lt is well known that Johannes Kepler was one of the first reputed and professionally recognized scientists to support the new heliocentric theory of Copemicus. Kepler accepted lt not as a provisional simpler theory, but as the true theory of the universe, and he did so despite the fact that he, more than any one else at that time, was keenly aware of the defects and deficiencies of this new theory. This paper Is an attempt to shed sorne fresh light on this baffling puzzle. After carefully and crltically examining the different views of well-recognized Ke pler scholars, this paper traces the source of this enigma to his special mode of thinking and proceedlng in his sclentlfic inquiry: Kepler allowed a creative and constructlve interaction between scientiflc data, phllosophical principies and certain religious beliefs. lf he had relied on empirícal data alone, he would not have been the...

lt is well known that Johannes Kepler was one of the first reputed and professionally recognized scientists to support the new heliocentric theory of Copemicus. Kepler accepted lt not as a provisional slmpler theory, but as the true theory of the universe, and he did so despite the fact that he, more than any one else at that time, was keenly aware of the defects and deficiencies of this new theory. This paper Is an attempt to shed sorne fresh light on this baffling puzzle. After carefully and crltically examining the different views of well-recognized Ke pler scholars, this paper traces the source of this enigma to his special mode of thinking and proceedlng in his sclentlfic inquiry: Kepler allowed a creative and constructlve interaction between scientiflc data, phllosophical principies and certain religious beliefs. lf he had relied on empiríca...

lt is well known that Johannes Kepler was one of the first reputed and professionally recognized scientists to support the new heliocentric theory of Copemicus. Kepler accepted lt not as a provisional slmpler theory, but as the true theory of the universe, and he did so despite the fact that he, more than any one else at that time, was keenly aware of the defects and deficiencies of this new theory. This paper Is an attempt to shed sorne fresh light on this baffling puzzle. After carefully and crltically examining the different views of well-recognized Ke pler scholars, this paper traces the source of this enigma to his special mode of thinking and proceedlng in his sclentlfic inquiry: Kepler allowed a creative and constructlve interaction between scientiflc data, phllosophical principies and certain religious beliefs. lf he had relied on empiríca...