[Serious] Giordano Bruno

[brewer]

And the "kooky" Bruno is a position. I'll take what I get from Stanford: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bruno/  Not in all ways kooky, includes science, at the least science thought. 

This is from the Stanford page that you prefer:

The authority that Bruno particularly liked to invoke, however, was Scripture. The infinite number of celestial bodies corresponded to “those so many hundreds of thousands [of angels]”—an allusion to Daniel 7:10—“that assist in the ministry and contemplation of the first, universal, infinite and eternal efficient cause” (BOI I, 455)

The celestial or, as Bruno called them, “principal” bodies glided weightlessly within an infinite “receptacle” or “expanse” of aether (BOI II, 110) like specks of dust in the sunlit air (BOL I.1, 262; I.2, 91). What made them move? Their souls.

Which part of this is "science thought," exactly?

BTW, I'm not going to read your "long articles". I find you/your writings quite off putting. But I read that the religious love them.

This tells us everything we need to know about the rigor of your scholarship.

You pulled out two items, good for you.

I'm lacking rigor, ooh .........ouch.

---

I have no idea what this is trying to say.



Garbage. That is not how historians work.



It includes "science thought" the way Deepak Chopra includes quantum mechanics. That doesn't make Chopra a quantum physicist. As I said, Bruno rejected science as too limiting, chided Coperncius for being restricted by mere mathematics, called actual astronomers "geometers" who he said would confirm some of his kooky ideas (they didn't) and then got the science of heliocentrism wrong in his sole simplistic attempt at explaining it. Those of us who have actually read his works and the scholarship about him rather than Googling a couple of websites are pretty clear on this point.



Where and when did they "deny the execution"? And the objection to the statue was due to some nineteenth century politics, which it seems you don't understand.



Yes, that's usually the reaction of close-minded fundamentalists to correction that they can't refute.



Smarter atheists love them too. The ones that actually are open-minded and rational that is, as opposed to the reflex fundamentalists who talk about being those things but just cling to a new set of dogmas and snarl at anyone who disturbs their circle jerks.

The reply didn't pull in all of the prior, the above will look a little strange. (looks like your mistake more than mine)


It was saying that the Secretary of the Vatican State stated the execution was by a civil power. Damned apologists. Here's the link again: https://famous-trials.com/bruno/265-letter

What do you mean "garbage"? Where did they get the history if not from catholics writings and those who wrote about the catholics at the time? After watching the catholics whack people who didn't tow the catholic company line, how much truth and accuracy do you think you'll get? Do we really need to go into how the catholics have a "history" of hiding their uncomfortable truths?

Well, the "deny the execution" was in the Standford attachment. The objection was a catholic objection, catholic politics. If you have a problem with information in the attachment you should probably take it up with Mr Knox (but I seriously doubt you will).

If he was that nuts, why all the sciency/philsophizer accolades and a statue? See section 8: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bruno/#BrunAfte   Like I said, this ain't passing the sniff test.

What fundamentalist? I'm not hear to refute you, but to disagree. I think you're biased, have an agenda and want to hold onto a rebel atheist reputation which seems to be your claim to fame. You're more than welcome to it. But glad to see that you are still quite off putting. I completely expect some more trash talk from you.

What new set of dogmas? If you think I'm a "New Atheist" you've read me completely wrong.

I believe I see Pascals Wager in your future. I must be channeling Bruno.

But I tire of you. Go and declare your victory.