Nick
Catalano is a TV writer/producer and Professor of Literature
and Music at Pace University. He reviews books and music for
several journals and is the author of Clifford
Brown: The Life and Art of the Legendary Jazz Trumpeter,
New
York Nights: Performing, Producing and Writing in Gotham
, A
New Yorker at Sea,, Tales
of a Hamptons Sailor and his most recent book,
Scribble
from the Apple. For Nick's reviews, visit his
website: www.nickcatalano.n
Men are
apt to mistake the strength of their feeling
for the strength
of their argument.
William Gladstone
The controversy
in Trump’s Washington, Bolsonaro’s Brazil and
Orban’s Hungary involving facts and ‘alternate’
facts, truth and lies, objective reporting, ‘fake news’
and other polarities invites inquiry into historical analogues.
In the past
few issues of Arts & Opinion I
have examined the history of political rhetoric, the process
of chronicle evolving into myth, and the sorry curricula in
schools, as players in the present drama of the search for
truth.
But in order to
view the convoluted process of the evolution of truth and
incontrovertible establishment of fact, I though it might
be helpful to trace the movement of one universally accepted
truth/fact/ law in its movement along the path of pitfalls
on its way to universal acceptance. I chose a story from Astronomy.
In the brilliant
scientific and philosophical minds of giants like Aristotle
and Ptolemy, the search for order led to their theory of a
solar system where the sun revolved around the earth. Actually,
their generalizations in astronomy, geography, math and science
were to become barometers of acute knowledge even up to the
present time. But their geocentric solar system explanation
was incorrect . . . Despite their other achievements of genius,
the work of these giants stumbled here. Incidentally, this
is often happens; scientific experimentation and theorizing
is conducted by imperfect human beings no matter their IQs.
This geocentric
or sun revolving around the earth view of the solar system
and the allied Aristotelian and Ptolemaic insistence that
the stars were ‘unmovable’ objects was totally
supported and promoted by medieval Christendom. The church
was always anxious to ally its articles of faith with the
most prestigious minds i.e. Aristotle, Plato (via St. Augustine),
and, later, philosopher/theologians Aquinas, Scotus and William
of Ockham. The church’s association with these intellectual
icons gave it a unique measure of appeal among the world’s
religions.
But in order to
maintain its thousand year dark ages dominance over the political,
social, economic as well as spiritual elements in society
Christendom (I include both the Vatican and Lutheran Protestantism)
ran the risk of clashing with scientists who might challenge
its unshakable insistence on any ‘laws’ that the
church had approved. Thus the geocentric law of the solar
system was destined to remain unchallenged even in the Renaissance,
because of the power of religion.
Except
that’s not what happened.
In 1514, Polish
astronomer, mathematician, theologian and polymath, Nicolaus
Copernicus sent out a pamphlet that stated the sun was the
center of the solar system -- not the earth. He also maintained
that the earth’s rotation accounted for the rising and
setting of the sun, and the movement of the stars and that
the cycle of the seasons was caused by the revolution of the
earth around it. The church did not immediately condemn the
book perhaps because it believed Copernicus’s theory
were so outlandish that it wouldn’t be taken seriously.
But soon a scientific fad took hold with the inexpensive costs
of telescopes and then, when Tycho Brahe (1546-1601), who
had methodically observed the skies with sophisticated instruments,
utilized the latest model to observe a moving star supernova
(SN 1572), church authorities began to squirm. How could a
star be moving when the most respected ancient astronomers
together with the pronouncements of the church had long held
that stars were fixed objects?
The supernova
(SN 1572) challenged the fixity of the heavens. In addition,
Brahe showed that unassisted sensory perception, relied upon
since Aristotle’s time for the building of knowledge,
could be misleading: the discovery of truth required evidence,
and evidence was to be obtained through new well-calibrated
instruments.
Then two months
before he died in 1543, Copernicus published his full book,
On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres, which
caused further uneasy stirring in the Vatican.
Next,
in 1610, Galileo published his Sidereus Nuncius (Starry
Messenger), describing the surprising observations that he
had made with his new telescope, among them, the Galilean
moons of Jupiter. With these observations and additional observations
that followed, such as the phases of Venus, he promoted the
heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Copernicus. And by the first
decades of the 17th century Galileo had become widely known
as the champion of the heliocentric revolution.
At this point,
the Vatican had had enough of Galileo's discoveries, and in
1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be "formally
heretical." Galileo went on to propose a theory of tides
in 1616, and of comets in 1619; he argued that the tides were
further evidence for the motion of the Earth.
The iconic astronomer,
physicist, mathematician and polymath continued his proposals,
accepted widely by fellow scientists, so that by1633 the Inquisition
was forced into a corner. But it came out swinging. That year
it put Galileo on trial, found him “vehemently suspect
of heresy,” and sentenced him to house arrest where
he remained until his death in 1642. His immensely popular
publication Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems,
published a few years before and strongly defending heliocentrism,
was the final straw. Further, the Inquisition banned all heliocentric
books and forbade any promotion of it anywhere.
But because of
the enormous popularity of cheap telescopes, the widespread
publication of discoveries by hordes of astronomers, and cascades
of sightings of asteroids, and meteors, the church condemnation
of heliocentrism fell on the deaf ears everywhere. It certainly
developed into an embarrassment for the church fathers whose
hubris militated against any kind of redaction.
And so it wasn’t
until 1758, more than 100 years later, that the church quietly
withdrew its foolish stridency. By this time observation of
planets, stars, constellations and navigation based on celestial
movement were easily the order of the day.
This narrative
serves as a good example of how verifiable fact can become
buried under a sea of distortion, lies, fake news, or whatever
you want to call it when a situation arises that contravenes
the policies of authorities in power . . . whether they be
religious clerics, economic dictators, or political strongmen
who broadcast that honest elections were rigged or who insist
that scientifically tested vaccines don’t work.
It took over 100
years for the geocentric ‘lie’ to be finally debunked
(actually, I’m wrong because I’m sure if you wander
about you will find individuals who still vehemently deny
that the earth revolves around the sun) . . . how long will
it take for the present day politicians’ lies to be
uncovered and rejected?
