This paper examines three interconnected topics: the ancient "problem of the planets," the Scientific Revolution of the 16th–18th centuries, and the revolution's impact on the Church and the philosophy of modern Europe. Drawing primarily on Richard Tarnas's The Passion of the Western Mind, the paper traces how Greek thinkers such as Plato and Ptolemy wrestled with irregular planetary motion, how their mathematical and philosophical frameworks eventually gave rise to the heliocentric revolution, and how figures such as Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, and Galileo reshaped both scientific understanding and religious authority. The paper argues that science and religion did not simply oppose one another but rather engaged in a complex, evolving relationship that ultimately transformed the Western worldview.
The problem of the planets relates to their movement. The Ancient Greeks were the first to address the issue thoroughly, and one of their thinkers — Ptolemy — came up with a theory about how planets moved (Knox, n.d.). This was necessary because the Greeks identified certain "wandering stars" that did not appear to move in the same way as other stars. They did not understand why this was the case, and they looked for explanations as to why some planets seemed to defy the normal pattern of movement across the sky (Knox, n.d.). If some planets were not in sync with the rest, what was the reason behind that? What did it mean for the Universe and for the Earth?
Ptolemy created a framework intended to resolve most of the confusion. He stated that the Earth was the center of the Universe and that all planets revolved around it (Tarnas, 1993). To explain the anomalies, Ptolemy argued that some planets' circular orbits themselves moved in a circular orbit — a concept he called "epicycles" (Knox, n.d.). Even with these explanations, planets that were expected to appear at certain times failed to do so (Knox, n.d.). Eventually, what Ptolemy had created was discredited, but only after many revisions designed to make the ideas workable. Because everything was alleged to move in a circle, the number of circles and epicycles grew exponentially until the entire model became untenable — there was simply too much confusion (Knox, n.d.).
Eventually, the Sun was deemed the center of the Universe rather than the Earth. This brought other complications, because the calculations needed to produce tables about planetary movement became far more complex once the Sun was placed at the center (Knox, n.d.). In addition, certain passages of the Bible had long been interpreted to mean that the Sun revolved around the Earth. Because the Church had been teaching this for a very long time, revising that doctrine and providing a satisfactory explanation for the change was an enormous challenge (Knox, n.d.). The heliocentric model was eventually accepted, though it was also later determined that the Sun was only the center of the galaxy — not the center of the Universe, as Ptolemy and others had assumed.
One individual who struggled deeply with the problem of the planets was Plato. He believed that order was equivalent to divinity (Tarnas, 1993). Given that belief, it was very difficult for him to accept that the planets moved in a disorderly fashion. What would that mean from a divine perspective? His faith was threatened by planetary irregularities, and he feared that the faith of all humanity might likewise be endangered. By referring to celestial bodies as "wandering stars" or "wanderers," Plato believed that people were committing blasphemy (Tarnas, 1993).
A large part of the religious foundation underlying Plato's philosophy was at stake in the apparent lack of order in planetary motion. Plato did not simply ignore the issue, however. After much thought and study, he determined that the planets were not truly "wandering." Instead, they were moving in perfect orbits suited to each planet, just as the Universe required. He placed his faith in that conviction and believed that time would prove him right, eventually yielding empirical data that would allow planetary movements to be calculated with certainty. Mastering mathematics and astronomy, he concluded, was the way to solve the riddle of the heavens.
The belief that divinity and geometry were linked was, ironically, what caused Plato and other Greeks the most difficulty. They were insistent that the Universe had to be explicable mathematically, and when their calculations did not produce the expected results, they were at a loss. Plato's willingness to reconsider his methods — while holding firmly to his broader philosophy — meant that he was open to refining his approach without abandoning his underlying worldview. He was more interested in demonstrating that his philosophy was correct and that a better mathematical method simply had not yet been found.
Tarnas (1993) addresses many issues that tie science and religion and philosophy together, and the problem of the planets is among the most significant. He calls it "the single most important factor giving both dynamism and continuity to the Western mind's attempt to comprehend the physical cosmos" (Tarnas, 1993, p. 48). That is a powerful statement, and it reflects Tarnas's view that the issue has both a logical (mathematical) and an emotional (spiritual) dimension. That dichotomy is valuable to anyone seeking to understand the Western mindset and how it developed. Tarnas also notes, however, that all of the great thinkers who wrestled with these mathematical and philosophical concerns were male, and that women were not afforded a significant role in either the scientific or spiritual discourse of that era.
The Scientific Revolution was a period in history during which new ideas fundamentally transformed humanity's understanding of the world. This revolution occurred primarily during the 16th and 17th centuries and produced new knowledge in areas such as chemistry, physics, biology, medicine, and astronomy (Marquin, 1994). Medieval and ancient worldviews were overturned, and the foundations of modern science were laid. The end of the Renaissance in Europe marked the beginning of the Scientific Revolution, which continued through the late 18th century (Taton, 1963) — a later phase commonly known as the Enlightenment (Pedersen, 1993).
In 1543, two landmark works by Copernicus were published, helping to set the entire Scientific Revolution in motion (Marquin, 1994). In the Middle Ages, a base had already been established for what would later become modern science (Smith, 1929). Scholars began to view the world in a new light, as superstition and fear gradually gave way to knowledge and reason. That shift created tension with the Church, because — for the first time — religious authority began to take a secondary role to scientific inquiry.
Science and faith did not completely separate from one another, however. Kepler, Newton, Copernicus, Brahe, Galileo, and others remained devout in their faith even as they made major scientific discoveries (Taton, 1963). They found ways to reconcile science with Scripture, allowing both to occupy an important place in everyday life (Pedersen, 1993). The Church struggled with this reconciliation for some time but eventually adapted so as not to lose too many of its followers.
Some who had previously been religious decided that science was more meaningful to them and that religion was no longer relevant, but they were not in the majority. Mostly, the Scientific Revolution was coupled with a philosophical revolution that encouraged people to think more deeply about what they believed and why, rather than simply accepting what they had always been taught. As Tarnas (1993) observed, philosophy "acquired a new identity and structure" during the Scientific Revolution (p. 272). Philosophy during that time also experienced a "momentous transfer of allegiance from religion to science" (Tarnas, 1993, p. 272), which deeply affected how people understood themselves and their world.
Those who embraced science did so willingly, and those who retained their religious faith were equally free to do so. Things were no longer dictated entirely by the Church. During the preceding era, many people had lived in fear of God as a wrathful and punishing figure, and life could be precarious for those who did not conform to Church doctrine. When science emerged as an alternative framework for understanding the world, people were able to consider more than one account of reality. That freedom to choose benefited the Church as much as the scientific community. The Church ultimately retained the members who had genuinely thought through their options and chosen faith — leaving it with fewer but more committed believers.
Tarnas (1993) also highlights the individuals at the heart of the revolution. Francis Bacon, for example, envisioned "a new era in which natural science would bring man a material redemption to accompany his spiritual progress toward the Christian millennium" (Tarnas, 1993, p. 272). This typified the thinking of many intellectuals of the day: even as they plunged deeper into scientific inquiry, they sought to connect their discoveries to something spiritual. Over time, it became clear that spirituality and institutional religion were not identical, and people found that they could pursue science while remaining philosophical or even devout.
Were it not for Plato and his Pythagorean ideals, the Scientific Revolution might never have taken place. During the revolution, science proceeded on the conviction that "the language of the physical world was one of number" (Tarnas, 1993, p. 292) — a belief that scientists still hold today in the context of quantum physics and beyond. The Scientific Revolution worked simultaneously to separate the Church from science in some respects while drawing them more closely together in others. Ultimately, Plato and his Pythagorean ideals may have planted the seed, but the Scientific Revolution "would culminate two thousand years later" (Tarnas, 1993, p. 48).
"Church authority challenged by scientific discoveries"
"Science reshapes European belief and Church doctrine"
"Lasting impact on Western thought and society"
You’re 50% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.