Re: implications was:RE: "just-so" stories (fwd)
Asst Prof Clarence F Sills Jr (sills@norfolk.nadn.navy.mil)
Thu, 6 Jul 1995 12:36:20 -0400 (EDT)Actually, the so-called "Copernican Revolution" *was* much less significant
than the "Darwinian Revolution." Copernicus, for example , hypothesized
that the heliocentric model was *more* consistent with Christian
presuppositions about the universe and its creator, because he saw the
celestial sun as a physical allegory of Christ--the center and source of
light. Darwin, by contrast, specifically hoped his theory would
undermine the basic notion of divine creation, and it has certainly had
that effect.
Statements about the Copernican revolution by self-serving
thinkers (Kant after the enlightenment who compared his own philosophy
with the "Copernican Revolution" and Freud more recently who did the
same), have helped put the Copernican revolution into a different
category. Of course, centuries of misleading hype about Galileo have
helped as well. Copernicus was a monk, after all, and there is no
evidence that he had lost his faith.