On Trial for Reason

This authoritative book about science, religion and culture is by specialist who has devoted a great deal of time to studying the scientific revolution and lecturing in particular on Galileo. The title is somewhat misleading in the light of the author's own thesis about the nature of rationality, scientific method and critical thinking in the context of methodology and epistemology. As he himself maintains, geocentric and geostatic views that we now know to be wrong seemed reasonable at the time and were defended by a variety of rational arguments; indeed, reasonable and rational people were wrong about the nature of the solar system for hundreds of years. The reality of Galileo's trial is more complex than the simple dichotomy of scientific truth versus religious dogma, as this very informative and detailed account demonstrates. It takes the reader through the whole controversy originating around the work of Copernicus through Galileo's earlier and later encounters with the Inquisition and their 'vehement suspicion of heresy', moving on to the history of Galileo as a cultural icon and more general considerations about science and religion and the nature of critical thinking.

It soon becomes apparent that the episode is more than an intellectual affair: 'besides the scientific, astronomical, physical, cosmological, epistemological, methodological, theological, hermeneutical, and philosophical issues, and besides the arguments pro and con, there were legal, political, social, economic, personal and psychological factors involved' as this study amply demonstrates. It is fascinating to read about the contemporary counter-arguments and counter-evidence against Copernicus's hypothesis. It is clear that the development of Galileo's telescope and his empirical findings at 30X magnitude when only 3-4X had been previously available was decisive in the development of his views. The question of authority – both scientific and scriptural - plays a key role, and there was by no means unanimity on this within the Church itself.

The author makes a telling distinction between surface and deep structures in his later analysis. On the surface, the conflict might seem to be one of Copernicus versus Scripture or science versus religion, but at a deeper level he suggests that the conflict is between innovation and conservatism, which is true even in science today; then also between facts and myths or stories arising around these facts. There is a chapter on Galileo as a model critical thinker - one of the tactics he used was to formulate arguments against his own position only to demolish them, as in his Dialogue on the Two World Systems, which precipitated his second encounter with the Inquisition. The author analyses the nature of reasoning and the various meanings of criticism as negative evaluation demonstrating the principle of fallibility, reflection and evaluation. He also highlights open-mindedness, judiciousness and fair-mindedness, concluding that Galileo was indeed a model of critical reasoning. These qualities also apply to the book as a whole, which can be highly recommended as a nuanced study of this famous episode.