[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 136 KB, 605x1024, 260-Galileo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19546742 No.19546742 [Reply] [Original]

Was reading picrel and apparently, according to Galileo, Aristotle believed that we lived in the perfect world because we have three dimensions of freedom and there are only three dimensions.
Tell me, was Aristotle actually this retarded or is Galileo a lying STEM-fag? Where does he say this? I really need to know.
He unironically makes his character Simplicio sound like a drooling fucking retarded so it's hard to say. Keep in mind that I was only able to read the first couple of exchanges at my college's library and I won't be back there for a while so if he cites it later, that's probably why I missed it.

>> No.19547141
File: 22 KB, 800x500, 1638942033088.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19547141

Come on, one of you guys must have read a lot of Aristotle...

>> No.19547150
File: 80 KB, 657x527, 537EB970-97D0-4921-AF07-9FB128197D36.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19547150

>>19547141
Why would I? He was retarded

>> No.19547480

This is a trap that you fall into when you just look at these ancient authors without context or background. Aristotle is fairly based, but you have to interpret him as a man of 2500 years ago, not a man of the modern post-Renaissance world. While many of his scientific efforts might seem pathetic to us when judged on their values per se, try to place them where they were completely original, where there was hardly any fundamental scientific or empirical method taught by anyone, anywhere. Then you can see the cleverness and the value that is in them.

P.S. read the poets and historians first, then read the playwrights. The philosophers are last (except for some of the simpler or more practical works, e.g. Aristotle's Rhetoric, which can be read early.(

>> No.19547483

>>19546742
Don't care
Didn't read
Here's a paper defending Aristotle's Physics
https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.4057v2

>> No.19547604

>>19547483
Already seen it, completely irrelevant to discussion here, fag.
>>19547480
Yes, but the question is this: what, exactly, is Galileo referencing, if anything?

>> No.19547610

>>19547480
>While many of his scientific efforts might seem pathetic to us when judged on their values per se
That is not entirely true. Aristotle was very wrong on things that were obvious even for his time(see the Aristotles getting the number of teeth people had wrong).