Best Argument Ever

[iago]

In the olde days, 1610 I think, there were 7 known planets besides the earth: Sun, Mercury, Venus, Moon, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. In 1610, Galileo, using his little telescope he made, he discovered that Jupiter has four moons.  In response to this, the scientific authorities gave their response:
-----
There are seven windows given to animals int he domicile of the head [2 ears, 2 in your nose, 2 eyes, and a mouth] ... From this and many other similarities in nature, such as the seven metals, etc., which it were tedious to enumerate, we gather that the number of planets is necessarely seven.  Moreover, these [alleged] satellites of Jupiter are invisible to the naked eye, and therefore can exercise no influence on the earth, and therefore would be useless, and therefore do not exist.  Besides, [from the earliest times, men] have adopted the division of the week into seven days, and have named them after the seven planets.  Now, if we increase the number of planets, this whole and beautiful system falls to the ground.
-----
- Quoted in W. T. Sedgwick and H. W. Tyler, A Short History of Science (Macmillan, New York, 1917), p. 222-223


I love this argument.. what do you think?

[hismajesty]

In the olde days, 1610 I think, there were 7 known planets besides the earth: Sun, Mercury, Venus, Moon, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. In 1610, Galileo, using his little telescope he made, he discovered that Jupiter has four moons.  In response to this, the scientific authorities gave their response:
-----
There are seven windows given to animals int he domicile of the head [2 ears, 2 in your nose, 2 eyes, and a mouth] ... From this and many other similarities in nature, such as the seven metals, etc., which it were tedious to enumerate, we gather that the number of planets is necessarely seven.  Moreover, these [alleged] satellites of Jupiter are invisible to the naked eye, and therefore can exercise no influence on the earth, and therefore would be useless, and therefore do not exist.  Besides, [from the earliest times, men] have adopted the division of the week into seven days, and have named them after the seven planets.  Now, if we increase the number of planets, this whole and beautiful system falls to the ground.
-----
- Quoted in W. T. Sedgwick and H. W. Tyler, A Short History of Science (Macmillan, New York, 1917), p. 222-223


I love this argument.. what do you think?

Lets increase the number of planets, I'd love eyes in the back of my head.  

But seriously, I love all the ironic things that occur.

[Grok]

When is it accepted that formal logic was described?  I thought logic had been around long before Galileo, but the argument you just posted is ridiculous and should have been discounted a dozen different ways.  Laughed at, even.

[iago]

When is it accepted that formal logic was described?  I thought logic had been around long before Galileo, but the argument you just posted is ridiculous and should have been discounted a dozen different ways.  Laughed at, even.

It's a theological argument.. 7 is a religiously important number.

[Grok]

Yeh, but I was just wondering, separately from that, when logic itself was formalized.

Religion and logic don't go together.

[hismajesty]

It's a theological argument.. 7 is a religiously important number.

according to astrology, 7 is one of my 2 lucky numbers(the other is 3)
It's a theological argument.. 7 is a religiously important number.

[iago]

Yeh, but I was just wondering, separately from that, when logic itself was formalized.

Religion and logic don't go together.

Not necessarely true.. both Descartes and St. Augustine studied religion to a great extent, and both of them were very logical.  Doctrine and logic don't go together would be a better argument, because when somebody believes a doctrine so strongly they can't see anything else (whether it be religious, political, or even scientific), they say stupid things like that.