Galileo: On Reasoning \"In Question of Science,

Galileo: On Reasoning

"In question of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual" (GALILEO).

Galileo was a noted mathematician, astronomer, physicist, and philosopher (Drake 1995), who many regard as the "father of modern science" (Redondi 1987). In his lifetime, Galileo was a somewhat controversial figure; falling out of favor with pope Urban VIII and the Jesuits for his work, "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" (Hawking 2009). He was one of the first to establish that mathematics and nature were interrelated; ignoring authorities and traditional thought regarding the separation of philosophy and science and religion.

With regard to the aforementioned quote, Galileo reaffirmed his oppositional and frequently controversial positioning with respect to those in authority. He was not a man prone to following conventional tides, untested and unregulated. The implications of his statement indicate that just because an authority determines it to be so and many agree doesn't supersede reasoning, challenge and proof posited by someone not necessarily noted or recognized as an authority figure. Authority and their opinions, philosophies, ideologies and reasoning's are to be and should be challenged by individuals who may sit outside of respected and notable circles.

Galileo's position stands in stark opposition to the methods and methodologies of modern day science. It is only with proof valid of others testing and proving hypothesis and theories that ideas and opinions come to be regarded as such. What Galileo posited and what most modern day scientists seem to disregard is the fact that someone had to have an original thought for others to test. Moreover, posited thought is only deemed worthy after it has been tested and either proven or disproven.

What frequently occurs in contemporary scientific arenas is the constant hashing and rehashing of theories and hypothesis' that have been proven or challenged and disproven over and over again, resulting in recommendations for additional research that may or may not be undertaken. All of the empirical and scientific research and the recommendations for additional research are, of course, to add to the scholarly literature.

There is or should be value assessed to individual conviction. Once again, this goes back to the notion that at one point all science was in its nascent state and there had to be those who originally posited a theory, tested and others accepted as valuable and noteworthy. However, in order for individual conviction to become more than that, modern science demands peer review and some level of acceptance and recognition within the larger scientific community. Even then, there has to be considerable testing, validating, and generalizability to the larger population for individual conviction to become theory, to then become accepted theory.