scotus to renaissance

8/6/2019 Scotus to Renaissance

1/24

Scotus to the Renaissance

Among those who werecritical of Aquinas afterhis death were a numberof Franciscansassociated with Oxford.

During the 13th century,the University of Paris

had undoubtedlydominated the learnedworld. By the end of thecentury, Paris andOxford were almost likecampuses of a singleuniversity, with manymasters passingbetween the twoinstitutions.

But by 1320 Oxford hadestablished itself as afirmly independent

center, and indeed hadtaken over from Paristhe supremacy ofEuropean scholasticism.

By the 14th cen. Thinkerswho made most mark onthe history of philosophywere all Oxfordassociates.

Relationships betweenthe faculties of Arts andof theology were notalways easy, and in the

last years of the 13th

cen. Oxford, like Paris,had been affected by abacklash of Augustiniantheologians againstAristotelianphilosophers.

The theologiansprincipal targets werescholars who interpretedAristotle in the style ofAverroes; but theyattacked also some of

the philosophicalteachings of Aquinas,despite the hostilityAquinas had himselfshown to Averroesteachings.

In 1277 thecongregation of OxfordUniversity formallycondemned 30 theses ingrammar, logic, and

natural philosophy.Several of the theseswhich were condemnedwere corollaries ofAquinas teaching that ineach human being therewas only a single form,namely, the intellectualsoul. Congregationcondemned, forinstance, the view thatwhen the intellectualsoul entered theembryo, the sensitiveand vegetative soulsceased to exist. Theissue was of concern totheologians, not justphilosophers, becauseAquinas view was takento imply that the body of

Jesus in the tomb,between his death andresurrection, hadnothing in common,save bare matter, withhis living body.

Victory in a long-runningcontroversy was nowgiven to those who, likeSt Bonaventure,believed in a plurality offorms in an individualhuman being.Supporters of St Thomastried to appeal to Rome,but came to naught.

For some time to comeOxford dominated byFranciscan thinkers who,though very wellacquainted withAristotle, in this andother matters rejectedAquinas distinctiveversion ofAristotelianism.

DUNS SCOTUS

*The most distinguished of these Oxford thinkerswas JOHN DUNS SCOTUS

*Born 1266; studied at Oxford between 1288 and1301; ordained priest in 1291.

*He was called The subtle doctor.*He argued against Aquinass notion of the

supremacy of reason, saying that Gods WILL(rather than Gods reason) is supreme; thisbecame known as the theory of VOLUNTARISM.

*The attitude of Duns Scotus towards Aristotleand philosophy in general is seen in his doctrine


2/24

of the object of human knowledge. According toAristotle, the human intellect is naturally turnedtowards sensible things from which it mustdraw all its knowledge by way of sensation andabstraction. As a consequence, the properobject of our knowledge is the essence of amaterial thing.

*Now, Duns Scotus was willing to agree thatAristotle correctly described our present way ofknowing, but he did contest that he had saidthe last word on the subject and that he hadsufficiently explained what is in full right theobject of our knowledge. Ignorant of Revelation,Aristotle did not realize that man is now in afallen state and that he was describing theknowledge, not of an integral man, but of onewhose mode of knowing was radically alteredby original sin. Ignorance of this fact isunderstandable in a pagan like Aristotle, but itmust have seemed inexcusable to Scotus in aChristian theologian like St Thomas.

The Christian, Scotusargues, cannot takemans present state ashis natural one, nor, as aconsequence, thepresent servitude of hisintellect to the sensesand to sensible things asnatural to him.

o We know from

Revelationthat man isdestined tosee God faceto face. Nowthis would beimpossible toachieve if theadequateobject of hisknowledgewererestricted tothe essencesof materialthings, forGod is notcontained

within theirscope.

o To be open to

the vision ofGod, theintellect musthave anobject broadenough toinclude Him,and the only

one thatsatisfies thiscondition isBEING. Being,therefore, inits fullindetermination to materiaandimmaterialthings is thefirst andadequateobject of theintellect.

When as a theologianDuns Scotus made thisdecision, he was notonly assuring the humanintellects capacity forthe beatific vision; hewas also makingmetaphysics as ascience possible bymarking out its properobject. Naturalphilosophy moves in therealm of finite mobilebeing and theology inthat of infinite being.Metaphysics, on theother hand, has for itsobject being as being, orthe pure undeterminednature of being. ForScotus this is not alogical universal. It is areality, and the mostcommon of all. Takensimply in itself, thenotion of being abstractsfrom all the differencesof beings. That is why itis, for themetaphysician, univocal,having the one and thesame meaning whenapplied to all things.Only in its finite and

infinite modes is beinganalogical.

*Being has consequently a univocity in Scotismwhich is not found in Thomism.

o For St Thomas

did not treatof being as ifit were anature oressence;rather is form


3/24

THAT WHICHIS, at whosecenter is anact ofexisting. Andsince everyact of existingis irreducibleto everyother, there isa radicalOTHERNESSin every beingwhich thework ofabstractioncan nevererase. That iswhy in thephilosophy ofSt Thomasbeing is, forthemetaphysician, not aunivocal, butan analogical,concept.

*It was the Arabian philosopher, Avicenna, whotaught Scotus to conceive being as an essencein an absolute state, NATURA TANTUM, and atthe same time suggested to him his solution ofthe classic problem of universals.

o The Scotist

nature, likethe

Avicennian, issimply whatthe definitionof it signifies.Now, neitherindividualitynoruniversality isincludedwithin thedefinition ofany nature.When I define

humanity,for instance, Imention itsessentialparts,animalistandrationality,but I do notsay whether itis individual

or universal.Indeed, initself it isentirelyindifferent tobeing one orthe other orboth at thesame time. Itcan be anindividual inreal existenceand universalin the mindand stillremainbasically thesame nature,for thesemodalities areentirelyaccidental toit. Supposethat thenature wereof itselfuniversal.

Then it couldnever beindividual; butas a matter offact it isindividual inthe world ofexistingthings. On the

other hand, ifit were by itsvery natureindividual, itcould neverbe universal,but it isuniversal inthe mind.Consequentlythe nature initself must beabsolute,

abstractingfrom bothindividualityanduniversality.

In Scotism the absolutenature does not exist assuch. Humanity, forinstance, does not existexcept in individual menand in the concept


4/24

which we form of it. Butit is not that accountsimply a conceptualentity. Scotus says thatit is a real being. Thisreal being is contractedor limited by anindividual difference orhaecceity whichrenders the natureindividual. Followingupon this contraction ofthe essence or nature,the individual isactualized by existence,which (at least increatures) is theultimate act of a thing,related to it simply as amode of being.

If this is true, it isevident that essenceplays the primary role inScotist metaphysics.

o The

metaphysicalnucleus, so tospeak, of anindividualthing is anessencewhich islimited bydifferentmodalitieswhich arepurelyaccidental toit. That is whyDuns Scotusmetaphysicshas justlybeen calledessentialist,in distinctionto theexistentialist metaphysicsof St Thomas,

in which themetaphysicalcenter of anindividualthing is an actof existingand itsessence is buta limitationon that act.

o Because they

do not agreein theirnotions ofbeing, thetwometaphysicsarefundamentally different. Toconfuse themand to equateScotism with

Thomism issimply toinvitemisunderstanding in bothdoctrines.

On the other hand, seenin its own light, themetaphysics of DunsScotus is entirelyintelligible.

o He carefully

distinguishesbetween twoorders of realbeing: theorder ofthings (RES)and the orderof realities orformalities(REALITATES,FORMALITATES).

o Things are

such that onecan exist inseparationfrom theother, if notnaturally (likePeter andPaul), at leastby theomnipotenceof God (asmatter canexist apartfrom form).

o Realities or

formalities,however,cannotpossibly existseparately.

They are onlyformally non-identical, in


5/24

the sensethat one isnot containedwithin theformaldefinition ofthe other. InPeter, forexample,rationality isnot containedwithin thedefinition ofanimality andhisindividualityas Peter is notcontainedwithin thedefinition ofhumanity;otherwisethere couldbe noanimalitywhich is notrational andno humanityother thanPeters.

What is characteristic ofthe philosopy of DunsScotus is that heattributed reality even tothese formalities. Theyare not simplyabstractions of the mind;they are abstract fromeach other even beforethe mind considersthem. Each has a realbeing of its own and areal unity distinct fromthat of individual things.

IN SUM:o SCOTU

Staught

aformaldistinctionbasedon thenatureof arealityinwhich


6/24

knowin itsfullness.

o The

Principle ofIndividuatio

naccording toScotus,isquantifiedmatter

Thomasteaches, but arealitywhichissuperaddedto abeingalreadyconstituted initsspecificnature.

This

realityiscalledthethisness of thethething(eitas

o Essenc

e andExisten

ce arenotdistinguishedincreatedbeing arealdistinction, butby a


7/24

form)inaddition tothesoulwhichis Thesubstantialform ofthelivingbody.HeholdsWILLsuperior toINTELLECT(arism

o In

judgment ofintellect in nowisemovesthewill,but is amerecondition for

thewillsfreeaction.

TheImmortality ofthesoulcannotbeprovedby

reasonalone.Scotusdeclares thattheconcept ofbeingisunivoc

CONCLUSION:


8/24

everymodern error.

o Some

holdthatScotusclouded the

wholescienceofMetaphysics;othersno lessardently averthat heclarified it.

o Many

saythat hemadephilosophy awelterofcomplexitiesthat nomindcanunderstand;otherssincerelybelievethat hesimplifiedphilosophy.

o Recent

criticalinvestigation,

however,showsthatmanyworksanddoctrines,supposedly of

WILLIAM OF OCKHAM

Born at Ockham inSurrey, England ca1285. Like Scotus aFranciscan friar.

Studied at Oxford shortlyafter Scotus had left it.He lectured on theSentences from 1317 to1319, but never took hisMA, having fallen foul ofthe Chancellor of theUniversity, JohnLutterell.

He went to Londonwhere, in the 1320s, hewrote up his Oxford


9/24

lectures, and composeda systematic treatise onlogic as well ascommentaries onAristotle and Porphyry.

In 1324 he wassummoned to Avignon toanswer charges ofheresy brought by

Lutterell, and soonafterwards gave up hisinterest in theoreticalphilosophy.

He became involved inthe disputes betweenPhilip the Fair of Franceand Pope Boniface VIII,and sufferedimprisonment andexcommunication for hisintemperate andunorthodox views. He

was reconciled with theChurch and with hisOrder before his death,which occurred in 1348or soon thereafter.

WORKSo Commentary on

the Sentences ofPeter Lombard;

o Commentaries on

Aristotle andPorphyry;Quodlibeta;

o Dialogue on the

Temporal Powerof the Popes.

DOCTRINEo His doctrine on

humanknowledge is thecore of hisphilosophy. Thisdoctrine, knownas VenerableInaugurator of

Terminism.o Terminism is

reallyNominalism, orperhaps it ismore accuratelydescribed asConceptualismwith a casttowards

Nominalism.o OCKHAMS LOGIC

OF LANGUAGE

Scotustendencyto restrictthe field ooperationof

philosophy iscarriedfurther byhissuccessor,WilliamOckham.

Many ofOckhamspositionsin logicand

metaphyscs weretaken upeither indevelopment of, orinoppositionto, DunsScotus.

Thoughhisthought islesssophisticated thanthat ofScotus,hislanguageismercifullymuchclearer.

o Like Scotus,

Ockham regardsbeing as aunivocal term,applicable to Godin the samesense as tocreatures. Heallows into hissystem, however,much lessextensive varietyof createdbeings, reducing


10/24

the tenAristoteliancategories totwo, namelysubstances andqualities.

o Like Scotus,

Ockham acceptsa distinction

betweenabstractive andintuitiveknowledge; it isonly by intuitiveknowledge thatwe can nowwhether acontingent factobtains or not.

o Ockham goes

beyond Scotus,however, inallowing thatGod, by hisalmighty power,can make ushave intuitiveknowledge of anobject that doesnot exist. That is,whatever Godcan do throughsecondarycauses, heargues, God cando directly; so ifGod can makeme know that awall is white bycausing the whitewall to meet myeye, he can makeme have thesame beliefwithout therebeing any whitewall there at all.

This thesisobviously opens

a road toskepticism,quickly traversedby some ofOckhamsfollowers.

o Ockhams most

significantdisagreementwith Scotusconcerned the

nature ofuniversals. Herejected outrightthe idea thatthere was acommon natureexisting in themany individualswe call by acommon nature.No universalexists outside themind; everythingin the world issingular.

o Ockham offered

many argumentsagainst commonnatures, of whichone of the mostvivid is thefollowing: Itfollows from thatopinion that partof Christsessence wouldbe wretched anddamned;because thatsame commonnature reallyexisting in Christreally exists in

Judas and isdamned.

o Universals are

not things butsigns, singlesignsrepresentingmany things.

There are naturalsigns andconventionalsigns; naturalsigns are thethoughts in ourminds, andconventional

signs are thewords which wecoin to expressthese thoughts.

o Ockhams view of

universals isoften callednominalism; butin his system it isnot only names,but concepts,


11/24

which areuniversals.However, the titlehas a certainaptness, sinceOckham thoughtof the concepts inour minds asforming alanguage system,a languagecommon to allhumans and priorto all thedifferent spokenlanguages.

o In that sense it is

true to say thatfor Ockham, onlynames areuniversal; but wehave to countamong namesnot only thenames in naturallanguages, butthe unspokennames of ourmental languagea languagewhich, asOckhamdescribes it, turnsout to have quitea strongstructural

similarity tomedieval Latin.

o At different times

in his careerOckham givesdifferentaccounts of therelationshipbetween thenames of themental languageand the things inthe world.

o According to hisearlier theory,the mindfashioned mentalimages orrepresentations,which resembledreal things. Thesefictions, as hecalled them,served as

elements inmentalpropositions, inwhich they tookthe place of thethings theyresembled.Fictions cold beuniversal in thesense of havingan equal likenessto many differentthings.

o Later, Ockham

ceased to believein these fictions;names in mentallanguage weresimply acts ofthinking, items inan individualpersonspsychologicalhistory. Thesemental namesoccur in mentalsciences(presumably assuccessivestages of thethinking of thesentence); athought, orsentence, is atrue thought orsentence if the

successivenames whichoccur in it arenames of thesame thing. Thusthe thought thatSocrates is aphilosopher is atrue thoughtbecause Socratescan be calledboth Socratesand

philosopher. It isnot easy to see,on this account,quite how toexplain the truthconditions of asentence such asSocrates is not adog; butOckham, to hiscredit, goes to


12/24

some trouble todeal with thedifficult cases.

o Ockham is best

known forsomething whichhe never said,namely Entitiesare not to be

multipliedbeyondnecessity.

o This principle,

commonly calledOckhamsRazor, is notfound in hisworks, though hedid say similarthings such as itis futile to do withmore what canbe done withfewer orplurality shouldnot be assumedwithoutnecessity.

o In fact, the

sentiment longantedatedOckham; but itdoes sum up hisreductionistattitude to thetechnicalphilosophicaldevelopments ofhis predecessors.Sometimes thisattitude enabledhim to cut awayfictional entities;as often as not, itled him tooverlookdistinctions thatwerephilosophically

significant.

POLITICAL THEORYo Conditioned by

the controversybetween thePope andEmperor overtaxation of theclergy for secularpurposes, etc.

FINAL REMARKS:o Terminism or

Nominalism hadmany followers,for it had twoattractivefeatures: 1) itdispensed with

the endlessdistinctions andsub-distinctionsof Scotism; and2) it offered aseemingly lightand easy solutionof the mostcomplexproblems ofphilosophy.

o Yet these

attractivefeatures weredeceiving, and

Terminism doesnot justify itsclaim as a seriousinterpretation ofthe universethefunction of truephilosophy. Onthe contrary, it isfull of implicitphilosophicalerrors. It wascondemned byPope Clement VIin 1346.

MYSTICISM AND ECKHARTo The 14 and 15

centuries saw arevival ofMysticism.

o The Chief

orthodox Mysticswere: Blessed

John Ruysbroeck(1293-1381);

John Gerson(1363-1429);Peter dAilly(1350-1420);Denis theCarthusian(1402-1471);

ThomasHemerken(Thomas aKempis), author


13/24

of the famousImitation ofChrist(1380-1471).

o Among the

heterodoxMystics: BlessedHenry Suso (died1366) who was

not consciouslyunorthodox indoctrine; MasterEckhart ofHochheim (about1260-1327), aDominican whowas unorthodox,but notcontumacious.He had 22propositionscondemned, butappealed to thePapal Court. Hedied beforeadverse decisionwas rendered;

John Tauler(1290-1361);Nicolas of Cusa(1401-1464).

THE OXFORD CALCULATORSo When Ockham

died of the BlackDeath in Munichin 1349 it was aquarter ofcentury since hehad left Oxford.During theperiod, theUniversity hadbecome theunquestionedintellectualcenter ofscholasticphilosophy. It

would be wrongto envisage itsimply as abattleground forwarring schoolsof thought,

Thomists againstScotists,nominalistsagainst realistsand so on. During

this period,Aquinas was notmuch followed inOxford, even byDominicans, andScotism was notdominant eventhough in thefirst half of the14th century theleading thinkerswere FranciscansEven Ockham leftbehind nocharacteristicnominalist schoolin Oxford. It wasin France thatnominalists like

John of Mirecourtand Nicholas ofAutrecourt tookto lengths ofextremeskepticism histeaching thatGods unlimitedpower renderedsuspect humanclaims to anycertainknowledge ofabsolute truth.

o Between 1320

and 1340 a groupof vigorous and

independentthinkers in Oxfordauthoreddevelopments invarious parts ofthe curriculum.Many writerspublished logicaltreatises,expanding thetraditional logicinto many newareas, exploring

especiallypropositionsabout motion andchange,expansion andcontraction,measurementand time. Themost importantof the logicalwriters was


14/24

Walter Burley,whose Pure Artof Logic markeda high point inthe formalizationof logic in theMiddle Ages.

o Formalization

became

important intheology too: itreached a pointwhere theologycan almost besaid to havebecomemathematized.Problems ofmaxima andminima, andquestionswhether continuaare infinitelydivisible andinfinitelyextendible,which might bethought to be theprovince of themathematicalscientist ratherthan thetheologian, arefirst worked outin the analysis ofthe growth of

grace in the soulsof the faithful andin measuring thecapacity forinfinite beatitudeof the Saints inheaven.

o Whether or not

these inquiriesassisted theprogress oftheology, theywere to prove

most valuable inthe study ofphysics. This wasalready apparentin thedevelopment,especially atMerton College,of a newmathematicalphysics. The

method of inquiryof these Oxfordcalculators wasthe presentationand solution ofsophismata,logical puzzle andparadoxes. Aproposition suchas Socrates isinfinitely whiterthan Plato beginsto be white waspresented andanalyzed, andassessed forpossible truthand falsity.Bizarre as thismethod mightseem to themodern reader, itwas in the courseof resolving thesesophismata thatnotions ofmathematicalratio andproportions wereevolved.Moreover, thenew notions weregivendiagrammaticrepresentation byline segments,

which proveduseful inmeasuring theinteraction ofmotion, time, anddistance. In thisway thefoundation waslaid for therevolution inphysicsassociated withmuch better

known namessuch as that ofGalileo.

o One of the

foremost of theMertonCalculators was

ThomasBradwardine,who developed atheory of ratios


15/24

which he used topresent a theoryof how forces,resistances, andvelocities were tobe correlated inmotion; thisquicklysupersededAristotles laws ofmotion, not onlyin Oxford, butalso in Paris,where it wasadopted byOresme.Bradwardine wasalso arepresentative ofanother newtendency of theOxford of themid-14th century,a revival ofAugustinianism.Augustine had, ofcourse alwaysbeen an authorityto be quoted withreverence; butnow scholarsbegan to paymore attention tothe historicalcontext of hiswriting, and to

take mostinterest in hislater, anti-Pelagian work.Bradwardine, inhis massive DeCausa Dei,presented anAugustiniantreatment of theissuessurroundingpredestination

and freedom.Theologicalinterest at thisperiod hadmoved awayfrom Trinitarianand Christologicalissues to suchtopics as graceand freedom andthe limits of

omnipotence. Ifyou can resist sinfor a single hour,does that meanyou can resist itfor a lifetime?Can Godcommand that hebe hated? What ifGod were toreveal tosomeone theirfuturedamnation?

TRANSITION TO MODERN PHILOSOPHY(1450-1600)

The study of the Greek andLatin classics was never utterlyextinct among Christianpeoples. Many of the Fathers ofthe Church, notably StsAugustine and Jerome, andmany ecclesiastical writers ofthe Middle Ages, praised theliterary monuments of antiquityand imitated their polishedstyle in their own writings. Theesteem in which the paganclassics were held wasincreased in Italy andthroughout Europe in the 14th

century by the writings ofDante Alighieri, FrancescoPetrarca, and GiovanniBoccaccio, the Fathers of the

Italian Language.

Now the Christian writers of thelater Middle Ages, especially incenturies following the 13,allowed themselves to growcareless in their expression andto profess a contempt for theniceties of Latin style.

Greek literature, imperfectlyknown in Europe before the 13century, was made availablethroughout the West during the14 and 15 centuries. Commercewith the Greeks, the attemptsof ecclesiastical powers to unitethe Eastern Schismatics withRome, and, finallly, the fall ofConstantinople and the settlingof fugitive Greeks in WesternEurope, were the occasions thatled to the intemperate zeal forGreek learning thatcharacterized this time.

Had the return to ancient


16/24

elegance been kept within duebounds, it would have been avery good thing for Christianity.

The truths of Faith would havethe more readily won the favorof learned men by beingpresented with grace andornateness. But, sad to say, thenew culture did harm to theFaith, and this for severalreasons.

*First, not only the elegant manner, but also theinelegant and gross matter of pagan classicscame to be admired by inferior and ill-disciplined mindsalways the majority in anycivilization.

*The exile of the Popes to Avignon in the 14century, and the schism which followed a littlelater, lessened respect for ecclesiasticalauthority and reverence for the teachings of theChurch itself.

*Laxity of morals followed as a matter of course.Christians, lay and clerical, neglected the studyof sacred science and became devotedadmirers of antiquity and the works of men(Humanism).

With the cult of pagan classicscame the revival of thestandards of pagan art. Thecombined revival or rebirth ofancient art and letters came tobe called the RENAISSANCE.And when the movement hadreached its height, thereoccurred the revolution ofProtestantism in the 16 century.

Thus in art, letters, and religion,the minds of the multitudeswere turned to doctrines andideals far removed from thearticles of Faith and fromScholastic Philosophy, whichwas contemptuously regardedas a mere instrument of thatFaith. Thus was the wayprepared for modern systems ofphilosophy, which began toappear in the 17 century.

SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY in 15th and 16th

Centuries

As the cult of classical antiquityincreased, the prestige ofScholasticism declined. Theadversaries of the greatPhilosophy of the Golden Agewere numerous and violent intheir attack; while discordsamong the Schoolmen renderedweak and futile their efforts at

defense. Scotists and Thomists,Terminists and Realists, battledand wrangled, or entertainedthemselves with ddialecticdrivel, while the fortress of trueScholastic Philosophy was beinglaid in ruins.

Aroused at last to their direnecessity, the Scholastics made

some show of unified effort. Ledby the Masters of the Universityof Paris, earnest philosophersinaugurated a movement forthe restoration of pureScholasticism. A royal decreewas passed in France forbiddingthe teaching of Terminism(Nominalism), and prescribingthat Aristotelean Philosophy betaught in the Schools. Amongcommentators on Aristotleapproved in the decree was

Thomas and Averroes, Scotus,Alexander of Hales, Giles ofRome, and Bonaventure. TheDominicanswho, indeed, hadnever abandoned Thomismwere a great power in the workof restoration. They appliedthemselves ardently to thestudy of the Angelic Doctor, andin the mid-15 century theyinstalled his SUMMAE as text-books in their Schools,displacing the long enduringSENTENCES of Peter theLombard. One of the greatestDominican Scholastics of thisperiod was Thomas de Vio,called Cajetan (1469-1534), anItalian, who, with Sylvester ofFerrara (1474-1528), led themovement for the restoration oScholasticism in Italy and Spain

The movement for restorationbore fruit, but the forces of anti-Scholasticism, aided by theHumanists and the heretics,could not be stayed. Besides,

the Schoolmen were unable, ona sudden, to free their camp ofall abuses; and the excessivelove of dialectical subtlety, thecontempt for new findings inexperimental and historicalsciences, the neglect of elegantletters, were things still to becorrected at the beginning ofthe 16 century.

Hence the Scholastics had not


17/24

only to revive the doctrines ofthe Golden Age; they had alsoto extend the principles of theirphilosophy in the interpretationof the steadily increasing dataof sacred and profane learningand of the experimentalsciences; and this work theyneglected.

Some Scholastics did, indeed,remain true to scientific ideals,trying with unflagging energy tokeep abreast of the times. Chiefof these was Francis de Vittoria,Italian Dominican (1480-1546),and he had numerous imitatorsamong the Dominicans and inthe newly established Societyof Jesus. These men tried toteach Scholastic Philosophy in amanner suited to the times, andtheir efforts bore fruitthroughout Europe, especiallyin Spain and Italy. Yet, indespite of all, the philosophyopposed to Revelationadvanced in scope andinfluence day by day.

THOMISM

The Thomists of the 15century were mostlycommentators trying toadapt philosophy to theneeds of the hour, and,while they did someservice forScholasticism, they alsowrought some harm,inasmuch as theyconfused the scope ofphilosophy andtheology, and varyingdegrees abandoned theform, method, and theorder of ThomasAquinas.

The Thomisticsphilosophers of 16century carried on,under the leadership ofFrancis de Vittoria, thework of reducing

Thomism to its pureform.

TERMINISM (NOMINALISM):

Terminism waned rapidlyafter its condemnationby the King of France in

1474, but its influenceextended into the 16century and itbequeathed somedoctrines to the anti-Scholastics of the age;these doctrines were,partially at least,transmitted to modernphilosophy.

SCOTISM

The Scotists of the 15and 16 centuries wereall members of theFranciscan Order.

SUAREZ

Of all the philosophers in thisperiod, perhaps the mostnotable, and certainly the mostenduring in influence, wasFRANCIS SUAREZ, Jesuit (1548-1617).

Suarez denied the realdistinction between essenceand existence in creatures,admitting only a logicaldistinction with a foundation infact (virtual distinction). Hetaught, in consequence, thatmatter and form in bodies haveneither of them, completeexistence, but form a completeexistence in their union. Heregarded subsistence as aperfection superadded to analready existing nature.

He rejected the ThomisticPrinciple of Individuation(quantified matter) and madethis the entity of a thingconsidered absolutely.

He taught that accidents of abody inhere in the Prime Matterand not in the composite(matter and form) body itself,making exception, however, of

some accidents which are fittedto inhere in both matter andsubstantial form. He assertsthat Prime Matter has entitativeextension antecedent to itsaccident of quantity in bodies.He makes the direct andimmediate object of intellectconcrete and individual reality;teaching that the speciesabstracted by the agentintellect are entitatively


18/24

immaterial, butrepresentativelymaterial andindividual. From such singularor individual knowledge theintellect rises to universalconcepts, or the formation ofSpecies and Genera.

NATURAL PHILOSOPHY OF THE PERIOD

The Renaissance fostered loveof the fine arts, and arousedinterest in the study ofNature,the exemplar of all the arts.During the 15 and 16 centuriesinterest in the sciences whichinvestigate nature increasedday by day. Theexperimentalists discoveredmany wonderful and valuabletruths, but, lacking a stablebasis of philosophy, theyoftentimes interpreted theirfindings in a manner harmful totrue philosophy and to religion.

Some authors group theexperimentalists asNaturalists. This does notmean that all professed ofNature, complete andconcordant, or that eachphilosopher agreed with theotherson the contrary. Thisgroup of scientists areNaturalists in the sense thatthey are engaged in the studyof natural science rather than inthat of Logic, Metaphysics, andEthics. The more importantnaturalistic philosophers of thetime were:

1. Nicolas Copernicus (1473-1543), wrote 4books On the Revolutions of the HeavenlyBodies;2. Bernardine Telesius (Telesio; 1508-1639),who instituted at Naples an Academy for thestudy of natural sciences;3. Thomas Campanella (1568-1639), aDominican Scholastic who was disturbed bythe anti-Scholasticism of the time, and tried

to reform the whole philosophic system;4. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), amathematician and astronomer, called bymany the Father of Modern ExperimentalScience. his doctrine on the heliocentricmovement of the earth aroused bittercontroversies, even among theologians;5. Johan Kepler (1571-1631), a famousastronomer6. Paracelsus (1493-1541), a physician,experimentalist, and philosopher;

7. Giordano Bruno, a Dominican (1548-1600), naturalist; he was proud anddissolute man, and was expelled from hisOrder for insubordination and heterodoxdoctrine. He travelled throughout Europepreaching heretical and immoral doctrines.

Taken at Venice and brought to Rome, hewas condemned and burned at the stake in1600.

All of the above agree instressing the importance ofexperimental science, but theydiffer much in their philosophy.

Copernicus, Galileo, and Keplerdid not enter the domain ofnatural philosophy, generallyspeaking, but kept toexperimental physics. Yet theirsane use of induction led to thediscovery of many natural laws,and demonstrated the value ofthis philosophic method in the

field of experimental science:thus they indirectly contributedto the cause of true philosophy.

Telesius and Campanelllaproposed a philosophy ofnature that may be summed upas follows: God created matterinert, and then gave it twoopposed powers, viz., heat andcold. At first these powersdivided matter evenly betweenthem. The heated matterbecame thin, white, and readilymovable; while the cold matterbecame dense, heavy, andopposed to motion. The heatedmatter, ascending, composedthe heavens; the cold matter,remaining below, made theearth. By the action of heatupon the earth, and thereaction of the cold earth,different kinds of things weregradually formed, of whichliving things are the mostperfect. Life itself is due to aheated substance penetrating abodily organism. Telesiussubstitutes this heated-life-principle for the substantialform of Aristotle (i.e., in livingthings), and calls it soulinplants, brutes, and men. Tosave his Faith, Telesius alsopostulated in man a strictlyspiritual soul created by God,which spiritual soul is theprinciple of thought and free-


19/24

will. At this point Campanellaleaves Telesius and advancessome further theories of hisown.

Campanella analyzes humannature. He declares that manhas the power of acting, thepower of thinking, and thepower of willing. He asserts that

these powers are found, inmore or less perfect degree, inall existent beings. Everythingthat exists has its power ofacting, it knows its entity, andit wills the last end towardswhich it tends. Hence it is thefunction of true philosophy toinvestigate the principles ofbeing, knowing, and willingin all things, and to refer theseto God, who is Himselfconstituted in the infinitegrade of being, power,intellection, and volition. Thisdoctrine of universallyextended power, knowledgeand will in all beings is calledPan-Psyschism.

Paracelsus and Cardano werephysicians who cultivatedexperimental science. Theyproposed nothing of anymoment to the philosopher.

They professed a kind ofmysticism, and practicedtheurgic and magical arts,seeking to cure the sick and toward off the bad influence ofevil spirits, stars, etc.

Francesco Patrizzi, a follower ofTelesius and Giordano Brunoentered the field of philosophymore directly than any of theNaturalists. Patrizzi wroteANew Philosophy of AllThings, in which he strikes atAristotelean doctrine, andprofesses himself a Platonist. Asa matter of fact, however, he israther a Neoplatonist than aPlatonist. He says that in thebeginning there existed onlythe absolute ONE, containingall things in Itself. By successiveemanations, the one producespure spirits the world-soul,human souls, and bodily nature(Pantheism). No bodily beinghas its own proper activity; allactivity in the universe

proceeds from the world-soul.Analogously, all activityregarded as proper to manproceeds from the human soulalone. In Physics, Patrizzifollows Telesius.Bruno professes a pantheism ofmanifestations. In the worksof Nicolas of Cusa he had readthat God is the complication ofall things; He is the coincidenceof opposites. Therefore, saysBruno, God is the essence of allthings. Things are but themanifestations or unfolding ofGod, who is latent ineverything. This divinemanifestation has two phases,matter and form. Matter is apassive principle; form (which issingle and unique in the wholematter) is an active principle,which functions universally,being the efficient and finalcause of all things. The humansoul is but a manifestation ofthe universal form, and thus wilnever perish. In Physics, Brunofollows Telesius.

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF THE PERIOD

The Renaissance, or, moreaccurately, the Humanistmovement, brought to light theworks of ancient legislators andpolitical philosophers, and

these were studied with greatzeal by the votaries of the newfad of studying and excessivelyvaluing everything human inthe treasury of the universe.

This study, plus the spirit ofrebellion against authority,ecclesiastical and civil, whichthe Reformation induced, aswell as a new devotion to theso-called Principle of Nationality(which holds that each nationshould constitute its own civil

society) occasioned theemergence of many socialphilosophies in the 16 century.Not a few of these wereopposed to the Social Ethics ofScholasticism.

3 Political philosophers areworth mentioning:

1. Nicolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), whoexpressed his political philosophy in a workcalled The Prince (Il Principe)


20/24

2. St Thomas More (1480-1535), Englishmartyr, whose UTOPIA describes animaginary island-republic so governed as toprocure absolute equality for its citizens andto promote universal happinessan idealimpossible of attainment3. Hugo de Groot (Grotius 1583-1645), alearned Dutch Protestant, who wrote on THERIGHT OF WAR AND OF PEACE

MACHIAVELLI teaches that thechief aim of civil society is thedevelopment of the STATE. TheState must be made supreme inall things, and all means arelawful to achieve this great end.

The ruler need feel himselfbound by no law, natural orhuman, but may manage thingsat will, so long as he worksconsistently in the direction ofState supremacy. Machiavelliwarred against Christianity,which he found in conflict withhis Ideal of State apotheosis.

DE GROOT was much more of aphilosopher than eitherMachiavelli or Thomas More. Hedistinguishes right as DIVINEand HUMAN, and subdivideshuman right into NATURAL andCIVIL. He calls civil or socialright VOLUNTARY because hebelieves that while man has a

TENDENCY towards life insociety, he has actuallyassumed social obligations andprivileges by a sort of freecompact, at least implicitly. Hedeclares that in the state oforiginal innocence communityof goods among men wasassured; the right of individualownership became necessaryas a consequence of sin; andthis necessary right securedrecognition in the world by atleast a TACIT agreement orcompact among men.

SUMMARY Not very long after St

Thomas Aquinas, cracksbegan to appear in theunifying culture ofChristianity. Philosophy andscience broke away moreand more from theology ofthe Church, thus enablingreligious life to attain a freerrelationship to reasoning.

More people nowemphasized that we cannotreach God throughrationalism because God isin all ways unknowable. Theimportant thing for a manwas not to understand thedivine mystery but tosubmit to Gods will.

As religion and sciencecould now relate more freelyto each other, the way wasopen both to new scientificmethods and a newreligious fervor. Thus thebasis was created for twopowerful upheavals in the15th and 16th centuries,namely, the RENAISSANCEand the REFORMATION.

By the Renaissance wemean the rich cultural

development that began inthe late 14th century. Itstarted in Northern Italy andspread rapidly northwardduring the 15th and 16th

centuries. Renaissancemeant rebirth that whichwas to be reborn was the artand culture of antiquity. Italso speaks of Renaissancehumanism, since now, afterthe long Dark Ages in whichevery aspect of life wasseen through divine light,everything once againrevolved around man. Goto the source was themotto, and that meant thehumanism of antiquity firstand foremost.

It almost became a popularpastime to dig up ancientsculptures and scrolls, justas it became fashionable tolearn Greek. The study ofGreek humanism also had apedagogical aim. Readinghumanistic subjectsprovided classicaleducation and developedwhat may be called humanqualities. Horses are born,it was said, but humanbeings are not borntheyare formed. It was thoughtthat to be a human being isto be educated.

The political and cultural


21/24

background must beconsidered in order tounderstand theRenaissance. 3 discoveriesthe compass, firearms,and the printing presswere essentialspreconditions for this newperiod we call theRenaissance.

The compass made it easierto navigate. In other words,it was the basis for the greatvoyages of discovery. Sowere firearms in way. Thenew weapons gave theEuropeans militarysuperiority over Americanand Asiatic cultures,although firearms were alsoan important factor inEurope. Printing played animportant part in spreadingthe Renaissance humanistsnew ideas. And the art ofprinting was, not least, oneof the factors that forcedthe Church to relinquish itsformer position as soledisseminator of knowledge.New inventions andinstruments began to followthink and fast. Oneimportant instrument, e.g.,was the telescope whichresulted in a completelynew basis for astronomy.

A process started in theRenaissance, beginning withthe changes on the culturaland economic front.

An important condition wasthe transition from asubsistence economy to amonetary economy. Towardthe end of the Middle Ages,cities had developed, witheffective trades and a livelycommerce of new goods, amonetary economy andbanking. A middle classarose which developed acertain freedom with regardto the basic conditions oflife. Necessities becamesomething that could bebought for money. This stateof affairs rewarded peoplesdiligence, imagination, andingenuity. New demands

were made on theindividual.

Remember how Greekphilosophy broke away fromthe mythological worldpicture that was linked topeasant culture. In the sameway, the Renaissancemiddle class began to break

away from the feudal lordsand the power of thechurch. As this washappening, Greek culturewas being rediscoveredthrough a closer contactwith the Arabs in Spain andthe Byzantine culture in theeast. The 3 divergingstreams from antiquity

joined into one great riverthe Renaissance.

The Renaissance resulted in

a NEW VIEW OF MANKIND.The humanism of theRenaissance brought a newbelief in man and his worth,in striking contrast to thebiased medieval emphasison the sinful nature of man.Man was now consideredinfinitely great and valuableOne of the central figures ofthe Renaissance wasMarsillo Ficino, whoexclaimed: Know thyself, Odivine lineage in mortalguise! Another centralfigure, Pico della Mirandola,wrote the Oration on theDignity of Man, somethingthat would have beenunthinkable in the MiddleAges.

Throughout the wholemedieval period, the pointof departure had alwaysbeen to God the humanistsof the Renaissance took astheir point of departure manhimself, so did the Greekphilosophers. That isprecisely why we speak of arebirth of antiquityshumanism.

But Renaissance humanismwas to an even greaterextent characterized byINDIVIDUALISM. We are notonly human beings, we areunique individuals. This idea


22/24

could then lead to an almostunrestrained worship ofgenius. The ideal could thenlead to an almostunrestrained worship ofgenius. The ideal becamewhat we call theRenaissance man, a man ofuniversal genius embracingall aspects of life, art, andscience. The new view ofman also manifested itselfin an interest in the humananatomy. As in ancienttimes, people once againbegan to dissect the dead todiscover how the body wasconstructed. It wasimperative both for medicalscience and for art. Onceagain it became usual forworks of art to depict thenude. High time, after athousand years of prudery.Man was bold enough to behimself again. There was nolonger anything to beashamed of.

The new view of mankindled to a whole new outlook.Man did not exist purely forGods sake. Man couldtherefore delight in life hereand now. And with this newfreedom to develop, thepossibilities were limitless.

The aim was now to exceedall boundaries. This was alsoa new idea, seen from theGreek humanistic point ofview; the humanists ofantiquity had emphasizedthe importance oftranquility, moderation, andrestraint.

The humanists behaved asif the whole world had beenreawakened. They becameintensely conscious of their

epoch, which is what ledthem to introduce the termMiddle Ages to cover thecenturies between antiquityand their own time. Therewas an unrivaleddevelopment in all spheresof life. Art and architecture,literature, literature, music,philosophy, and scienceflourished as never before.

For example, Ancient Romegloried in titles such as thecity of cities and the hubof the universe. During theMiddle Ages the citydeclined, and by 1417 theold metropolis had only17,000 inhabitants.

The Renaissance humanists

saw it as their cultural dutyto restore Rome: first andforemost, to begin theconstruction of the great StPeters Church over thegrave of Peter the Apostle.And St. Peters Church canboast neither of moderationnor restraint. Many greatartists of the Renaissancetook part in this buildingproject, the greatest in theworld. It began in 1506 andlasted for a hundred andtwenty years, and it tookanother fifty before thehuge St Peters Square wascompleted. It was 200meters long and 130 metershigh, and it covers an areaof more than 16,000meters.

It was also significant thatthe Renaissance broughtwith it an new view ofnature. The fact that manfelt at home in the worldand did not consider lifesolely as a preparation forthe hereafter, created awhole new approach to thephysical world. Nature wasnow regarded as a positivething. Many held the viewthat God was also present inhis creation. If he is indeedinfinite, he must be presentin everything. This idea iscalled PANTHEISM.

The medieval philosophershad insisted that there is aninsurmountable barrierbetween God and theCreation. It could now besaid that nature is divineand even that it is Godsblossoming. Ideas of thiskind were not always lookedkindly on by the Church.

The fate of Giordano Bruno


23/24

was a dramatic example ofthis. Not only did he claimthat God was present innature, he also believedthat the universe wasinfinite in scope. He waspunished very severely forhis ideas. He was burned atthe stake in Romes FlowerMarket in the year 1600.

During the Renaissance,what we call antihumanismflourished as welltheauthoritarian power of Stateand Church. During theRenaissance there was atremendous thirst for tryingwitches, burning heretics,magic and superstition,bloody religious warsandnot least, the brutalconquest of America. Buthumanism has always had ashadow side. No epoch iseither purely good or purelyevil. Good and evil are twinthreads that run through thehistory of mankind. Andoften they intertwine this isnot least true of the nextkey phrase, a NEWSCIENTIFIC METHOD,another Renaissanceinnovation. A preconditionfor all the technicaldevelopment that tookplace after the Renaissance.

The new scientific methodwas mainly a process ofinvestigating nature withour own senses. Since the14th century there had beenan increasing number ofthinkers who warnedagainst blind faith in oldauthority, be it religiousdoctrine or the naturalphilosophy of Aristotle.

There were also warnings

against the belief thatproblems can be solvedpurely by thinking. Anexaggerated belief in theimportance of reason hadbeen valid all through theMiddle Ages. Now it wassaid that every investigationof natural phenomena mustbe based on observation,experience, and

experiment. We call this theEMPIRICAL METHODthatone bases ones knowledgeof things on ones ownexperienceand not ondusty parchments orfigments of imagination.Empirical science wasknown in antiquity, butsystematic EXPERIMENTSwere something quite new.It was now above all allimperative to expressscientific observations inprecise mathematical termsMeasure what can bemeasured, and makemeasurable what cannot bemeasured, said GalileoGalilei, who was one of themost important scientists ofthe 17th century. He alsosaid that the book of natureis written in the language ofmathematics.

Nature was no longersomething man was simplya part of. Knowledge ispower, said the Englishphilosopher Francis Bacon,thereby underlining thepractical value of knowledgeand this was indeed new.Man was seriously startingto intervene in nature andbeginning to control it.

The technical revolutionthat began in theRenaissance led to thespinning jenny and tounemployment, tomedicines and newdiseases, to the improvedefficiency of agriculture andthe improvement of theenvironment, to practicalappliances such as thewashing machine and therefrigerator and pollution

and industrial waste. Theserious threat to theenvironment we are facingtoday has made manypeople see the technicalrevolution itself as aperilous maladjustment tonatural conditions. It hasbeen pointed out that wehave started something wecan no longer control. More


24/24

optimistic spirits think weare still living in the cradleof technology, and thatalthough the scientific agehas certainly had itsteething troubles, we willgradually learn to controlnature without at the sametime threatening its veryexistence and thus our own.

A NEW WORLD VIEW. In1543 a little book waspublished entitled ON THEREVOLUTIONS OF THECELESTIAL SPHERES. It waswritten by the Polishastronomer NicolausCopernicus, who died on theday the book was published.Copernicus claimed that itwas not the sun that movedround the earth, it was viceversa. He thought this wascompletely possible fromthe observations of theheavenly bodies thatexisted. The reason peoplebelieved that the sun wentround the earth was thatthe earth turns on its axis,he said. He pointed out thatall observations of heavenlybodies were far easier tounderstand if one assumedthat both the earth and theother planets circle aroundthe sun. This is called theHELIOCENTRIC WORLDPICTURE, which means thateverything centers aroundthe sun.

scotus to renaissance

Documents