学》一书。在该书中，他实际上发明了运动学和材料学（虽然伽利略的犯罪记录意味着这本书不可以在意大利出版，但它仍于1638年在荷兰出版了）。在纯学术层面而言，《论两种新科学》一书才真正堪称伽利略对现代科学的最伟大贡献。伽利略于1642年去世，在同一年，艾萨克·牛顿诞生了。

事实列举得够多了。但是教会究竟为何如此苛刻地对待伽利略呢？有些学者认为这要归因于伽利略的运气不好。因为他恰巧在政治环境最糟糕的时候出版了他的《对话》。在17世纪初，天主教会竭力避免来自基督教界内部的造反（新教改革）。当天主教会受到攻击时，教会内部不少人都不喜欢放宽对天主教学说的限制。伽利略很可能成了一场更大规模战争的间接牺牲品。
　　另有历史学家指出了伽利略生平中为数众多的瑕疵。毫无疑问，在攫取社会地位和政治地位时，他是一个贪婪的往上爬的人。他在意大利文艺复兴时期宫廷里施展的政治伎俩为自己树立了不少有势力的敌手。他对哥白尼体系的证明（该证明并不正确）做出后，伽利略显然希望能够借此赢得巨大声望，攀到宫廷金字塔的最高峰：梵蒂冈教廷（他渴望成为教皇的官方数学家和天文学家）。他以自己对哥白尼体系的证明作为赌注，却输掉了赌局，承担了随之而来的一切后果。
　　还有一些学者暗示伽利略的失势应归因于他与教皇个人关系的滑落。有一些文件支持这样的结论，教皇乌尔班八世感到自己被伽利略的错误证明所出卖。更令其恼怒的是，伽利略曾把教皇与他的私人谈话通过Simplicio（那个书中的笨蛋）之口写入《对话》的最后部分。

事实上，有一个科学史学家John Heilbron最近出版了一本名为《教堂中的太阳》的书，记载了在伽利略事件发生后，教会如何继续推动关于日心说证据的研究。其中甚至包括将整个教堂变成一个巨大的小孔成像照相机，以便数次测量一年中太阳圆面视直径的变化。由于数学上的缘故，用哥白尼体系算出的太阳视圆面直径变化结果将与用托勒密-亚里士多德体系算出来的略有不同。17世纪50年代和60年代由教会主持的观测实验显示，测量结果显然支持哥白尼的学说

[url="http://www.scipark.net/2012/05/%E5%86%B2%E7%AA%81%E7%9A%84%E7%9C%9F%E7%9B%B8%E2%80%94%E2%80%94%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%8E%E4%BC%BD%E5%88%A9%E7%95%A5%E5%8F%97%E5%AE%A1%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6%E7%9A%84%E6%96%B0%E6%9D%90%E6%96%99%E5%8F%8A%E5%85%B6/“]补充材料[/url]
伽利略为人狂傲不羁，在发明与发现的研究中也有很多掠人之美的剽窃行为，例如关于太阳黑子现象发现就有充分证据说明是耶稣会天文学家克里斯托.夏纳通信中告诉伽利略的，但伽利略独伐奇功率先发表。这类事件使伽利略官司缠身，并使可能的支持者离心离德，我们应该看到，直到1613年罗马的耶稣会天文学者还是伽利略的有力支持者之一。

 

[qwerty0]

伽利略：一个虔诚的天主教徒

下面有一封他当年的亲笔信，最能说明问题了： Letter to Madame Christina of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of Tuscany: Concerning the Use of Biblical Quotations in Matters of Science (1615), 摘录如下：

I think in the first place that it is very pious to say and prudent to affirm that the holy Bible can never speak untruth—whenever its true meaning is understood. But I believe nobody will deny that it is often very abstruse, and may say things which are quite different from what its bare words signify. Hence in expounding the Bible if one were always to confine oneself to the unadorned grammatical meaning, one might fall into error

From these things it follows as a necessary consequence that, since the Holy Ghost did not intend to teach us whether heaven moves or stands still, whether its shape is spherical or like a discus or extended in a plane, nor whether the earth is located at its center or off to one side, then so much the less was it intended to settle for us any other conclusion of the same kind. And the motion or rest of the earth and the sun is so closely linked with the things just named, that without a determination of the one, neither side can be taken in the other matters. Now if the Holy Spirit has purposely neglected to teach us propositions of this sort as irrelevant to the highest goal (that is, to our salvation), how can anyone affirm that it is obligatory to take sides on them, and that one belief is required by faith, while the other side is erroneous? Can an opinion be heretical and yet have no concern with the salvation of souls? Can the Holy Ghost be asserted not to have intended teaching us something that does concern our salvation? I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree: “That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how heaven goes.”

And in St. Augustine we read: “If anyone shall set the authority of Holy Writ against clear and manifest reason, he who does this knows not what he has undertaken; for he opposes to the truth not the meaning of the Bible, which is beyond his comprehension, but rather his own interpre­tation; not what is in the Bible, but what he has found in himself and imagines to be there.”

 

[qwerty0]

'日心说'和'地心说'其实都是正确的，只是以那里为静止的原点作参考点而已。画太阳系的天体图，以日为中心，和以地球为中心，都是可以的。可以用坐标转换一下，得出相同的直观图来。
至于争得个你死我活，那是用各自的偏见当成真理，而去压制对方。这也是一知半解的基督徒的通病之一。都想当神的代言人，对不服从的就来个火烧，死刑什么的。因为是宗教主宰政府社会，甚至控制了皇帝，所以基督徒（包括有的帝王）又来争主教的位置，经常是闹得个你死我活的。
话说'中世纪'的千把年间，其'黑暗'是相对于近代的发展来比较出来的。要是从人的'非正常死亡'的情况来看，中世纪的欧洲社会结构还不算最坏，毕竟是教皇还在那里稳稳的坐着，下面的教主的争斗，对异端邪说的惩罚，以及对小小的不服造反的打击，当然有'非正常的死亡'。可以来比较在中国的的那千把年里，那是人在主宰。'大逆不道'是最大的罪，也就是反皇帝。那么谁是皇帝呢，谁都可以是，如卖草鞋的刘备，官二代的李渊，要饭的朱元璋，吃奶的娃娃。所以，谁都可以杀人。这样，整个中华社会就象烙烧饼，隔三差五地就有什么大的动荡，不死上几十万几百万甚至几千万，是不得消停的。
相对于那个年代的中华大地的快刀子杀人如麻，中世纪的欧洲简直还算不上是慢刀子割肉。所以，人治还是比神治杀地狠杀得多。
中世纪死人多的一是鼠疫，可能是养狗吧，病毒从鼠毛到狗腿再到人身。再就是十字军东征，傻呼呼的大堆大堆的穷基督徒们被主教忽悠就上了战车，最后是大败，能回家的就不错。打败了穆S吗，没有。同现在的阿富汗伊拉克的情形一样，穆S的一派是倒了，但穆S却是扩散了。希拉里到阿富汗要带头巾，可有那穆S女到了美国就是不露面。所以神治与神治的相互杀戮，还在进行，一时是看不到胜负的。
'阿门'看起来是打胜了，可是'阿拉'的地盘越来越大。中世纪如此，近代也一样。美洲大陆好像是救了基S的一命，但长远来看，不容乐观吧。中世纪的'黑暗'黑不到穆S那里去，中世纪的'光明'也照不到穆S那里。
中世纪的黑暗以后，'光明'是来了，如殖民地如卖黑奴，如一战二战，如东正教新教摩门教，如达赖喇嘛法轮功，这都是基S的果。
唏嘘，不禁要问，'黑暗'的基S的中世纪和发达的基S的现在，孰是孰非？

抱歉，人类几千年的历史、天文、宗教被你聊聊数语就全概括了，阿Q完全没有能力讨论这么高度概括的命题。起“学习中世纪”这样的题目都已经觉得很惶恐了，幸亏在网上没人认得，否则是不敢的

如果你愿意讨论更加具体一点的问题，甚感荣幸

 

[Happy Angel]

布鲁诺，先看看他是为什么死的？

Frances Yates 60年前对布鲁诺的研究，已经逐步被西方主流接受，至少这一点：布鲁诺不是一个科学的殉道者
http://shc2000.sjtu.edu.cn/0512/bulunuo.htm

罗马宗教裁判所对他的指控
* holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith and speaking against it and its ministers;
* holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith about the Trinity, divinity of Christ, and Incarnation;
* holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith pertaining to Jesus as Christ;
* holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith regarding the virginity of Mary, mother of Jesus;
* holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith about both Transubstantiation and Mass;
* claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their eternity;
* believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the human soul into brutes, and;
* dealing in magics and divination.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
When Giordano Bruno (1548–1600) was burned at the stake as a heretic, it had nothing to do with his writings in support of Copernican cosmology, and this is clearly shown in Finocchiaro's reconstruction of the accusations against Bruno (see also Blumenberg's part 3, chapter 5, titled “Not a Martyr for Copernicanism: Giordano Bruno”)

Catholic Encyclopedia
Bruno was not condemned for his defence of the Copernican system of astronomy, nor for his doctrine of the plurality of inhabited worlds, but for his theological errors, among which were the following: that Christ was not God but merely an unusually skillful magician, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, that the Devil will be saved, etc.

COLLIER'S ENCYCLOPEDIA
The numerous charges against him included blasphemy, immoral conduct, and heresy in matters of dogmatic theology, and involved some of the basic doctrines of his philosophy and cosmology

中国人自己的1948年版《辞海》说：“白鲁诺（布鲁诺）：意大利哲学家，幼入黑僧袍派，接受宗教教育，每凭己意攻击教理，遂被逐。周游英法德诸国大学，主张泛神论，回国后诋毁教会受火刑死。”《辞海》中并没有说他因“支持哥白尼及地动学说受审。

貌似Encyclopædia Britannica维持传统的观点
Bruno is, perhaps, chiefly remembered for the tragic death he suffered at the stake because of the tenacity with which he maintained his unorthodox ideas at a time when both the Roman Catholic and the Reformed churches were reaffirming rigid Aristotelian and Scholastic principles in their struggle for the evangelization of Europe.

宗教裁判所是天主教的“产物”。

http://www.jonahome.net/Article/article/2006-6-2/676-3.htm

 

[qwerty0]

继续收集信息，突然意识到为什么15、16世纪的伽利略、哥白尼已经是大学生，他们的学术活动怎么跟近代那么象？于是简单查看一下他们有关的几所大学的情况：

哥白尼的学习经历和大学简单历史
1491-1495：University of Kraków，Poland。哥白尼在此学习：arithmetic, geometry, geometric optics, cosmography, theoretical and computational astronomy), a good knowledge of the philosophical and natural-science, and made him conversant with humanistic culture.
was established in 1364 by Casimir III of Poland when Pope Urban V granted him permission to set up an academy in Kraków. 成立最初教授：liberal arts, Medicine, Canon Law，Roman Law

1496 -1500 University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy: 学习数学，天文学，法律，医学等，并接受人文主义思想

尽管大学的章程最早制定在1317年，但事实上早在11世纪末在博洛尼亚就已经出现了第一个法律学院，所以大学的建立时间，经过考证确定为1088年，为欧洲第一所大学。两年后，1100年大宋王朝的宋徽宗即位。神圣罗马皇帝腓特烈一世于1158年颁布法令，规定了大学不受任何权力的影响，作为研究场所享有独立性。从十四世纪开始继法学之后，博洛尼亚大学又迎来了众多逻辑学、天文学、医学、哲学、算术、修辞学以及语法学的学者。1364年，大学建立了神学院

1501 - 1503 University of Padua, Padua, Italy: Medicine
The university is conventionally said to have been founded in 1222 when a large group of students and professors left the University of Bologna in search of more academic freedom. The first subjects to be taught were law and theology. The curriculum expanded rapidly, and by 1399 the institution had divided in two: a Universitas Iuristarum for civil law and Canon law, and a Universitas Artistarum which taught astronomy, dialectic, philosophy, grammar, medicine, and rhetoric. There was also a Universitas Theologorum, established in 1373 by Urban V.

1503 University of Ferrara，Ferrara, Italy: 法学博士
The University of Ferrara was founded on March 4, 1391 by Marquis Alberto V D'Este with the permission of Pope Boniface IX. The Studium Generale was inaugurated on St. Luke's Day (October 18) of that year with courses in law, arts and theology. After the unification of Italy, Ferrara University became a free university with faculties of Law and Mathematics, a three-year course in Medicine (reduced to two years in 1863-64), as well as Schools of Veterinary Medicine (abolished in 1876), Pharmacy, and for public Notaries.

 

[qwerty0]

伽利略相关的大学

He started to study for the priesthood, but left and enrolled for a medical degree at the University of Pisa. He never completed this degree, but instead studied mathematics notably with Ostilio Ricci, the mathematician of the Tuscan court

之后伽利略分别在 University of Pisa 和 University of Padua 任教

University of Pisa

The University of Pisa, is an Italian public research university located in Pisa, Italy. Established in 1343 by an edict of Pope Clement VI.

But a number of scholars claim its origin dates back to the 11th century.

The first reliable data on the presence of secular and monastic schools of law in Pisa is from the 11th and the second half of the 12th century. Further, the next century form the first documents that prove the presence of doctors of medicine and surgery.

The earliest evidence of a Pisan Studium dates to 1338, when the renowned jurist Ranieri Arsendi transferred to Pisa from Bologna. He along with Bartolo da Sassoferrato, a lecturer in Civil Law, were paid by the Municipality to teach public lessons.

The papal bull In supremae dignitatis, granted by Pope Clement VI on September 3, 1343, recognized the Studium of Pisa as a Studium Generale; an institution of further education founded or confirmed by a universal authority, the Papacy, or Empire.

The first taught subjects were theology, civil law, canon law and medicine.

 

[Happy Angel]

蛮族入侵给中世纪带来了黑暗。

http://www.cawhi.com/plus/view.php?aid=4626

 

[qwerty0]

伽利略与天主教会冲突参杂了政治斗争、科学之争、神学之争，伽利略简单生平和与教会冲突经过如下

Born in Pisa on February 15, 1564

1589 - 1592，He held the mathematics chair at University of Pisa

1592 - 1610, Chair of mathematics at the University of Padua

1610, he was appointed mathematician and philosopher to the Grand Duke of Tuscany.

1613, He entered a debate with Christoph Scheiner, a German Jesuit and professor of mathematics at Ingolstadt, regarding the Sunspots

1613 he wrote a letter to his student Benedetto Castelli in Pisa about the problem of squaring the Copernican theory with certain biblical passages. Inaccurate copies of this letter were sent by Galileo’s enemies to the Inquisition in Rome. Several Dominican fathers in Florence lodged complaints against Galileo in Rome, and Galileo went to Rome to defend the Copernican cause and his good name.

1615 圣衣会成员，牧师、数学教、神学家 Paolo Antonio Foscarini published a book arguing that the Copernican theory did not conflict with scripture. Foscarini went to Rome to defend the Copernican theory personally, but Inquisition consultants examined the question and pronounced the Copernican theory heretical. Foscarini’s book was banned

1616， Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, one of the most respected Catholic theologians of the time, was called on to adjudicate the dispute between Galileo and his opponents, including both religious and secular university professors.

Bellarmine found no problem with heliocentrism so long as it was treated as a purely hypothetical calculating device and not as a physically real phenomenon. For unknown reason, February 19, 1616, the Inquisition asked a commission of theologians, known as qualifiers, about the propositions of the heliocentric view of the universe, and the result was, Galileo was advised not to teach or defend Copernican theory.

Galileo met again with Bellarmine, apparently on friendly terms; and on March 11 he met with the Pope, who assured him that he was safe from persecution so long as he, the Pope, should live

1616, 天体运行论 though not formally banned, was removed from circulation pending revisions, and in fact was not fully cleared until the 19th century.[citation needed] Galileo was personally safe and his works had not been banned

1623 Maffeo Barberini, Galileo's supporter and friend, was elected Pope Urban VIII.

1624 Galileo went to Rome and had six interviews with Urban VIII. The pope gave Galileo permission to write a book about theories of the universe but warned him to treat the Copernican theory only hypothetically

1630, he finished Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, and it was printed in Florence in 1632

In this book, he put Pope Urban VIII’s favourite argument in the mouth of the person who had been ridiculed throughout the dialogue. The reaction against the book was swift. The pope convened a special commission to examine the book; the commission found that Galileo had not really treated the Copernican theory hypothetically and recommended that a case be brought against him by the Inquisition

It should be noted that Galileo was never in a dungeon or tortured; during the Inquisition process he stayed mostly at the house of the Tuscan ambassador to the Vatican and for a short time in a comfortable apartment in the Inquisition building.

Finally, in April 1633 Galileo was called before the Holy Office, 但此时在罗马已经有很多支持者因为《对话》一书远离他

22 June 1633, the court issued a sentence of condemnation and forced Galileo to abjure.

He was confined in Siena and eventually, in December 1633, he was allowed to retire to his villa in Arcetri and he was continuing his scientific research.

1638, when he was almost totally blind, the [Discourses and demonstrations on two new Sciences] was published in Leiden though the Inquisition prohibited his future publications.

Galileo died in Arcetri on January 8, 1642.

 

[qwerty0]

1616 和 1633 年宗教裁判所审判伽利略的原始文档英文翻译：http://web.archive.org/web/20070930....edu/mgagne/ess362/resources/finocchiaro.html

1616年由红衣主教Bellarmine主持的审查的文档摘录：

Consultant's Report on Copernicanism (24 February 1616)
Assessment made at the Holy Office, Rome, Wednesday, 24 February 1616, in the presence of the Father Theologians signed below.

Proposition to be assessed:

(1) The sun is the center of the world and completely devoid of local motion.

Assessement: All said that this proposition is foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts many places the sense of Holy Scripture, according to the literal meaning of the words and according to the common interpretation and understanding of the Holy Fathers and the doctors of theology.

(2) The earth is not the center of the world, nor motionless, but it moves as a whole and also with diurnal motion.

Assessment: All said that this proposition receives the same judgement in philosophy and that in regard to theological truth it is at least errouneous in faith.

Inquisition Minutes (25 February 1616)
His Holiness ordered the most Illustrious Lord Cardinal Bellarmine to call Galileo before himself and warn him to abandon these opinions; and if he should refuse to obey, the Father Commissary, in the presence of a notary and witnesses, is to issue him an injunction to abstain completely from teaching or defending this doctrine and opinion or from discussing it; and further, if he should not acquiesce, he is to be imprisoned.

Decree of the Index (5 March 1616)
In regard to several books containing various heresies and errors, to prevent the emergence of more serious harm throughout Christendom. ... has decided that they should be altogether condemned and prohibited:

Calvinist Theology (in three parts). . .
Scotanus Redivivus, or Erotic Commmentary in Three Parts. . .
Historical Explanation of the Most Serious Question in the Christian Churches Especially in the West,
from the Time of the Apostles All the Way to Our Age. . .
Inquiry Concerning the Pre-eminence Among European Provinces. . .
Donellus's Principles, or Commentaries on Civil Law,. . .

Q注：从以上书名不难猜出这些基本属于神学范畴

Therefore, in order that this opinion may not creep any further to the prejudice of Catholic truth, the Congregation has decided that the books by Nicolaus Copernicus (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres) and Diego de Zuniga (On Job) be suspended until corrected;（Q注：以上两本为科学书） but that the book of the Carmelite Father Paolo Antonio Foscarini be completely prohibited and condemned（Q注：此书侧重神学，试图解释说日心说没有违反圣经）;