Was Copernicus an Astrologer?
The question ‘Was Copernicus an astrologer’ is prima facie very clear, while in fact being quite ambiguous. This question should rather be regarded as a vast topic covering lots of more concise questions such as ‘Was Copernicus thoroughly educated in astrology?’, ‘Did Copernicus believe in astrolog...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences
2024-09-01
|
| Series: | Studia Historiae Scientiarum |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ojs.ejournals.eu/SHS/article/view/9566 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832575607519576064 |
|---|---|
| author | George Borski Ivan Kolkov |
| author_facet | George Borski Ivan Kolkov |
| author_sort | George Borski |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
The question ‘Was Copernicus an astrologer’ is prima facie very clear, while in fact being quite ambiguous. This question should rather be regarded as a vast topic covering lots of more concise questions such as ‘Was Copernicus thoroughly educated in astrology?’, ‘Did Copernicus believe in astrology?’ or ‘Did a mature Copernicus practice astrology?’
Unfortunately, thus far, consensus has not been achieved among historians on any of them. Accordingly, the topic has been for some time, and still is, a battlefield of the most acrimonious debates in Copernicology, nay, perhaps in the whole history of science.
Carefully made distinctions and subsequent analysis of the common pro et contra arguments enabled this paper to arbitrate the different perspectives. None of the arguments has been found to have a decisive force. In general, while the pro lines of reasoning are normally based upon insecure or even faulty inductive logic, their contra counterparts often suffer from ex silentio inferences or even ad ignorantiam fallacy.
Two new, subtle arguments have been introduced instead. They can be considered as genuine new evidence allowing for the resolution of some lingering doubts. First, the natal charts of Copernicus that were cast in the middle of the 16th century have been studied. The excessively exact birth hour of Copernicus at 4:48 PM has quite naturally been expected to be a result of a preliminary astrological rectification. However, apparently it was not rectified by the algorithms most popular at the time. The findings suggest the number-symbolic rather than astrological inclinations of Copernicus.
Further, a careful analysis of Copernicus’s annotations in the Alfonsine Tables revealed a link between the misprints corrected by him and the ancient observations he included in De Revolutionibus. Consequently, an extensive astrological use of the tables by him can be excluded with a high probability. Moreover, Copernicus likely never used Regiomontanus Tables on a regular basis either.
The conclusion integrates all the available arguments pertinent to the relationship of Copernicus with astrology.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a609408e613b46849cc44bdf09a00faf |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2451-3202 2543-702X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-09-01 |
| publisher | Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Studia Historiae Scientiarum |
| spelling | doaj-art-a609408e613b46849cc44bdf09a00faf2025-01-31T23:45:52ZengPolish Academy of Arts and SciencesStudia Historiae Scientiarum2451-32022543-702X2024-09-0123Was Copernicus an Astrologer? George Borski0Ivan Kolkov1Foundation for the History and Philosophy of Science (Amsterdam – Almere The Netherlands)Foundation for the History and Philosophy of Science (Amsterdam – Almere The Netherlands) The question ‘Was Copernicus an astrologer’ is prima facie very clear, while in fact being quite ambiguous. This question should rather be regarded as a vast topic covering lots of more concise questions such as ‘Was Copernicus thoroughly educated in astrology?’, ‘Did Copernicus believe in astrology?’ or ‘Did a mature Copernicus practice astrology?’ Unfortunately, thus far, consensus has not been achieved among historians on any of them. Accordingly, the topic has been for some time, and still is, a battlefield of the most acrimonious debates in Copernicology, nay, perhaps in the whole history of science. Carefully made distinctions and subsequent analysis of the common pro et contra arguments enabled this paper to arbitrate the different perspectives. None of the arguments has been found to have a decisive force. In general, while the pro lines of reasoning are normally based upon insecure or even faulty inductive logic, their contra counterparts often suffer from ex silentio inferences or even ad ignorantiam fallacy. Two new, subtle arguments have been introduced instead. They can be considered as genuine new evidence allowing for the resolution of some lingering doubts. First, the natal charts of Copernicus that were cast in the middle of the 16th century have been studied. The excessively exact birth hour of Copernicus at 4:48 PM has quite naturally been expected to be a result of a preliminary astrological rectification. However, apparently it was not rectified by the algorithms most popular at the time. The findings suggest the number-symbolic rather than astrological inclinations of Copernicus. Further, a careful analysis of Copernicus’s annotations in the Alfonsine Tables revealed a link between the misprints corrected by him and the ancient observations he included in De Revolutionibus. Consequently, an extensive astrological use of the tables by him can be excluded with a high probability. Moreover, Copernicus likely never used Regiomontanus Tables on a regular basis either. The conclusion integrates all the available arguments pertinent to the relationship of Copernicus with astrology. https://ojs.ejournals.eu/SHS/article/view/9566CopernicusastrologyrectificationAlfonsine TablesPrutenic TablesRegiomontanus Tables |
| spellingShingle | George Borski Ivan Kolkov Was Copernicus an Astrologer? Studia Historiae Scientiarum Copernicus astrology rectification Alfonsine Tables Prutenic Tables Regiomontanus Tables |
| title | Was Copernicus an Astrologer? |
| title_full | Was Copernicus an Astrologer? |
| title_fullStr | Was Copernicus an Astrologer? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Was Copernicus an Astrologer? |
| title_short | Was Copernicus an Astrologer? |
| title_sort | was copernicus an astrologer |
| topic | Copernicus astrology rectification Alfonsine Tables Prutenic Tables Regiomontanus Tables |
| url | https://ojs.ejournals.eu/SHS/article/view/9566 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT georgeborski wascopernicusanastrologer AT ivankolkov wascopernicusanastrologer |