Free download.
Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online The Astrosociological Imagination & the Space Renaissance: Humanistic Compendium Edition. file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Astrosociological Imagination & the Space Renaissance: Humanistic Compendium Edition. book.
Happy reading The Astrosociological Imagination & the Space Renaissance: Humanistic Compendium Edition. Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF The Astrosociological Imagination & the Space Renaissance: Humanistic Compendium Edition. at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Astrosociological Imagination & the Space Renaissance: Humanistic Compendium Edition. Pocket Guide.
Imagination & the Space Renaissance': Humanistic Compendium Edition. (English Edition) [eBook Kindle] pdf, you can find many 'The Astrosociological.
Table of contents
PDF [4.1MB] - NASA
As we shall soon see, this problem remains unresolved unless we change our vision of the intellectual life during the Renaissance, and begin to appreciate the extent to which Islamic culture, and Islamic science in particular, had been sought after during that time. So what was the Patriarch hoping to do with those books? In hindsight, we now know that there was a good market for them in northern Italy, along the corridor that stretched from Venice in the North East down to Florence and eventually to Rome.
We are told that Ferdinand struck a deal with the Patriarch in which the Patriarch would receive a monthly stipend of 25 scudes, and a life-long free access to his books, if he consented to deliver those books to a governing board of the press that was then headed by Raimondi, and who later became the owner of the same press. All of these facts could not simply be happy circumstances. The only explanation that could connect all those facts together is to assume that there was a lively intellectual and business environment in sixteenth century Italy that valued the sciences of, and possible business with, the Islamic world.
A word of this interest must have already reached the Islamic lands so that the Patriarch could smell a commercial prospect for his books. The re-unification of the churches must have only been an excuse to facilitate the trip, for we know that nothing of the sort happened, and that a very small group of Eastern Christians had a long and checkered history with the Papacy who, at various stages of their history, all the way from the great schism of the eleventh century till the nineteenth century, split off and re-united themselves with the papal authority several times over.
Not only did the Pope want to test the grounds for a campaign against the Turks, [10] but he also wanted to revive the Catholic church from the debilitating attacks it had received at the hands of the protestants. One should not underestimate the symbolism of this rejection as a means to safeguard the independence of the Eastern churches from that of Rome.
My contention is that the press had a European market in mind, and used the missionary work to avoid being censored by the Inquisition for producing Arabic books in the very heart of Christendom.
Not much is known about the details of the deliberations that led to the reform of the Julian calendar in , under Gregory XIII. We do not know who proposed what, at what time, and for what reasons. We also do not know the particular expertise the Patriarch brought to the committee, other than his being well versed in the secular sciences of the Islamic world. But few tidbits have already come to light, and through them we can still trace the general theme of the embedding of the Islamic legacy into the intellectual environment of Renaissance Europe.
We are particularly fortunate that the Vatican had the wisdom to convene a conference at the th anniversary of the Gregorian reform, and that the proceedings of the conference are now in print for all to consult. I will only single out those who have made remarks that help us understand the phenomenon of embedding of scientific ideas or remarks that warrant further research. I only have the chance to highlight those remarks here and not to go into them in any great detail.
The important part of the report is that it included the names of the members of that committee. Among the nine signatures we find the names of three prominent prelates. The first is Cadinal Guglielmo Sirleto who was the prefect of the congregation and co-ordinator of its works. Next comes Bishop Vincenzo Lauri of Mondovi who was perhaps the co-ordinator of the group before Sirleto.
In the third place we find the name of the Patriarch Ignatius of Antioch. It is certain that the three of them were well acquainted with astronomy and we have direct evidence of this in the case of the Patriarch. Notice that the name of the famous Christoph Clavius is not among the top three signatures of the report.
Patriarch Ignatius maintained that the idea of a variable tropical year was due to observational and instrumental errors, also adding that a whole series of near-eastern observations A. He alludes to these observations by listing, sometimes the authors, sometimes the places where they had been made. One can imagine what kind of information that could be when we know that any ecclesiastical calendar had to consider, at a minimum, the best values if could have for the lengths of the solar year and the lunar month, and the manner in which those values were determined.
Furthermore, the concept of the solar year itself involves decisions whether this year was a sidereal or a tropical year, and the relationship between the two was governed by a third concept, namely, that of precession. What was well known by then was that the Ptolemaic value for precession was considerably off the mark, and that this very value was indeed corrected by the observations that were performed during Islamic times in more than one Islamic capital.
So what did the calendar committee do with such parameters? And the models proposed for this trepidation had a long history that stretched all the way from ninth century Baghdad till the time of Copernicus and the time of the committee itself. Each one of these models led to a different theory of the tropical year.
The linear precession of Ptolemy gave a constant value of the length of the year which was known to be wrong. This had become clear already to Muslim astronomers working from the 9th century onwards in Baghdad and elsewhere, as the Patriarch Ignatius explained to the Pope in a letter and in a later report on the Compendium 12 March in which he maintained that the year had a constant, although non-Ptolemaic value. More importantly, he was apparently instrumental in convincing the committee to abandon the obsolete values of Ptolemy and adopt instead the latest, up to date values that were determined in Islamic times.
This in itself is the best illustration I can think of to elucidate the concept of embedding ideas as a means of science transmission. In his own article on the Papal Bull of that aimed to promulgate the reformed calendar, August Ziggelaar had occasion to address the persons who gave this Bull the authority it had and the calendar the shape it finally took. But more importantly, Ziggelaar reveals that not all the members were in one voice supporting the results that were reached and circulated by the Pope in his letter to all catholic princes.
They are the same reasons contained in the Laurentiana manuscript, which has been repeatedly mentioned so far. For apparently the Patriarch, like Clavius, had studied the very details of the new calendar and on his own had come to the following conclusions:. Finally, the Patriarch promised to present within a very few days the result of the research in his books, according to the commission of his Holiness.
Imagining Outer Space | SpringerLink
Ziggelaar tells us that the Patriarch kept his word, and his critique of the calendar is apparently still preserved, in Karshuni, in the Laurentiana manuscript, which has been referred to several times already. Apparently the critique of the Patriarch did not stop with the seven points listed above. He went on to discuss other defects in the proposed reform that was being circulated by the Pope. For example, he contended that. Thus the 14th day will be full moon but the Compendium makes full moon fall on the 16th day.
Books by Stephanie Lynne Thorburn
The Compendium believes that the mean motion of the sun is irregular and hence the length of the year variable. But this has to be attributed to the instruments of observation. All this reveals the amount of scrutiny the Patriarch was able to bring to the effort of the reform.
- European Astroculture in the Twentieth Century.
- Unwritten: A Regan and Russo Novel.
- Peeps at Many Lands: Ireland.
- drilling rig mechanical equipment sop.
And more was to come. Also, if conjunction takes place shortly before sunset, the next day will invariably be the first day of the month. It thus results that the month always begins more than one day too early in the Compendium. Summarizing, Ignatius repeats that the Compendium makes the lunation begin one day too early and from noon, as astronomers do, but not as the Jews do. Ignatius joins a few tables to find Sunday letters according to several assumptions and he also adds thirty tables to find the new moons according to the opinion of the Holy Fathers and that of the Compendium. For according to Ziggelaar.
In his Explicatio Clavius asserts that the reform agrees completely with those rules of the Christians in the East which Patriarch Ignatius showed the commission in Rome, in particular that Easter may be celebrated immediately after the 14th day of the lunation. Ignatius is among the members who signed the report of the commission dated 14 September, The final adoption of the reform was not a straightforward matter, and could not be assumed as finalized as soon as the Compendium was issued. It was in fact a long process, and some may even remember that as early as Copernicus himself was supposed to have participated in a proposed solution for the calendar reform.
At new moon however, there is no need of so much precision. This seems to be the result of all the criticism by Ignatius. And yet in the final reform formulation, as promulgated in , the problem of the new moon falling after 6 pm being relegated to the next day was not formally accepted, but was found to be most correct if followed in practice.
Having a scientifically valid calendar, and accepting to keep within it the influence of the church tradition, like keeping Easter tagged to Passover, and the Vernal Equinox on March 21, as it was during the Nicean Council when Easter rules were established, instead of 25, which was being proposed at the time of the Gregorian reform, is one thing, and having it accepted universally by all churches East and West is another matter. Of all the committee members, Clavius was the most conscious of the political hoops the calendar had to go through after it was finally pronounced in the bull Inter gravissimas in He already anticipated that, especially in the Eastern churches, who incidentally never signed onto this reform at least as far as the date of Easter was concerned.
In that respect, he must have known that the presence of the Patriarch on the committee would become a political asset. Martti Koskenniemi warned that humanitarian demands and human rights are in danger of degenerating into "mere talk. Both David Kennedy and Oona Hathaway have gone one step further by taking issue even with those who proved to be serious by joining treaties or engaging in advocacy.
In a controversial quantitative study, Hathaway contended that the ratification of human rights treaties by sets of given countries not only did not improve human rights conditions on the ground, but actually correlated with increasing violations. On the whole, Kennedy is more concerned about the dangers of leaving human rights to international legal elites and a professional culture which is blind for the mismatch between lofty ideals and textual articulations on the one side, and real people and problems on the other side.
Considered in this light, the effort of the British aid organization Save the Children, for instance, to help children in need both in Britain and abroad after World War I faithful to George Bernard Shaw's saying, "I have no enemies under seven"is only the flip side of a trend to declare total war on others regardless of their age and situation. This assertion clearly goes far beyond the voices of other pessimists.
Agamben's work is understandable only against the backdrop of an entirely familiar mistrust of liberal democracy and its ability to cultivate nonpartisan moral and legal perspectives. According to Agamben, democracy does not threaten to turn into. The difference between Agamben and Schmitt lies in the fact that Schmitt fought liberal democracy in the name of the authoritarian state, while Agamben sees democracy and dictatorship as two equally unappealing twins. Very much unlike Schmitt, the Italian philosopher confronts. Ultimately, he offers a version of Schmitt's theory of sovereignty that changes its political valence and downplays the difference between liberal democracy and totalitarian dictatorshipa difference about which Adorno once said that it "is a total difference.
And I would say," he added, "that it would be abstract and in a problematic way fanatical if one were to ignore this difference. Porter, Political Studies and Director of the Institute of Women's Studies at the University of Ottawa ,Beyond positivism: critical reflections on international relations, This radical simplification is apparent in Ashleys treatment of international theory.