상세검색
최근 검색어 전체 삭제
다국어입력
즐겨찾기0
145866.jpg
KCI등재 학술저널

법과 정치로부터 과학과 기술의 독립성에 대한 재고찰

- 갈릴레이 사건(1616-1633)의 신화와 진실 -

  • 104

Science and technology have been thought to be free from any sort of ideological influences. Advancement of knowledge was the main justification for this independence. To exemplify the relation between science-technology and law and politics, modern liberal thinkers have built an image of sacrifice from Galilei, who had to suffer the oppressive treatments from the Roman Catholic Church for the reason that he endorsed the Coperinican heliocenric theory. By the way, a deep review of the Galilei affair from 1616 to 1633 invites us to see that Galilei was in fact far from being a proponent of the freedom of science itself, but that he had very practical motivation to behave in such a manner. The rise of modern capitalism and colonial expansion was the background of Galilei’s involvement with new science and technology. Criticism of Galilei’s position is not new, since we have already some writers who suggested a reversed perspective on the affair in the first half of the twentieth century. First, Brecht relates a different story of Galilei’s affair, in which the Italian scientist is depicted rather as a betrayer of science in the sense that he finally conceded not only to ecclesiastical power, but also to political and financial ones. Witnessing the dreadful force of atomic bombs, Brecht was actually warning the contemporary humanity of an uncontrollable result of the marriage between science-technology and politics. Koestler’s criticism of Galilei, too, echoes Brecht’s concerns. In a sense, he goes further in reckoning Galilei among the “sleepwalkers” who are not conscious of where they are, nor of where their steps are leading them to. The most regrettable thing to the eyes of Koestler is that Galilei contributed to separate science from religion, whereas these two areas are not so remote from each other as we the modern used to take it granted. The recent discovery of the letter from Galilei to Castelli from the collection of the Royal Society ( Nature , No. 561, pp.441-442) reveals that Galilei’s irresponsibly reckless opposition to the Biblical authority corresponds to what Koestler criticizes with regard to Galilei’s attitudes. The criticism of Galilei culminates in Feyerabend’s article, “Galileo and the Tyranny of Truth”. The role of scientists does not consist in blindly opposing social conventions, but in keeping prudence and openness in search for truth, says Feyerabend. By doing so, scientists can respect and conciliate with traditional understandings and values. The criticism of these three authors shed a light when we consider the ethical problems in science and technology, particularly today. For nowadays the main, and perhaps only, purpose of science and technology is regarded as consisting in promoting economical development. The American model of military-industrial-academic complex is received by most of countries, including the Republic of Korea. The State-driven economic policy since the military regime, in particular, did nothing but distort the relation between scientific academy and industry and make it harder to keep the balanced development among many branches of traditional and new science and technology. From this point of view, the article 127, section 1, of the current Constitution of the Republic of Korea should be seriously reviewed, in a future constitutional revision, if we really hope for the true freedom of science and technology.

Ⅰ. 머리말

Ⅱ. 근대과학의 발전이 낳은 신화 : 갈릴레이 사건의 경과 및 여파

Ⅲ. 20세기에 다시 바라본 갈릴레이 사건의 의미

Ⅳ. 맺음말

로딩중