The Catholic Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Eifelheim
Eifelheim, Oct 2021
>
4. A clash of ideas
date
newest »
newest »
In my opinion This book proves One thing that the Contact between two cultures It must not conclude in the elimination of the other culture. Overall plays with the Pope Francis what does It happen if an alien wanted to be Catholic.
It is very intersting the meeting between Dietrich and Ockam really different of the image that we have of the father of Nominalism.
Mod
In chapter 7, Dietrich thinks that a heliocentric system is impossible because there would then be parallax among the fixed stars when viewed from the Earth, contrary to experience.
This argument against an heliocentric system of the world wouldn't have been used in the 14th century. The distance from the Earth to the sun is known since Eratostenes calculated it in the third century B.C. The distance to the "fixed stars" was computed by Archimedes (also in the 3rd century B.C.) as around one light-year (using his own system of naming large numbers, but that's what it amounted to).
Therefore it was well known, since ancient times, that any parallax in the fixed stars would be undetectable from the Earth with the naked eye. In fact, the existence of that parallax was discovered by Bessel, in the nineteenth century, using a telescope, in the star 61 Cygni.
Dietrich being extremely well up-to-date in the science of his time, it must be concluded that the mistake has been made by Flynn, not by Dietrich.
A note to Fonch: we are discussing the book here. If we detect a scientific mistake, we must point it out. It does not mean that the book is bad, or that we should stop reading it.
Manuel wrote: "With respect to the clash between modern and medieval science:In chapter 7, Dietrich thinks that a heliocentric system is impossible because there would then be parallax among the fixed stars whe..."
In this case i can not argue because this wrong is totally fair, and this is a mistake of the own Michael D. Flinn in this case i could not defend him. I suppose that in this case he will be influenced by the Copèrnican`s revoluition, however at least the book put really good the science and the Philosophy of the 14th century proving that the Middle Age it is not a dark age it will be very interesting the Middle Age`s view of Mark Twain in our next reading.
I think that Michael Flynn's book has something very interesting, which we should not overlook, and more so in an openly anti-Christian world, which questions its past, and which has been dedicated to revisionism. Now we are seeing it with indigenism, which, promoted by the left, Marxism, cultural, the Frankfurt school, liberation theology. Now those who fly this flag could be the Woke, or the Black Live Matters have recently seen attacks on the statue of Junipero Serra, or Christopher Columbus. In Canada it has been seen how the indigenist current has promoted in a school the burning of books. In one of our conversations Professor Manuel Alfonseca, and I talked about this issue, such as censorship in the name of tolerance, human rights (in fact in our correspond my friend has always feared that every time we are closer to dystopias like "Farentheit 451" by Ray Bradbury and "The Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley (where books have been banned. In the world of Ray Bradbury, in fact they burn), and others were imposing themselves to do something that is more typical of Nazi Germany, than of a country like Canada, but still in the name of this political correctness by a woman who has posed as indigenous (who even if she were would not have the right to do so) has promoted the burning of books like Asterx, or Tintin, which in Europe are enormously popular for this stigma. My country Spain has been one of the most attacked by the way in which America was colonized, and Christianity was taken to America, despite the courageous actions of our kings (you can see the Testament of Isabella the Catholic, the Laws of Burgos, the action of Salamanca, and the action of the clergy who were the great protector of the Indians). In fact, what grew the most during colonization was the number of mestizos, because miscegenation was practiced between the different peoples. In fact, in Spain we do not believe in the term race we call it hispanidad a term coined by an Argentine priest Martín de Vizcarra, and then defended by Ramiro de Maeztu, and other great Catholic writers such as Hugo Wast, or the Jesuit Leonardo Castellani, recently a very interesting book of this aspect written by Marcelo Gullo "Mother Country" has come out https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5... &rank=2 I know that my credit for repurposing books has plummeted a bit, after eifelheim's choice. But for me one good thing that I want to highlight about this book precisely is that here it is fantasized as an idea. We don't know if aliens exist. I personally and I have told Professor Alfonseca I am agnostic (he could tell us about the Fermi paradox adapting it to the extraterrestrial phenomenon. Although if I don't have a fault the memory Fermi used it for time travelers). Unfortunately not only in the subject of history has been politicized and used as a field of arms against Catholics, also in literature, as shown by an acquaintance of my friend Professor Manuel Alfonseca, and my journalist and writer Pablo J. Ginés https://www.religionenlibertad.com/ci... (I trust that Google can translate it into English), who has ever participated in the blog of my friend professor called Divulciencia https://divulciencia.blogspot.com/ my friend speculates about the possibility that extraterrestrials, and humans contacted, and these wanted to embrace baptism, and has drawn the opinion of several theologians, and Catholic writers among them quotes Michael Flynn and this novel in particular"Eifelheim" and I must admit that there are not many among them, he only quotes this writer, and a Christian writer that I like, although he is a bit procelta and anti-Catholic Stephen R. Lawhead seems to be one of the few who think that we would not end these beings, when our creed, and what theologians think prove the opposite as Pablo J. Ginés shows (it is a pity that his book, and that of Marcelo Gullo are not in English but I recommend his book"Converts seekers of God" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... That is why I have in esteem this novel, despite the theological, scientific, and historical errors that it has committed because it is one of the few that speaks well of the Middle Ages speaking well of its science, and philosophy, contributing innumerable things, which most do not know. Two this book is favorable to Catholicism that's why I recommended it (I'm sure it's not the worst of the books that has been read in this club), and third and most importantly because it proves that the worst is not always true, and that the contact between two remote civilizations between cases between earthlings, and humans do not have to end in a genocide, and that can very well end as Michael Flynn explains. In fact, that happened in the Spanish conquest. Hence its great value.
I didn't feel it like a clash of ideas. It was easy to get immersed in the way of life of the XIV century villagers and in Dietrich's way of thinking.
Mariangel wrote: "I didn't feel it like a clash of ideas. It was easy to get immersed in the way of life of the XIV century villagers and in Dietrich's way of thinking."Now i am in the page 61 of the spanish edition of this book when Dietrich and Joachim are discussing about the franciscan`s rebellion. It is really curious because the rebellions that Dietrich spoke are the same that were defended by Umberto Eco in The Name of the Rose. I think in Ubertine of Casale, Michele of Cesena, Clarene, Olivi they are the not violent heretics and Dulcine and Segharelli are the violent heretics. In the final chapters of the Francis Assissi book was written by G.K. Chesterton wrote about the dilemma if the franciscan had to have possessions or not. For this reason Dietrich is so critic with the Franciscan but all orders had his problems and their reformations and some heretics except the Carthusians.
It is really interesting that Flyyn introduce Joachim not as a hero, or Martyr as he did Zamyatin, or Umberto Eco and they were introduced as a very dangerous people with radical opinions. The Psycology of Joachim is really well done.
Fonch wrote: "I think that Michael Flynn's book has something very interesting, which we should not overlook, and more so in an openly anti-Christian world, which questions its past, and which has been dedicated..."To the list of writers I quote on the relations between Catholics and fantasy creatures should be added this writer. I don't know who recommended it to me whether Corinna Turner, Jane Lebak, or Fiorella Nash https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... It is also very interesting the position of the writer John C. Wright and his wife Jagi L. Lamplighter on the subject. I think, according to Wikipedia John C. Wright said that if the Vulcans could be anything they would be Catholic. https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
Mod
The ET are supposed to be advanced enough to be able to perform interstellar travel. However, their theoretical and practical science is at the level of our current science. They speak about electromagnetic waves that can move without a material substrate; about the equivalence between matter and energy, according to Einstein's well-known equation. They use computers, microphones, radio-communication, explosives, and little else, all of which we have now.
On the other hand, the "NOW" scientists speak about the non-constancy of the velocity of light, the existence of a polyverse (i.e. additional space dimensions), and even have developed a completely new science (Cliology). These are things we clearly do not have NOW, but that the ET should have.
I think there is a clash, because the science of the ET and the NOW science should have been inter-exchanged. The advanced science should be the science of the ET, as their level of science is actually ours, the science of the 21st century.
I consider this a flaw in the novel.
If in that I agree with Professor Alfonseca I think that the science of extraterrestrials is very outdated I was weighing it, while I was read it, or that it is inferior to that of the earthlings of the twentieth century, XXI. With what Dietrich is telling us, I do not understand how they have been able to make that planetary journey, or that pilgrimage. Already Maria Doria Russell in "The Sparrow" talked about reaching Alpha Centaurus in a ship, which was not going at the speed of light, but the speed of an asteroid, and they took a long time. Of course, Rhakat's aliens were not as beneficial as those in Michael Flynn's novel. I must admit that with "The Sparrow" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...if I felt uncomfortable unlike this novel. Not only because of how poorly translated it was, but because the characters, and their critical comments about the birth rate made me very angry. This author is already known to have abandoned the Catholic faith, and converted to Judaism moved by the brutality of the Holocaust. Anyway, reading her novel I had the feeling that this woman was not comfortable with her religion, or that she had a very liberal view of it. Anyway, it was an interesting book, and it tried to emulate the martyrdom of the Jesuits (it was very influenced by the Jesuits in Canada, in fact, it was very influenced by "A Case of Conscience" its ending is one of the cruelest, and bitterest I have ever read).
Mod
I think there is a clash, because the science of the ET and the NOW science should have been inter-exchanged. The advanced science should be the science of the ET, as their level of science is actually ours, the science of the 21st century.
I consider this a flaw in the novel."
I don't think I agree. Other than cliology, the ET clearly have an understanding of the non-constancy of the velocity of light and the existence of a polyverse - it is imbedded in their technology, as shown in the diagram that confirms Sharon's theories.
Mod
I'm not at that point yet! :-)
Mod
I beg your pardon. I'm not used to finishing before others. 😉
Mod
You are right, but even so, the science of the aliens seems to be at the same level as the "NOW" science, when it should be far advanced. In my opinion, there should have been something in their science that even we cannot understand. Although I'm aware that it's difficult for the author to put something in his book that not even he can understand. 😉
Anyway, I withdraw what I said, that this is a flaw in the novel.
I don't understand a word of Sharon's scientific thinking. Does it make sense to those of you more conversant with contemporary science?
Mod
Yes, it does. Sharon's "polyverse" is a derivative of current multiverse theories, but restricted to our universe. In String Theory (a physical theory proposed in the eighties, but never confirmed since then) there would be 8 space dimensions in our universe, 5 of them of ultra-small length, the other 3 our normal space dimensions. Adding time, we'd have 9 dimensions.
Then in the nineties, M-theory (an extension of String Theory) was proposed, which would add another space dimension (number 9) to allow for different universes to exist along one another (the M-theory multiverse, also called the string theory-multiverse).
Sharon is adding another extra dimension (the 11th), also small, whose use would allow interstellar travel in very short time.
In this post in my blog on popular science, you can find a summary of all the multiverse theories: https://populscience.blogspot.com/201.... In all this, I think physicists have been losing their mind lately.
This is a very rough analogy, but faster travel along Sharon's new dimension could be likened to being able to fly between two points on Earth (using 3 dimensions) rather than having to travel on land or sea between them (being restricted to the 2 dimensions of the surface).
At one point a Krenk tells Dietrich how, in effect, the Krenken evolved from lower animals over millions of years. And the medieval priest's response to this statement? Perhaps predictably, Dietrich reflects: “Yet, if the Krenken were ruled by instinctus, the rational appetite could not exist in them, since a higher appetite necessarily moved a lower one. Which meant that the Krenken were beasts.” It appears Dietrich is projecting earthly, human preconceived categories on the extraterrestrials, judging them as either animals or “human-like.” As I was reading this section, I wondered how open Dietrich was to the possibility of what we now see as the phenomenon of evolution.
a) Modern with medieval
b) Theist with materialist
c) Hard with soft science
d) Human with extra-terrestrial
e) Speculative with practical
f) Created with Divine.