DOCSLIB.ORG

From Reconstruction to Reformation Jacob Thomasius's Use of Aristotle In

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From Reconstruction to Reformation Jacob Thomasius's Use of Aristotle In FROM RECONSTRUCTION TO REFORMATION JACOB THOMASIUS’S USE OF ARISTOTLE IN THE DEBATE ON THE ORIGIN OF THE HUMAN SOUL* Zornitsa RADEVA Abstract This article sheds new light on the complex relationship between Jacob Thom- asius’s main occupation as a professor of Aristotelian philosophy at the Lutheran University of Leipzig and his works on the history of philosophy, which showed the incompatibility of Aristotle with central Christian doctrines. I argue for a strong inner consistency between these two seemingly conflicting aspects of Thomasius’s intellectual activity. Far from paralyzing his way of doing ‘Chris- tian Peripatetic philosophy,’ the history of philosophy was for Thomasius an indispensable analytical tool for reforming Aristotelianism. To illustrate my thesis, I investigate the way Thomasius used his historical reconstruction of Aristotle’s theory of intellect to intervene in a contemporary debate on the origin of the human soul, a debate which played a central role in the crystal- lization of a Lutheran confessional identity. * The present article has been written within the framework of the research project ERC-2013-CoG 615045 MEMOPHI (Medieval Philosophy in Modern History of Phi- losophy), directed by Catherine König-Pralong. I would like to thank Nadja Germann, Catherine König-Pralong, and Mario Meliadò for having read and discussed with me in detail previous versions of this paper. Their critical observations and suggestions have greatly contributed to its present form. The remarks and bibliographical references I received from the two anonymous referees have helped me improve a number of weaker points in my exposition. I am also grateful to Luca Bianchi and Stefano Di Bella for their interest and comments on my work on Thomasius. Thanks to the kind invitation of Evelina Miteva and David Wirmer, I had the opportunity to present some preliminary results of my studies at the conference The Place of Intellect in Aristotelian Natural Phi- losophy. Arabic, Latin, and Hebrew Perspectives (Cologne, 15–16 February 2016). Nikolina Hatton kindly corrected my English. Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales 84(2), 427-463. doi: 10.2143/RTPM.84.2.3269053 © 2017 by Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales. All rights reserved. 428 Z. RADEVA Introduction: an academic debate with narrative aspects In order to judge between the two currently prevailing opinions on the origin of the human soul, the one affirming its creation out of nothing, the other claiming that it is transmitted by the parents, the philosopher should enquire into the history of the whole controver- sy.1 This programmatic statement offers a prime example of the approach which Jacob Thomasius (1622–1684), remembered mainly as one of the mentors and correspondents of Gottfried Wilhelm Leib- niz, adopted when faced with a serious philosophical problem. The affirmation stems from the Disputatio physica de origine animae humanae, which Thomasius presided over in 1669, as a professor at the arts faculty of the University of Leipzig.2 Looking for the historical 1. J. THOMASIUS – (resp.) J. VAKE, Disputatio physica de origine animae humanae, sect. II, §§ 1-2, Lipsiae 1669, pp. 7-8: “De qvaestione proposita duae hodie regnant […] in scholis Christianorum sententiae: una eorum, qvi animas nostras volunt a Deo creari ex nihilo: altera illorum, qvi eas ex animabus parentum traducunt. Ut de his judicium fieri tanto melius qveat, operae pretium fuerit, qvemadmodum in Ecclesias hodiernas ingressae sint eae paulatim, ex historia totius controversiae circumspicere.” 2. For bio-bibliographical information on Thomasius see R. SACHSE, “Thomasius, Jakob,” in: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie 38 (1894), pp. 107-112, URL: https://www. deutsche-biographie.de/gnd119238098.html#adbcontent (visited on 17 October 2016); G. ACETI, “Jakob Thomasius ed il pensiero filosofico-giuridico di Goffredo Guglielmo Leib- niz,” in: Jus. Rivista di scienze giuridiche 8/2 (1957), pp. 259-318, esp. 260-273; G. SANTI- NELLO, “Jakob Thomasius (1622–1684),” in: G. SANTINELLO (ed.), Storia delle storie gener- ali della filosofia, vol. 1, Brescia 1981, pp. 438-467, esp. 438-442; H. JAUMANN, “Thomasius, Jakob,” in: W. KÜHLMANN (ed.), Killy Literaturlexikon. Autoren und Werke des deutschspra- chigen Kulturraums, Berlin/Boston 2012, URL: https://www.degruyter.com/view/Killy/kill y.6712?rskey=D8aeTg&result=73&dbq_0=Thomasius&dbf_0=killy- fulltext&dbt_0=fulltext&o_0=AND (visited on 27.02.2017); H. JAUMANN, “Jakob Thom- asius, ein protestantischer Späthumanist. Seine Dissertationes und Programmata zur Philoso- phiegeschichte,” in: R. B. SDZUJ – R. SEIDEL – B. ZEGOWITZ (eds.), Dichtung — Gelehrsamkeit — Disputationskultur. Festschrift für Hanspeter Marti zum 65. Geburtstag, Wien/Köln/Weimar 2012, pp. 587-603, esp. 587-591. — For an overview of Thomasius’s works and his activities in the context of the contemporary Lutheran educa- tional system, see M. GIERL – H. JAUMANN – W. SPARN, “Einleitung,” in: J. THOMASIUS, Philosophia practica (Gesammelte Schriften 1), Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2005 (reprint Lipsiae 1682), pp. 1-22. — The ascription of the Disputatio physica to Thomasius seems unproblematic, although his respondent Vake certainly played a part in it. The text repro- duces basic tenets of Thomasius’s conception of pagan philosophy, which I shall have occa- sion to dwell on in the course of this article, and shows clear parallels to Thomasius’s text- book on natural philosophy, the Physica perpetuo dialogo […] adornata (1670). Moreover, Thomasius himself refers to this disputation as “theses nostrae” (J. THOMASIUS, “Praefatio LXVII. De sententia Aristotelis circa originem corporis & animae humanae,” in: J. THOMASIUS, Praefationes sub auspicia disputationum suarum in Academia Lipsiensi recitatae, FROM RECONSTRUCTION TO REFORMATION 429 ‘origins’ of a contemporary quaestio vexata3 was in this case particu- larly apposite and even necessary. Thomasius’s Disputatio physica can in fact be read as a comprehensive response to a work Johannes Zei- sold published in 1662, under the somewhat verbose yet informative title Diatribe historico-elenctica de sententiae creationem animae ration- alis statuentis, antiquitate & veritate, nec non de sententiae propagatio- nem animae rationalis per traducem statuentis, novitate & absurditate. Zeisold (1599–1667), a philosophy professor at Jena and fervid proponent of creationism, had waged a life-long polemic against the traducianist theories of the famous philosopher and physician Daniel Sennert (1572–1637) and his pupil Johannes Sperling (1603–1658), one of Thomasius’s preceptors at Wittenberg. Among his fellow Lutherans Zeisold was in the minority. Traducianism was more con- sistent with the Lutheran insistence on the unity of body and soul and, above all, with some distinctly Lutheran teachings on the nature and transmission of original sin. Creationism, on the other hand, had a number of Calvinist supporters and represented the dominant view argumenti varii, Lispiae 1681, pp. 418-426, esp. 419) and as “meam de origine animae humanae disputationem” (“Jakob Thomasius an Leibniz, Leipzig, 6. (16. Mai) 1669,” in: G. W. LEIBNIZ, Philosophischer Briefwechsel (1663–1685), ed. M. SCHNEIDER [Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe (Akademie-Ausgabe) 2/1], Berlin 2006, pp. 39-40, esp. 26, 12). The same work was reprinted in 1725 and in 1745 under a slightly changed title and with Thomasius as its sole author (J. THOMASIUS, Tractatio physica de origine animae humanae, Halae Magdeb. 1725 and 1745). Finally, it was attributed to Thomasius by the Lutheran theologians and historians of philosophy Johann Franz Budde (1667–1729) and Johann Georg Walch (1693–1775) (cf. J. G. WALCH, “Seelen Ursprung,” in: J. G. WALCH, Phi- losophisches Lexikon, Leipzig 1726, cols. 2330-2343, esp. 2330 and 2340; J. F. BUDDE, Com- pendium historiae philosophicae, observationibus illustratum, cap. VI, § XVII, ed. J. G. WALCH, Halae Saxonum 1731, p. 423). — On the literary genre of early-modern dissertations, their institutional setting, the university disputation, and the problem of their authorship, see H. MARTI, “Einleitung,” in: H. MARTI, Philosophische Dissertationen deutscher Universitäten 1660–1750. Eine Auswahlbibliographie, München 1982, pp. 11-77, esp. 13-31; H. MARTI, “Disputation,” in: G. UEDING (ed.), Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, vol. 2, Darmstadt 1994, cols. 866-880; H. MARTI, “Dissertation,” in: G. UEDING (ed.), Historisches Wörter- buch der Rhetorik, vol. 2, Darmstadt 1994, cols. 880-884; W. A. KELLY, Early German dis- sertations: their importance for university history, East Linton 31997. 3. As noted already by Giovanni Santinello (“Jakob Thomasius e il medioevo,” in: Medioevo. Rivista di storia della filosofia medievale 4 [1978], pp. 173-216, esp. 179-182; ID., “Jakob Thomasius (1622–1684),” pp. 449, 462-463) and as we shall see further down, concepts like origo, initium, occasio, and radix function in Thomasius as fully developed historiographical categories. They serve to designate not only the spatio-tem- poral beginnings of certain doctrines but also the factors which brought them into being and conditioned their manifestation in the course of history. 430 Z. RADEVA among contemporary Catholics, being to a large extent the heritage of medieval scholasticism.4 To support his confessionally precarious thesis, in the Diatribe historico-elenctica Zeisold developed a full- fledged narrative argument based on the allegedly Tertullianic adage antiquissimum quod est, id quoque
Load more

Recommended publications
  • At Least in Biophysical Novelties Amihud Gilead
    The Twilight of Determinism: At Least in Biophysical Novelties Amihud Gilead Department of Philosophy, Eshkol Tower, University of Haifa, Haifa 3498838 Email: [email protected] Abstract. In the 1990s, Richard Lewontin referred to what appeared to be the twilight of determinism in biology. He pointed out that DNA determines only a little part of life phenomena, which are very complex. In fact, organisms determine the environment and vice versa in a nonlinear way. Very recently, biophysicists, Shimon Marom and Erez Braun, have demonstrated that controlled biophysical systems have shown a relative autonomy and flexibility in response which could not be predicted. Within the boundaries of some restraints, most of them genetic, this freedom from determinism is well maintained. Marom and Braun have challenged not only biophysical determinism but also reverse-engineering, naive reductionism, mechanism, and systems biology. Metaphysically possibly, anything actual is contingent.1 Of course, such a possibility is entirely excluded in Spinoza’s philosophy as well as in many philosophical views at present. Kant believed that anything phenomenal, namely, anything that is experimental or empirical, is inescapably subject to space, time, and categories (such as causality) which entail the undeniable validity of determinism. Both Kant and Laplace assumed that modern science, such as Newton’s physics, must rely upon such a deterministic view. According to Kant, free will is possible not in the phenomenal world, the empirical world in which we 1 This is an assumption of a full-blown metaphysics—panenmentalism—whose author is Amihud Gilead. See Gilead 1999, 2003, 2009 and 2011, including literary, psychological, and natural applications and examples —especially in chemistry —in Gilead 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014a–c, and 2015a–d.
    [Show full text]
  • Plutarch's 'Lives' and the Critical Reader
    Plutarch's 'Lives' and the critical reader Book or Report Section Published Version Duff, T. (2011) Plutarch's 'Lives' and the critical reader. In: Roskam, G. and Van der Stockt, L. (eds.) Virtues for the people: aspects of Plutarch's ethics. Plutarchea Hypomnemata (4). Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp. 59-82. ISBN 9789058678584 Available at http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/24388/ It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work. See Guidance on citing . Publisher: Leuven University Press All outputs in CentAUR are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including copyright law. Copyright and IPR is retained by the creators or other copyright holders. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the End User Agreement . www.reading.ac.uk/centaur CentAUR Central Archive at the University of Reading Reading’s research outputs online Reprint from Virtues for the People. Aspects of Plutarchan Ethics - ISBN 978 90 5867 858 4 - Leuven University Press virtues for the people aspects of plutarchan ethics Reprint from Virtues for the People. Aspects of Plutarchan Ethics - ISBN 978 90 5867 858 4 - Leuven University Press PLUTARCHEA HYPOMNEMATA Editorial Board Jan Opsomer (K.U.Leuven) Geert Roskam (K.U.Leuven) Frances Titchener (Utah State University, Logan) Luc Van der Stockt (K.U.Leuven) Advisory Board F. Alesse (ILIESI-CNR, Roma) M. Beck (University of South Carolina, Columbia) J. Beneker (University of Wisconsin, Madison) H.-G. Ingenkamp (Universität Bonn) A.G. Nikolaidis (University of Crete, Rethymno) Chr. Pelling (Christ Church, Oxford) A. Pérez Jiménez (Universidad de Málaga) Th.
    [Show full text]
  • Theodicy: an Overview
    1 Theodicy: An Overview Introduction All of us struggle at one time or another in life with why evil happens to someone, either ourselves, our family, our friends, our nation, or perhaps some particularly disturbing instance in the news—a child raped, a school shooting, genocide in another country, a terrorist bombing. The following material is meant to give an overview of the discussion of this issue as it takes place in several circles, especially that of the Christian church. I. The Problem of Evil Defined Three terms, "the problem of evil," "theodicy," and "defense" are important to our discussion. The first two are often used as synonyms, but strictly speaking the problem of evil is the larger issue of which theodicy is a subset because one can have a secular problem of evil. Evil is understood as a problem when we seek to explain why it exists (Unde malum?) and what its relationship is to the world as a whole. Indeed, something might be considered evil when it calls into question our basic trust in the order and structure of our world. Peter Berger in particular has argued that explanations of evil are necessary for social structures to stay themselves against chaotic forces. It follows, then, that such an explanation has an impact on the whole person. As David Blumenthal observes, a good theodicy is one that has three characteristics: 1. "[I]t should leave one with one’s sense of reality intact." (It tells the truth about reality.) 2. "[I]t should leave one empowered within the intellectual-moral system in which one lives." (Namely, it should not deny God’s basic power or goodness.) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Awkward Objects: Relics, the Making of Religious Meaning, and The
    Awkward Objects: Relics, the Making of Religious Meaning, and the Limits of Control in the Information Age Jan W Geisbusch University College London Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Anthropology. 15 September 2008 UMI Number: U591518 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U591518 Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Declaration of authorship: I, Jan W Geisbusch, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signature: London, 15.09.2008 Acknowledgments A thesis involving several years of research will always be indebted to the input and advise of numerous people, not all of whom the author will be able to recall. However, my thanks must go, firstly, to my supervisor, Prof Michael Rowlands, who patiently and smoothly steered the thesis round a fair few cliffs, and, secondly, to my informants in Rome and on the Internet. Research was made possible by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).
    [Show full text]
  • Colin Mcallister Regnum Caelorum Terrestre: the Apocalyptic Vision of Lactantius May 2016
    Colin McAllister Regnum Caelorum Terrestre: The Apocalyptic Vision of Lactantius May 2016 Abstract: The writings of the early fourth-century Christian apologist L. Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius have been extensively studied by historians, classicists, philosophers and theologians. But his unique apocalyptic eschatology expounded in book VII of the Divinae Institutiones, his largest work, has been relatively neglected. This paper will distill Lactantius’s complex narrative and summarize his sources. In particular, I investigate his chiliasm and the nature of the intermediate state, as well as his portrayal of the Antichrist. I argue that his apocalypticism is not an indiscriminate synthesis of varying sources - as it often stated - but is essentially based on the Book of Revelation and other Patristic sources. +++++ The eminent expert on all things apocalyptic, Bernard McGinn, wrote: Even the students and admirers of Lactantius have not bestowed undue praise upon him. To Rene Pichon [who wrote in 1901 what is perhaps still the seminal work on Lactantius’ thought] ‘Lactantius is mediocre in the Latin sense of the word - and also a bit in the French sense’; to Vincenzo Loi [who studied Lactantius’ use of the Bible] ‘Lactantius is neither a philosophical or theological genius nor linguistic genius.’ Despite these uneven appraisals, the writings of the early fourth-century Christian apologist L. Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius [c. 250-325] hold, it seems, a little something for everyone.1 Political historians study Lactantius as an important historical witness to the crucial transitional period from the Great Persecution of Diocletian to the ascension of Constantine, and for insight into the career of the philosopher Porphyry.2 Classicists and 1 All dates are anno domini unless otherwise indicated.
    [Show full text]
  • Ingenuity in Mathematics Ross Honsberger 10.1090/Nml/023
    AMS / MAA ANNELI LAX NEW MATHEMATICAL LIBRARY VOL 23 Ingenuity in Mathematics Ross Honsberger 10.1090/nml/023 INGENUITY IN MATHEMAmCS NEW MATHEMATICAL LIBRARY PUBLISHED BY THEMATHEMATICAL ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA Editorial Committee Basil Gordon, Chairman (1975-76) Anneli Lax, Editor University of California, L.A. New York University Ivan Niven (1 975-77) University of Oregon M. M. Schiffer (1975-77) Stanford University The New Mathematical Library (NML) was begun in 1961 by the School Mathematics Study Group to make available to high school students short expository books on various topics not usually covered in the high school syllabus. In a decade the NML matured into a steadily growing series of some twenty titles of interest not only to the originally intended audience, but to college students and teachers at all levels. Previously published by Random House and L. W. Singer, the NML became a publication series of the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) in 1975. Under the auspices of the MAA the NML will continue to grow and will remain dedicated to its original and expanded purposes. INGENUITY IN MATHEMATICS by Ross Honsberger University of Waterloo, Canada 23 MATHEMATICAL ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA Illustrated by George H. Buehler Sixth Printing © Copyright 1970, by the Mathematical Association of America A11 rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. Published in Washington by The Mathematical Association of America Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 77-134351 Print ISBN 978-0-88385-623-9 Electronic ISBN 978-0-88385-938-4 Manufactured in the United States of America Note to the Reader his book is one of a series written by professional mathematicians Tin order to make some important mathematical ideas interesting and understandable to a large audience of high school students and laymen.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Infinite in Leibniz's Philosophy
    On the Infinite in Leibniz's Philosophy Elad Lison Interdisciplinary Studies Unit Science, Technology and Society Ph.D. Thesis Submitted to the Senate of Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan, Israel August 2010 This work was carried out under the supervision of Dr. Ohad Nachtomy (Department of Philosophy), Bar-Ilan University. Contents א.……………………………….…………………………………………Hebrew Abstract Prologue…………………………………………………………...………………………1 Part A: Historic Survey Methodological Introduction…………………………………………………………..15 1. Aristotle: Potential Infinite………………………………………………………….16 2. Thomas Aquinas: God and the Infinite………………………………………..…….27 3. William of Ockham: Syncategorematic and Actual Infinite……………………..….32 4. Rabbi Abraham Cohen Herrera: Between Absolute Unity and Unbounded Multitude………………………………………………………………………..….42 5. Galileo Galilei: Continuum Constructed from Infinite Zero's………………………49 6. René Descartes: Infinite as Indefinite…………………………………………….…58 7. Pierre Gassendi: Rejection of the Infinite…………………………………………...69 8. Baruch Spinoza: Infinite Unity…………………………………………………...…73 9. General Background: Leibniz and the History of the Infinite……………………....81 Summary…………………………………………………………………………….…94 Part B: Mathematics Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….99 1. 'De Arte Combinatoria' as a Formal Basis for Thought: Retrospective on Leibniz's 1666 Dissertation………………………………………………………………....102 2. Leibniz and the Infinitesimal Calculus……………………………………….……111 2.1. Mathematical Background: Mathematical Works in 16th-17th Centuries…..111 2.2. Leibniz's Mathematical Development…………………………………….…127
    [Show full text]
  • The Search for the Historical Gassendi
    The Search for the Historical Gassendi Margaret J. Osler University of Calgary Writing about the history of science and the history of philosophy in- volves assumptions about the role of context and about the relationships between past and present ideas. Some historians emphasize the context, concentrating on the intellectual, personal, and social factors that affect the way earlier thinkers have approached their subject. Analytic philoso- phers take a critical approach, considering the logic and merit of the arguments of past thinkers almost as though they are engaging in contem- porary debates. Some philosophers use the ideas of historical ªgures to support their own philosophical agendas. Scholarly studies of the French natural philosopher Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655) exemplify many of these approaches. What, then, is context? At the most basic level, the context is the text itself. The most acontextual scholars examine only snippets of the text. In- terested in ideas about necessity, arguments for the existence of God, or ideas about matter and gravity, they mine the writings of historical ªgures for their views on these questions without considering the author’s aim for the book or project as a whole. This approach has frequently characterized discussions of Gassendi’s philosophy. His major work, the Syntagma Philo- sophicum, is a massive treatise in difªcult neo-Latin, daunting to all but the hardiest (or most foolish) of scholars. Consequently, of those philosophers and historians who deal with Gassendi at all, many rely on the bits that have been translated into English or French or those that deal with speciªc topics and seldom consider the entirety of his work, but the work as a whole gives the parts their meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • The Well-Trained Theologian
    THE WELL-TRAINED THEOLOGIAN essential texts for retrieving classical Christian theology part 1, patristic and medieval Matthew Barrett Credo 2020 Over the last several decades, evangelicalism’s lack of roots has become conspicuous. Many years ago, I experienced this firsthand as a university student and eventually as a seminary student. Books from the past were segregated to classes in church history, while classes on hermeneutics and biblical exegesis carried on as if no one had exegeted scripture prior to the Enlightenment. Sometimes systematics suffered from the same literary amnesia. When I first entered the PhD system, eager to continue my theological quest, I was given a long list of books to read just like every other student. Looking back, I now see what I could not see at the time: out of eight pages of bibliography, you could count on one hand the books that predated the modern era. I have taught at Christian colleges and seminaries on both sides of the Atlantic for a decade now and I can say, in all honesty, not much has changed. As students begin courses and prepare for seminars, as pastors are trained for the pulpit, they are not required to engage the wisdom of the ancient past firsthand or what many have labelled classical Christianity. Such chronological snobbery, as C. S. Lewis called it, is pervasive. The consequences of such a lopsided diet are now starting to unveil themselves. Recent controversy over the Trinity, for example, has manifested our ignorance of doctrines like eternal generation, a doctrine not only basic to biblical interpretation and Christian orthodoxy for almost two centuries, but a doctrine fundamental to the church’s Christian identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Georg Mancelius Teoloogina Juhendatud Disputatsioonide Põhjal
    Tartu Ülikool Usuteaduskond MERLE KAND GEORG MANCELIUS TEOLOOGINA JUHENDATUD DISPUTATSIOONIDE PÕHJAL magistritöö juhendaja MARJU LEPAJÕE, MA Tartu 2010 Sisukord SISSEJUHATUS .................................................................................................... 4 TÄNU ..................................................................................................................... 9 I. LUTERLIK ORTODOKSIA............................................................................. 10 1.1. Ajastu üldiseloomustus .............................................................................. 10 1.1.1. Ajalooline ülevaade ............................................................................ 10 1.1.2. Ortodoksia tekkepõhjused................................................................... 13 1.2. Luterlik ortodoksia..................................................................................... 14 1.2.1. Periodiseering, tähtsamad esindajad ning koolkonnad....................... 14 1.2.2. Luterliku ortodoksia teoloogilised põhijooned ................................... 17 1.2.2.1. Pühakiri........................................................................................ 17 1.2.2.2. Õpetus Jumalast ........................................................................... 19 1.2.2.3. Loomisest ja inimese pattulangemisest........................................ 22 1.2.2.4. Ettehooldest ja ettemääratusest.................................................... 23 1.2.2.5. Vabast tahtest..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Machine Guessing – I
    Machine Guessing { I David Miller Department of Philosophy University of Warwick COVENTRY CV4 7AL UK e-mail: [email protected] ⃝c copyright D. W. Miller 2011{2018 Abstract According to Karl Popper, the evolution of science, logically, methodologically, and even psy- chologically, is an involved interplay of acute conjectures and blunt refutations. Like biological evolution, it is an endless round of blind variation and selective retention. But unlike biological evolution, it incorporates, at the stage of selection, the use of reason. Part I of this two-part paper begins by repudiating the common beliefs that Hume's problem of induction, which com- pellingly confutes the thesis that science is rational in the way that most people think that it is rational, can be solved by assuming that science is rational, or by assuming that Hume was irrational (that is, by ignoring his argument). The problem of induction can be solved only by a non-authoritarian theory of rationality. It is shown also that because hypotheses cannot be distilled directly from experience, all knowledge is eventually dependent on blind conjecture, and therefore itself conjectural. In particular, the use of rules of inference, or of good or bad rules for generating conjectures, is conjectural. Part II of the paper expounds a form of Popper's critical rationalism that locates the rationality of science entirely in the deductive processes by which conjectures are criticized and improved. But extreme forms of deductivism are rejected. The paper concludes with a sharp dismissal of the view that work in artificial intelligence, including the JSM method cultivated extensively by Victor Finn, does anything to upset critical rationalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories and Images of Creation in Northern Europe in the Twelfth Century
    Art History ISSN 0141-6790 Vol. 22 No. 1 March 1999 pp. 3-55 In the Beginning: Theories and images of creation in Northern Europe in the twelfth century Conrad Rudolph 'Logic has made me hated by the world!' So Peter Abelard thought and wrote to his former lover, the brilliant Heloise, in probably his last letter to her before his death in 1142, after having been virtually driven from Paris by Bernard of Clairvaux, the austere Cistercian mystic and perhaps the most powerful ecclesiastical politician of Western Europe.1 Characteristically for Abelard in matters of self-conception, he was exaggerating. Logic had made him hated not by the world but by only a portion of it. While this was certainly an influential portion and one that had almost succeeded in destroying him, it could never do so entirely. In fact, logic had made Abelard 'the Socrates of the Gauls, the great Plato of the West, our Aristotle ... the prince of scholars'2- and this, this great fame and the almost unprecedented influence that accompanied it, was as much the problem as logic was. In a word, Abelard had been caught up in the politics of theology. The time was one of great theological inquiry, challenging, as it did, the very authority of divine revelation on the most fundamental level, and at a moment when both interest in secular learning and the number of students were dramatically increasing - all factors that can hardly be over-emphasized. But for certain elements within the Church, more still was at stake. And this was nothing less than a perceived assault on one of the basic underpinnings of the complex relationship between religion, theology, society and political power.
    [Show full text]