In class, we had an intense debate on what is "true" knowledge, and what are our sources to believe these facts. I think this is a very good subject to debate on because it all depends on perspective and purpose. That class discussion could have gone on and on, only because people have different scientific and religious beliefs. For example, a strong Christian believer will continously argue the fact the God exists and he created the universe. Not everyone believes this because they are not of the same faith. This is why it is all about perspective because religiously, a person will be convinced only because they believe in their religion, but if you only believe in scientific evidence, then you will argue with this point. This is exactly what occurred in class.
In the reading assignment, I noticed that their was kind of a dominoes affect on how we received proof on how the universe is placed and how it exists today. A Greek philosopher named Aristotle portrayed the point that the earth was the center of the universe, and all the planets revolved around it. Later in 1543, Copernicus proved that Aristotle's judgment was incorrect and that the sun is the center of the universe while the earth and all the other planets revolve around it. In the early 17th century, a German mathematician named Kepler, focused on what the planets around the sun were doing. They were not just floating around, but were actually placed on elleptical orbits in which they moved in a perfect circle. The Italian man, Galileo created a new and improved telescope in which they were able to focus in on the planets themselves. I found this to be an interesting pattern because as technology grew, each aspect of the universe was looked at more closely.
No comments:
Post a Comment