The Scientific Revolution was a societal shift beginning in the 17th century that saw transformations in what we understood about science, which in turn changed our understanding of religious doctrine, philosophy and government structures. These changes were due to advancements in technology that made humans rethink their place within the universe, which subsequently caused society to reconsider concepts such as divine authority. The Scientific Revolution is therefore a period when societies began to explore concepts such as natural and human rights, rather than relying solely on religion to inform how we should live.
One of the most prominent and controversial discoveries that helped begin the Scientific Revolution was Galileo’s research indicating the earth revolved around the sun, rather than the other way around. Before this discovery, the primary understanding of the observable universe was that the sun must revolve around the earth. The religious implication of this previous paradigm was that if the earth was the center of the universe, then the entirety of the universe literally revolved around the earth, making it essentially the most important place in the universe. Because man is the dominant species, this greatly elevated the importance of humankind, and aligned with religious doctrine that supported this same conclusion. Galileo’s discovery was considerably controversial, because it changed this perspective. Galileo understood the controversy about this discovery; in the letter, he affirms his believe that the Bible can never be untrue, but he also includes that “nobody will deny that it is often very abstruse” which introduces the idea that there is the possibility the Bible might be open to interpretation. This openness to interpretation, rather than taking the Bible literally, is what allowed people to begin to reconsider literal interpretations of religious doctrine if they did not correlate with scientific discoveries. Thus, the main paradigm shift that was created with this discovery is that the Bible does not need to be taken literally, and this created changes in how humans considered government structures and concepts of justice, as previously these were believed to be the domain of God.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"The Scientific Revolution".
The English king Charles I and his eventual execution demonstrates how the Scientific Revolution changed views on governmental authority. Charles I fell into conflict with his Parliament, who demanded more control in the government. He ignored these requests because he believed in the Divine Right of Kings: essentially, that those who became Kings were granted authority from God to rule. Essentially, Charles I believed that if he made a decision or acted in a certain way, it was his right to do so because he had been given a mandate from God. However, Parliament disagreed, which resulted in a civil war between the two forces. Charles I was defeated and brought before the court. When given the charge of treason, Charles I responded: “I am your king, your lawful king, and what sins you bring upon your heads, and the judgement of God upon this land” . What Charles I is claiming is that acting against him is a sin against God, as he is their divinely appointed leader. However, Charles I was eventually determined to be guilty, whereupon he was executed. This made many believe that Charles I was not actually divine, and the Divine Right of Kings was a myth, or at least not literally true. If the highest political authority could be executed, then this was proof that leaders were not necessarily appointed by God. Thus, the major paradigm shift that occurred here is that societies began to rethink how rulers should be selected, and what authority they had over a population.
Because there was a reconsideration on how government should be selected by the people, Thomas Hobbes introduced the idea of a Commonwealth, where an “assembly of men, shall be given by the major part the right to present the person of them all, that is to say, to be their representative” . If kings were no longer considered to have a divine mandate, then there needed to be a new type of agreement between citizens and their leaders. The concept of a Commonwealth arose after Hobbes considered the nature of man, which was that man was motivated by power while simultaneously needing protection. In order to achieve this, Hobbes theorized that the ideal government was one that involved the right of every man to vote on who should lead, in a form of social contract. The social contract is a concept whereupon governments are selected by the will of the people, rather than simply being governed by someone who inherited the position or assumed he has the authority to do so under God. This changed how many future governments would be modeled, including how the United States and other democracies, which are the the most prevalent types of government on earth, would be structured. Previously, many believed that they were simply born into a society without having a choice on who should lead. The Commonwealth was a revolutionary idea because it introduced the notion that people have a natural right to select their own leader, even if indirectly through a representative. Thus, the paradigm shift that occurred here is a reconsideration of how society should be structured.
The Scientific Revolution was therefore a shift precipitated by discoveries in science, which made society change its views on the influence of religion. Religious doctrine was no longer considered the defining authority on how governments should be structured, which created widespread societal changes that have continued to influence how we think about government in the modern era.
- Galilei, Galileo. Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina. Handout, 1615.
- Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Handout, 1651.
- Stephen, H. L. “The Trials of Charles I.” State Trials: Political and Social. Handout, 1899.
