“The Assayer” by Galileo Galilei (1623) [pdf](web.stanford.edu)
web.stanford.edu
“The Assayer” by Galileo Galilei (1623) [pdf]
https://web.stanford.edu/~jsabol/certainty/readings/Galileo-Assayer.pdf
11 comments
Pretty much created the mind-body problem.
Galileo refers in this to a book he had published earlier, the "Starry Messenger". It is well worth reading.
Galileo had just build the first ever telescope and he describes what he has discovered: there are incredibly more stars than can be seen by the naked eye; Jupiter has satellites; there are mountains on the moon and he has figured out their height from the length of their shadows... The book is full of the quiet excitement of a man who has discovered a new world, and seen what no man had seen before.
https://archive.org/details/siderealmessenge80gali/page/6/mo...
Galileo had just build the first ever telescope and he describes what he has discovered: there are incredibly more stars than can be seen by the naked eye; Jupiter has satellites; there are mountains on the moon and he has figured out their height from the length of their shadows... The book is full of the quiet excitement of a man who has discovered a new world, and seen what no man had seen before.
https://archive.org/details/siderealmessenge80gali/page/6/mo...
I don't think Galileo was quite the first to make a telescope. He had heard a description of one by someone in the Netherlands, and then designed and built his own. He was the first to use it to observe and describe those otherwise invisible objects in the night sky though
If I remember correctly, in that book Galileo says he heard of someone in the Netherlands having made a microscope, but without any details about how it was made. Armed with the knowledge that something like that was possible, he designs a telescope (lenses only, not a Newton type telescope with a mirror). He build three and used the last and best to do his observations.
No surprise that Galileo made enemies while some of his thoughts on math are spot on, he really underestimated Sersi throughout the work, who himself was a math professor.
On the nature of comets - looks like Sersi was nearer to the Truth compared to Galileo
Galileo was definitely a hostile/belligerent character.
Plus, a lot of his claims turned out to be pretty wrong, yet he stated them with such absolute confidence, which didn’t help his case at all.
In comparison people like Da Vinci, Newton were more politically/socially savvy. They knew how/when/where to communicate (relatively speaking)
On the nature of comets - looks like Sersi was nearer to the Truth compared to Galileo
Galileo was definitely a hostile/belligerent character.
Plus, a lot of his claims turned out to be pretty wrong, yet he stated them with such absolute confidence, which didn’t help his case at all.
In comparison people like Da Vinci, Newton were more politically/socially savvy. They knew how/when/where to communicate (relatively speaking)
This says it's an abridged translation. I wonder what the original was called; "Assayer" is an English word, and Galileo would have been writing in Italian or Latin, neither of which I think would pose much difficulty in reading.
Il Saggiatore, apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer.
> The Assayer (Italian: Il Saggiatore) is a book by Galileo Galilei, published in Rome in October 1623. It is generally considered to be one of the pioneering works of the scientific method, first broaching the idea that the book of nature is to be read with mathematical tools rather than those of scholastic philosophy, as generally held at the time. Despite the retroactive acclaim given to Galileo's theory of knowledge, the empirical claims he made in the book—that comets are sublunary and their observed properties the product of optical phenomena—were incorrect.[1]
Original text, printed in 01623, in Italian, at https://archive.org/details/ilsaggiatorenelq00gali, at least until the Archive is destroyed. (Pirate your PDFs while they're hot!) There are some other scans, but they are much inferior. The scanner comments, "First issue, second state. Without the poems by Johann Faber and Francesco Stelluti in praise of Galileo." This was scanned just three months ago from the collection of the University of Toronto. It's 250 pages, so this 56-page abridged translation is very abridged indeed.
The first sentence from the abridged translation is found on the 11th page, after the dedication to the new Pope:
> Io non hò mai potuto intendere Illuſtriſſimo Sig. onde ſia nato, che tutto quello; che de’miei ſtudi, per aggradire, ò feruire altrui, m'è convenuto metter’in publico; abbia incontrato in molti una certa animoſità in detrarre, defraudare, e vilipendere quel poco di pregio che,ſe non per l’opera, almeno per l’intenzion mia m’era creduto di meritare.
Italian has evidently changed a lot less than English since 01623, because Google Translate renders this as follows, which seems almost entirely in agreement with Drake's translation:
> I have never been able to understand, Most Illustrious Sir, where it came from, that all that I have had to make public of my studies, to please or hurt others, has encountered in many a certain animosity in detracting, defrauding, and vilifying that little bit of respect that, if not for the work, at least for my intention, I believed I deserved.
Where it differs, I'm a little bit puzzled as to why Drake chose the translation he did—aggradire seems clearly to be "hurt" (the English cognate is "aggress", or current Spanish agredir) rather than "please", as Drake renders it.
Il Saggiatore, apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer.
> The Assayer (Italian: Il Saggiatore) is a book by Galileo Galilei, published in Rome in October 1623. It is generally considered to be one of the pioneering works of the scientific method, first broaching the idea that the book of nature is to be read with mathematical tools rather than those of scholastic philosophy, as generally held at the time. Despite the retroactive acclaim given to Galileo's theory of knowledge, the empirical claims he made in the book—that comets are sublunary and their observed properties the product of optical phenomena—were incorrect.[1]
Original text, printed in 01623, in Italian, at https://archive.org/details/ilsaggiatorenelq00gali, at least until the Archive is destroyed. (Pirate your PDFs while they're hot!) There are some other scans, but they are much inferior. The scanner comments, "First issue, second state. Without the poems by Johann Faber and Francesco Stelluti in praise of Galileo." This was scanned just three months ago from the collection of the University of Toronto. It's 250 pages, so this 56-page abridged translation is very abridged indeed.
The first sentence from the abridged translation is found on the 11th page, after the dedication to the new Pope:
> Io non hò mai potuto intendere Illuſtriſſimo Sig. onde ſia nato, che tutto quello; che de’miei ſtudi, per aggradire, ò feruire altrui, m'è convenuto metter’in publico; abbia incontrato in molti una certa animoſità in detrarre, defraudare, e vilipendere quel poco di pregio che,ſe non per l’opera, almeno per l’intenzion mia m’era creduto di meritare.
Italian has evidently changed a lot less than English since 01623, because Google Translate renders this as follows, which seems almost entirely in agreement with Drake's translation:
> I have never been able to understand, Most Illustrious Sir, where it came from, that all that I have had to make public of my studies, to please or hurt others, has encountered in many a certain animosity in detracting, defrauding, and vilifying that little bit of respect that, if not for the work, at least for my intention, I believed I deserved.
Where it differs, I'm a little bit puzzled as to why Drake chose the translation he did—aggradire seems clearly to be "hurt" (the English cognate is "aggress", or current Spanish agredir) rather than "please", as Drake renders it.
I believe aggradire is an archaic form for aggradare, "to please". Gradire also means "to enjoy". The Italian word for "to aggress" is aggredire.
Having studied both Italian and English literature in high school, I can confirm that 17th century Italian is more understandable for a native speaker than 17th century English is. But I am naturally biased because I am a native Italian speaker.
Having studied both Italian and English literature in high school, I can confirm that 17th century Italian is more understandable for a native speaker than 17th century English is. But I am naturally biased because I am a native Italian speaker.
Thank you for the correction! So, unsurprisingly, Drake is correct, and my Spanish-based intuition was wrong, as was Google Translate. ("Please" makes more sense in context, too.)
In Spanish we have agradecido, "grateful", which I suppose must be cognate, though the underlying verb agradecer is not in my Spanish-as-second-language vocabulary. https://dle.rae.es/agradecer
In Spanish we have agradecido, "grateful", which I suppose must be cognate, though the underlying verb agradecer is not in my Spanish-as-second-language vocabulary. https://dle.rae.es/agradecer
Oops. "Feruire" should be "ſervire". Reading the long S as an F is a common OCR error which I corrected in the other cases where it occurred. U and V were not yet separate letters, just medial and initial lowercase forms of the same letter, so I've tried to choose the right modern letter in each case.
Ha, and I thought LKML could be spicy!
> Now I say that whenever I conceive any material or corporeal substance, I immediately feel the need to think of it as bounded, and as having this or that shape; as being large or small in relation to other things, and in some specific place at any given time; as being in motion or at rest ... But that it must be white or red, bitter or sweet, noisy or silent, and of sweet or foul odor, my mind does not feel compelled to bring in as necessary accompaniments. Without the senses as our guides, reason or imagination unaided would probably never arrive at qualities like these. Hence I think that tastes, odors, colors, and so on are no more than mere names so far as the object in which we place them is concerned, and that they reside only in the consciousness.