On the refutation of Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy by the modern science
“It is also sometimes thought that the findings of modern science, which have refuted various assumptions of Aristotelian science, thereby refute Aristotelian metaphysics. But that is a non sequitur. Aristotelian physics is one thing, and Aristotelian metaphysics another, and they do not stand or fall together. Even if some of the scientific examples in terms of which Aristotelians sometimes explained their metaphysical notions have turned out to be false — such as the idea that the earth sits motionless at the center of the universe — there is no essential connection between the metaphysical notions and the scientific examples, and the former can easily be restated in terms of better examples. Nor was the possibility of empirical scientific advance denied by the Scholastic thinkers, as if they thought the science of their time infallible. As Aquinas himself says with respect to the Ptolemaic astronomy accepted in his day, “the suppositions that these astronomers have invented need not necessarily be true; for perhaps the phenomena of the stars are explicable on some other plan not yet discovered by men” (In DC II.17, as translated by Rickaby at p. 67 of his Scholasticism; cf. ST I.32.1).”
Feser, Edward. Aquinas: A beginner’s guide. Oneworld Publications, 2009.