Giordano Bruno and other Martyrs for Science

[Twentythree]

I have been taking a look at art history and the exaltation of saints and apostles, deities and myths. If we were to look at science in the same way who would we want to exalt, who are the pioneers, the martyrs and mythical heroes of science.

I think Giordano Bruno needs to be on the list. A philosopher and thinker put to death for believing in the truth.

It is then unnecessary to investigate whether there be beyond the heaven Space, Void or Time. For there is a single general space, a single vast immensity which we may freely call Void; in it are innumerable globes like this one on which we live and grow. This space we declare to be infinite, since neither reason, convenience, possibility, sense-perception nor nature assign to it a limit. In it are an infinity of worlds of the same kind as our own.

~Giordano Bruno~

[Recusant]

I agree; Bruno has been a favorite character in history for me since I read an old biography (I believe it was Giordano Bruno by James Lewis McIntyre, published in 1903) when I was quite young.  It's true that among the things which Bruno was found guilty of were his belief in the "plurality of worlds" and that the sun was essentially another star, but there was a lot more to it than that. Probably what actually got him burnt was his heretical stance on matters of Church doctrine unrelated to cosmology.  Still, as I said, I think he deserves a place on your proposed list.

[xSilverPhinx]

Way ahead of his time. If only we could have more like him today and send more of the medieval-minded to back then...

Hypatia too, though she was killed by a christian mob and not christian authority as was the case with Giordano Bruno.

[The Magic Pudding]

I have been taking a look at art history and the exaltation of saints and apostles, deities and myths. If we were to look at science in the same way who would we want to exalt, who are the pioneers, the martyrs and mythical heroes of science.

In a way heroes of science shouldn't be mythical, their achievements would normally be obvious, not in need of embellishment.  But I suppose victory against adversity makes a better story that plain victory.  The adversity could be include theism, current thinking, funding, bureaucracy or be in the nature of the work such as with Marie Curie.

I can't think of any scientists actually killed for their science at the moment, Galileo received some pretty heavy threats, Newton had to hide his weird Alchemy work, Darwin self censored for years.  The John Rock story is interesting.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rock_%28American_scientist%29

[Twentythree]

I understand that scientific achievements should be in no need of mythical embellishment, but there are some scientist and breakthroughs that become legendary...if we were to think of a pantheon of philosophers and scientists how would we go about constructing it. Just for fun to see what we come up with. We would undoubtedly put up Darwin, but what about Lamarck, or James Watson and Francis Crick? If we were to pen the Odessy of our scientific history who would our main characters be...were there even some villainous characters who sought to derail scientific progress?

I of course think that Bruno deserves a role in this story, Hypatia too this is great. I'd never heard of her before this post.

[The Magic Pudding]

were there even some villainous characters who sought to derail scientific progress?

I don't think you have to go to far to find villains, I can think a few fields rife with villains.
Anti stem cell research
Climate change contrarians
Tobacco and asbestos industries who deny, hide or prevent a fair scientific appraisal of their products.
I think 19th century researches and DaVinci before them had to use dodgy methods to obtain bodies for research.
Anti immunisation idiots.
There would be cases of leaders in a scientific field being less than open to new ideas.

[Too Few Lions]

Giordano Bruno's been a hero of mine since I was a teenager. I made sure I went to the statue of him in the Campo de Fiore the first time I went to Rome (obviously I also avoided going anywhere near the Vatican!)

Personally I prefer the idea of 'heroes for science' than 'martyrs for science' as I associate the word martyr with Christians and Muslims who have been prepared die for (and sometimes kill for) their religion, and the unhealthy veneration of these fanatics for centuries afterwards. I don't like the idea of celebrating someone dying for their beliefs.

You can also then include all those great scientific / free thinking minds that didn't end up being murdered for their beliefs.

[xSilverPhinx]

You can also then include all those great scientific / free thinking minds that didn't end up being murdered for their beliefs.

I would include everyone that broke some barrier among these especially in the face of opposition, such as Darwin.

I also don't feel that people who die for their beliefs are necessarily better. There's a lot of fanaticism included there, which I have no respect for.

[Sweetdeath]

were there even some villainous characters who sought to derail scientific progress?

Anti stem cell research

I still have such a hard time believing anyone would be against stemcell reseach, as it could help.millions with health problems. It disgusts me when religion stands in the way of potentionally saving lives.

[Tank]

were there even some villainous characters who sought to derail scientific progress?

Anti stem cell research

I still have such a hard time believing anyone would be against stemcell reseach, as it could help.millions with health problems. It disgusts me when religion stands in the way of potentionally saving lives.

Well the latest pile of sh1t is the issue of mitochondrial transplants. Mitochondria are tiny symbiotic components of all cells, they improve the efficiency of energy transfer/use. They are all inherited from the female. If a woman has MS then the disease is transferred via her Mitochondria. However one can swap out her faulty Mitochondria for good ones and in the test tube create an embryo that is MS free. Trouble it Mitochondria have there own DNA. Thus the embryo has 3 sets of DNA, Mother and Father in the nucleus and donor DNA in the Mitochondria (which plays no part in the growth or development of embryo). Apparently this raises ethical questions about the ancestry of the embryo.

Mitochondrial DNA

[xSilverPhinx]

were there even some villainous characters who sought to derail scientific progress?

Anti stem cell research

I still have such a hard time believing anyone would be against stemcell reseach, as it could help.millions with health problems. It disgusts me when religion stands in the way of potentionally saving lives.

Well the latest pile of sh1t is the issue of mitochondrial transplants. Mitochondria are tiny symbiotic components of all cells, they improve the efficiency of energy transfer/use. They are all inherited from the female. If a woman has MS then the disease is transferred via her Mitochondria. However one can swap out her faulty Mitochondria for good ones and in the test tube create an embryo that is MS free. Trouble it Mitochondria have there own DNA. Thus the embryo has 3 sets of DNA, Mother and Father in the nucleus and donor DNA in the Mitochondria (which plays no part in the growth or development of embryo). Apparently this raises ethical questions about the ancestry of the embryo.

Mitochondrial DNA

Why people would want to prevent that makes no sense whatsoever. I really think that if religious institutions would take their noses out of these issues, human kind would be in a better place by now.