SKEPTICISM, THEOLOGY, AND SCIENCE: THE CASE OF EARTH'S MOTION

The Omnipotentia Dei absoluta thesis (any non-contradictory state of fact is possible) was used by theologians as a skeptical argument against any scientific claim unwarranted by biblical exegesis. Mathematical astronomy was bound to build models of data based on physically sound hypothesis acceptable to theology. Fourteenth century theologian Nicolas Oresme weighted the arguments pro Earth and Heavens rotation. Being an expert in mathematics and natural philosophy, concluded the higher plausibility of Earth's rotation, but skeptical considerations declared those arguments insufficient and the opinion false for scriptural reasons. Seventeenth century setting was much different: Reform induced an increase of catholic fundamentalism, while Galileo's physical arguments in support of Copernicanism, together with his refutation of Ptolemaic cosmology due to Venus phases, turned the skeptical balance between both systems untenable. Roman theologians being this time ignoramuses in mathematics and physics, condemned Galileo and declared heliocentrism false, physically absurd, and formally heretic.