 Chapter 31 of History and Philosophy William of Shampo, Life William of Shampo was, like Saint Adam's Elm, an opponent of the nominalism of Rosalind. He was born at Shampo, a village near Milan, about the year 1070. At an early age he repaired Paris to study under the renowned Alsatian teacher Manigold of Lothumbach. Later on he studied dialectic at Rosalind's school in Compiègne and theology at the school of Lyon, over which the theologian Anselm, not Saint Anselm of Canterbury, at that time presided. In 1103 he was summoned to Paris, was made Archdeacon, and appointed to the Chair of Philosophy in the Cathedral School. In 1108 he retired to the monastery of St. Victor, where he continued his career as a teacher, and gave the initiative to the mystic movement, which is associated with that abbey. He was promoted in 1113 to the sea of Chalon-sur-Man. He died in 1121. William of Shampo enjoyed among his contemporaries a very high reputation for learning and sanctity. He was known as the Colomna Doctorum, according to Abelard. He was Ray at Pharma Praesipuus, and when he died it was said that the light of the Word of God was extinguished on earth. Sources. Of the philosophical writings of William of Shampo, we possess mainly some fragments, a portion of the work Dioregine animae, published by Martin, and 42 fragments discovered at Troy by Ravesil. Portions also of a Libescententiarum, and a Dialogues sur Altacatio Curius d'Am Cristiani et Judae. Our Chief Secretary's sources of information are Abelard, who constantly refers to his rival teacher, and John of Salisbury. Michaud's Guillaume de Shampo, Paris, 1867, is an excellent study of our philosopher and his times. Doctorines. Problem of universals. According to Abelard, William maintained that the universal is wholly and essentially present in each individual. Erat, otum ea sententia ut ea dem, esentia litter, remtotam simul singulus, suis inessa atsturrat individuus, quorum quidem nola eset in esentia diversitas, sed sola multitudine accidentium veriatas. Examples therefore exist in individual things. This is the thesis of realism, that by the word esentia litter, William meant convey a doctrine of exaggerated realism, is apparent from the objections, which Abelard urged against him. Among Abelard's objections we find the following. If the essence of humanity is wholly and essentially present in Socrates, it is not where Socrates is not, but it is also wholly and essentially present in Plato. Therefore Socrates must always be where Plato is. Unable to refute this and similar objections, William of Shampo, after his retirement to Saint Victor, formulated a new thesis, in which he maintained that the universal is in the individual, not in the entirety of its essence, but by reason of its particular or individual modifications. Sik otum istam suam korexit sententiam, says Abelard. Ut dey en cheps rem aya dem, non esentia litter, said individualit, decherit. Even if we substitute for the word individualit, the word indiferenta, and there seems to be better manuscript authority for indiferenta, we cannot arrive at a definite conclusion as to what was the precise meaning of the change which Abelard forced on his adversary. It is obvious, however, that the substitution of individualit or indiferenta for esentia litter was meant as a concession to the anti-realists. The corrected expression was intended to convey a doctrine of more temperate realism. The end of the controversy, if we are to accept Abelard's authority, was that William, after having modified his first thesis, was obliged to abandon the second thesis altogether. The truth, however, seems to be that, although Abelard carried off the honours of the debate, William continued to teach realism while he remained at St Victor. Psychological doctrines In the work D'Originae animae, William refutes the doctrine of the traditionists, according to whom the soul of the child is in some way derived from the parents, and defends the creationist doctrine, that the soul is created immediately by God. He teaches that the soul is a simple substance, and that it is not distinct from its faculties or their operations. He describes in the following terms the relation between body and soul. Quaiduo corpus skillicet et animae, ita quodamo du, sunt inserta ut et corpus por spiritum sensifica retur, ed est il os quinkue sensus habaret et animae naturum cor poris ita contrahet et indae sensifica rett et irasca ceraetur, vel contiupiscaret, vel issuriret. Historical position William O'Shampo represents an important phase in the development of the doctrine of universal concepts. His most noteworthy contribution to philosophy is, however, his doctrine of creationism. It will be remembered that St Augustine refused to decide the question of the origin of the soul. William is the first Christian philosopher in the West to maintain definitely, and unhesitatingly, the creation of the individual soul. Associated with William O'Shampo are the realists Otto of Tuenai, Adelaide of Bath, and Walter of Mortang. Otto of Tuenai, life, Otto, or Odon, of Tuenai, died 1113, was professor at Tuenai, abbot of the monastery of Saint Martin, in that city, and subsequently Bishop of Cambore. Such was his renown as a teacher that Hermann says, Sivveis omnes relectis alis orepibus soli felisifaii deditos crederes. After he had devoted much attention to the study of Plato, he chanced one day to read some of Saint Augustine's treatises against the Manichians, and henceforth he gave all his time and attention to the study of theology. Before he took up the study of theology, he composed several philosophical works. His principal theological treatise is entitled De Peccato originale. His works are published by Min, Patrologia Latina, volume 160. Doctrines. Otto was a Platonic realist. This appears from the work just mentioned, and also from certain verses which are written by contemporary, probably by a disciple of Otto, and attached to a manuscript copy of Bertheus's work, De Hypotheticus syllogismis. He applied exaggerated realism, one, to the doctrine of original sin, teaching that the whole human race is one substance, and that when our first parent sinned, the whole race was vitiated, because the humanity which existed then, as really as it exists now, was contaminated. Two, to the account of the origin of the soul, maintaining that the act of creation consists merely in the production of new properties, which adhere in a previously existing substance, and serve to distinguish one soul from another, there being no substantial difference between individual souls. Ildebert of Lavarde, a Platonist poet and mystic philosopher, belongs to the same school as Otto. Aurea had been obliged to reconsider his decision that Ildebert was the author of the Tractatus Theologicus, which according to some historians, was the model used by Peter the Lombard in composing his sentences. Adelaide of Barth, life. Adelaide of Barth, circa 1100, who, about the beginnings of the 12th century, studied at Thur and at Lael, was the first of the medieval teachers to seek enlightenment by travelling in Greece and Asia Minor. His principal works are Castiones Naturales, published in 1472, and a treatise De Eodam et Diverso, which has recently been published in Bytrage Zorgesh der Fil des Mittelalter. Doctrines. Adelaide is a Platonist. He teaches that ideas are innate, having been placed in the soul by the creator at the beginning of the world. Theosorum non semper. C'est comme nécessaire et expliqué. In the treatise De Eodam et Diverso, Adelaide solves the problem of universals by the doctrine of indifferentism, which closely resembles the second form of William of Shampo's realism. The indifferentists maintained that in every individual we may distinguish the determinations which belong to the individual, namely the differentiating mark, difference, and the generic or specific part of the individual, namely the common element indifference, which it shares with the others of the same genus or species. The latter alone is universal. Making a further distinction between essence and substance, the indifferentists granted that the essence includes the difference, and therefore they argued there is no universal essence. They contended, however, that substance does not include the difference, and therefore they inferred that substance is physically one and common to all individuals. Walter of Mortin was born about the beginning of the 12th century at Mortin in Flanders. After studying at Tournai he went to Paris, where from 1136 to 1144 he taught at the school of Santo Geno Viev. He died Bishop of Lyon in 1174. He composed a work entitled Tractatus De Sancta Trinitate and Six Opuscula. Five of the opuscula are published in d'Archer's Spici legium, Paris 1723, and the sixth in means patrilatina, volume 186, column 1052. Doctrines. Walter, like Adelaide, is a Platonist. In a letter to Abelard he expresses the belief that the body is an obstacle to the higher operations of the soul. He is best known, however, by his doctrine of non-difference or indifference, which is described by John of Salisbury, his disciple, in the following terms. De Nuo colligont universalia singularibus, quod ad essiantiam unieda, patientu itaque status, duce qualterae duc moritania, et platonum, in eo quod plato est individuum, in eo quod homo speciem, in eo quod animal genus, sed supol terinum, in eo quod substantiar genera lessimum. The doctrine of indiferentism is further described in a document number 17813 of the Bibliotec national, published by Elho in 1892, and attributed by him to Walter. The document defines difference and indifference, and proceeds, et attendae quod socrates et unum quod quae, individuum hominis, in eo quod unum quod quae, est animal racional mortal, sunt unum et idem. It is worthy of remark that in this document the status of which John of Salisbury speaks are called atenciones. They suggest at once the formalatates of Don Scotus. The question of the interpretation of the passage just quoted is to be answered according to the meaning of the phrase unum et idem. Does it mean mere logical unity, or does it mean that there is in the world a reality, a one, which is animal racionale motale. If the unity is merely logical, the work of the mind, as the work atencion seems to imply, we have here the nearest approach of realism to the moderate realism of St Thomas. If on the contrary the unity is real and objective, we have instead a form of platonic realism. We must decide in favour of the latter interpretation, for it is on the supposition of the latter is the true interpretation, and on that supposition alone, that we can understand the objections which Abelard and others urged against the doctrine of indiferentism. Historical position. The school of Touni and the advocates of indiferentism represent an attempt at founding a realistic doctrine of universals on an eclectic union of platonic and Aristotelian principles. Before we take up the history of the more thoroughgoing Platonism of the school of Shat, it is necessary to study the philosophy of Abelard, the opponent of realism, and the chief advocate of what was then understood to be the Aristotelian doctrine of concepts. End of Chapter 31. Chapter 32 of History of Philosophy. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. History of Philosophy by William Turner. Chapter 32. Scholastic Philosophy, Abelard. Life. The most conspicuous figure in the great dialectical contest, which occupied so large a share of the attention of philosophers during the 12th century, is Peter Abelard, who was born at Palais near Nantes in Brittany in the year 1079. After having studied under Rosalind, he went to Paris, where he attended the lectures of William of Champagne. Being, as Saint Bernard says, Virpellator ad adolescentia, he quarrelled with his master, and at the age of 22 set up a rival school, teaching first at Melon and afterwards at Corbeil. When William retired to the monastery of Saint Victor 1108, Abelard returned to Paris, where he enjoyed the most extraordinary success as a lecturer on dialectic. He first taught at St. Genevieve, and later about 1113, at the Cathedral School of Notre-Dame. In his autobiography, which he so appropriately styles, Historia Calamitatum, he tells of his love for hallowees, of the vengeance of the canon Falbert, of the secret marriage, of his entry into the Benedictine Order at the Abbey of Saint Denis, of the retirement of hallowees to the convent of Argentoil, and of the foundation of the oratory called the Paraclete. He made no secret of the pride and vanity, to which he attributed his downfall and the sufferings of his later life. About the time he had attained the greatest eminence as a teacher of dialectic, Abelard presented himself at the School of the Venerable Anselm of Laon, for the purpose of studying theology. At Laon, it was the same story of insubordination as at Paris. Abelard was uneasy until he had disconfited the Doctor Doctorum Anselm, as completely as he had overthrown the Columna Doctorum William of Shampo. After the downfall of Abelard, the disciples of Anselm had their day of revenge. Summon before the Council of Sosons, 1121. Abelard was obliged to recite the Athanasian Creed and to burn his book on the Trinity, footnote. The work condemned and burned on this occasion was the Tractatus de Unitata et Trinitata de Vina. This treatise was discovered and edited in 1891 by Dr. Stoltz of Würzburg. The Theologia Cristiana, as we now possess it, is a revised form of the original Tractatus, with some significant omissions and some amplifications by way of explanation and apology. After this, he retired to a desert region near Troy's. Thence he went to the monastery of St. Gildas the Rise in Brittany. The monks, however, drove him from the Abbey, and after some years spent in the neighborhood of Nantes, he resumed his lectures at Paris. Pupils now began to flock in such numbers to his school that Anselm's disciples became alarmed once more, and the intervention of St. Bernard of Glervaux was invoked. Abelard treated Bernard and his monks with characteristic disdain. St. Bernard wrote to Rome and sent a circular letter to the bishops of France. The result was that at Abelard's own request, so at least it seems, a council was assembled at Sts. 1140. Abelard, however, refused to defend himself. Nevertheless, he was condemned, but because he appealed to Rome, he was allowed to accept the hospitality of the Venerable Peter of Cluny, at whose monastery he spent the last two years of his life in peace. He died in 1142 at Chalons-sur-San, four leagues distant from Cluny, and was buried at the Paraclete. Character. Abelard is a type of the fighting die-election of the 12th century, Vir Bellator. He was by disposition a rationalist, intolerant of restraint, totally devoid of respect for authority, and so fond of displaying his extraordinary talents, that he appears to have preferred victory to truth. Sources. In addition to the Historia Calamitatum, we possess the following works of Abelard. Magni. Patrilat. Volume 178. Epistolia. Expositio fidei. Introductio ad teologium, teologia cristiana, etica, or schitotepsom. Sic et non. Dialogus interfilosofum eudeum et cristiano. To these are to be added the Summa Dialectia, and perhaps also the fragment de generibus et spesibus, published by Cacen, monographs Remusat Abelard, Paris 1845, Deutsch Peter Abelard, Leipzig 1883. Doctrines. Method. Abelard is primarily a die-election. Dialectic he defines as the art of discerning the true from the false. It implies the task of discerning or distinguishing thoughts, and the subsidiary task of distinguishing words. In the Sic et non, Abelard formulates the principal thesis of theology and presents the opinions of the fathers pro and contra. This idea of philosophic method was further developed by Alexander of Hales, and became the recognized method of the schoolmen of the 13th century and of their successors. Doctrine of Universals. There is nothing more certain than that Abelard was equally opposed to the nominalism of Rosselline and to the realism of William of Champagne. It is not, however, so easy to determine what was Abelard's own answer to the questions proposed by Porphyry. John of Salisbury, a disciple of Abelard, after mentioning the opinion of Rosselline, speaks of Abelard's doctrine in the following terms. Alius cermones intu etur ed at il los de torquet quid quib alicubi de universalibus meminitscriptum. In Hak-autem opinione de prehensus est peripateticus palatinus Abelardus nostre. Distinguishing between vox and cermel, the word as used in a sentence, Abelard would maintain est cermopredicabilis. Apparently, therefore, Abelard was a modified nominalist. He is generally classed with the contextualists, and John of Salisbury's statement that Abelard and his followers, rem de re predicari monstrum docunt, seems definitely to exclude them from the ranks of the realists. From the texts furnished by Remusat and Cuisine, it is clear that the traditional opinion which regarded Abelard as the founder of conceptualism must be abandoned. Abelard nowhere teaches that the universal existing in the mind has no objective value. On the contrary, while he does not succeed in discovering an etern concise formula in which to express his doctrine of realism, he maintains principles which justify us, in classing him, not only among the anti-realists, who opposed exaggerated realism, the antiqua doctrina, but even among the moderate realists, although his moderate realism is naturally undeveloped, among the principles to which we refer are the following. One, the universal has no existence apart from the individual. Cum neg ipsa e species hapehad nisti per individua subsistere. Two, the universal is not a mere word. The word becomes universal by means of the mode of predication which it assumes on being made part of a sentence. It is therefore presumably the mind which confers universality on account of the essential similarity of different individuals. The sword is not, however, explicitly enunciated by Abelard. It is merely contained in his distinction of vox and sermo. The difference of genera and species is founded on a difference of things. Diversitas substanti e diversitatem generum et specierum facet. Relation of philosophy to theology. In the introductio a teologia, Abelard lays down certain principles which seem to remove all distinction between philosophy and theology by reducing the latter to the level of the form. Face must be based on reason. Si enem, cum perso adetur aliud ut credetur, nil estratione discutiendum, utrum schiliket credi oparteat vel non, Agen he says, A principle which, it is said, offended Saint Bernard's sense of orthodoxy and constituted the real reason of Abelard's second condemnation. The credo ut entelegam and the entelego ut credem are equally essential to the scholastic doctrine of the relation between philosophy and theology. By neglecting the former altogether and by insisting on the latter exclusively, Abelard unduly emphasizes the rationalistic element in scholasticism. Like Erigina, he identifies philosophy with theology. But while Erigina understood the identity in one sense, Abelard understands it in another. Erigina's point of view was that of a mystic. Abelard's point of view is that of a rationalist. Erigina raised philosophy to identification with theology, because God, the object of theology, is the only reality and is therefore the object of philosophy. Abelard lowers theology to identification with philosophy, because the principle that in order to believe, we must first understand is by him extended to mean that reason can comprehend even the mysteries of faith. It was in this spirit of rationalism that Abelard, according to Otto Freising, compared the holy trinity to a syllogism. In a similar spirit, he affirmed, the moral precepts of the Gospel, to be merely a reformation of the natural law observed by pagan philosophers, and said and wrote many things which, though they were not heretical, gave offence by reason of their total disregard for authority. We are not here concerned with the theological doctrines for which Abelard was twice condemned. It is sufficient to note that the sum of the accusations brought forward by Saint Bernard was that Abelard regarded the trinity as a mere trinity of names or at most of attributes. Origin of the Universe Abelard's account of the origin of things is characterized by necessitarianism and optimism. Whatever God made, he made necessarily. For whatever he made is good, and to say he could abstain from doing what is good is to accuse him of jealousy or of downright malice. God therefore made everything that he could make. And the world is the best possible world, for the evil which exists is such as God could not prevent. In a certain sense, however, God created freely, because in the act of creation, he was constrained by no external agent, but only by his own true nature. Psychological doctrines The soul, although in itself simple and spiritual, yet in as much as it is included in the body, is corporeal. For this reason, Abelard says that all creatures are corporeal, the angels, because they are circumscribed by place, and the human soul because it is included in the body. The soul is the principle of life. It makes the body to be what it is. Abelard speaks of free judgment, liberum arbitrium, rather than a free will. Judgment is free, because there is no compulsion, and freedom consists in the power to act or abstain from acting. Ethical doctrines In his ethical treatise, Abelard distinguishes between vitium, pecatum, and mala actrio. Vitium is the inclination to sin. It quo ad pecatum proni effe kimur, choc est ad consenti endum, ei quod non convenit. Pecatum is not mere mala voluntus, it is contemptuous day, sieve consensus in ei quod credimus proptar deum dimitendum. Mala actio is the external act, the opus pecati, which is not properly speaking, that is formally, a sin at all, but merely the matter of sin. From this distinction it follows, that all external actions are in themselves morally indifferent. It is the intention that causes them to be good or evil. Opera omnia inse indiferentia, negnisi pro intentione, agentis bona, val mala, di kendo sunt. God looks not to the deed, but to the intention, and he punisheth the intention rather than the act. Non enim deus ex damno, sed ex contemptu offendi potest. Finally, where ignorance blinds or force coerces there is no sin, sin being essentially something contrary to conscience. Non est pecatum, nisi contra consentium. Conscience must, therefore, be our guide, since it corresponds to the external norms of conduct. Historical position Abelard was acknowledged to be the foremost dialection of an age in which dialectic was cultivated as it never has been cultivated since. Huik soli says an epitaph written by contemporary, patuid skibile kwid kwid eret. He appeared in the 12th century like a brilliant comet, which dazzled for a moment, but failed to shed permanent light. His was a highly gifted mind, but it was a mind whose prominent quality was brilliancy rather than proprandity. He discussed many questions, but exhausted none. His career, however, brought out the many sidedness of the scholastic movement by exhibiting in exaggerated form the rationalistic element of scholasticism. Abelard was condemned, not because he advocated the rights of reason, nor because he applied dialectic to the discussion of the trinity. St. Augustine had done this without incurring reproach, but because of the extravagant claims which he urged on behalf of reason, and because of the heresy into which he fell in his discussion of the Trinitarian's mystery. Chapter 33 of History of Philosophy This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. History of Philosophy by William Turner Chapter 33 Scholastic Philosophy is a School of Charters During the 12th century, charters became the scene of a platonic reaction against the anti-realism represented by Rosalind and Abelard. The founders of the School of Charters were the brothers Bernard and Theodoric of Charters, with whom were associated William of Conches and Gilbert de la Porte. Bernard of Charters Life Bernard of Charters taught at Charters during the early part of the 12th century. Among his disciples were William of Conches and Gilbert de la Porte. In 1119 he was made Chancellor of the Church of Charters. He died about the year 1125. Sources According to John of Salisbury Bernard composed a prose treatise, The Expositione por Firi, a metrical treatise on the same subject, a moral poem on education, and probably a fourth work in which he sought to reconcile Plato with Aristotle. Fragments of these treatises are to be found in the Meta-logicus 4.35 and the Polycreticus 7.13 Horro falls into the common error of compounding Bernard of Charters with Bernard of Tours and assigns to the former works which are to be ascribed to the letter. Doctrines Bernard in common with others of his school devoted more attention to the study of the T-mails and of the works of the new Platonists than to the study of Aristotle's Diacletical Treatises and of the Commentaries of Boethus. Consequently he not only discussed the problem of universals, distinguishing between the abstract, the process and the concrete, albedo, albed and album, but also occupied himself with problems of metaphysics and cosmology. Metaphysics There are three categories of reality. God, Matter and Idea God is supreme reality. Matter was brought out of nothingness by God's creative act and is the element which in union with ideas constitutes a world of sensible things. Ideas are the prototypes by means of which the world was, from all eternity present to the divine mind. They constitute the world of providence. In qua omnia semel et simul fecet deus and are eternal, but not co-eternal with God. According to John of Salisbury, Bernard also taught that there exist native forms, copies of the ideas created with matter, which are alone, united with matter. It is difficult, however, to determine what was Bernard's doctrine on this point. It is sufficient to note that he reproduced in his metaphysical doctrines many of the characteristic traits of Platonism and Neoplatonism, the intellect as the habitat of ideas, the world's soul, eternal matter, matter of the source of imperfection, etc. Cosmology Matter, although caused by God, existed from all eternity. In the beginning, before its union with the ideas, it was in a chaotic condition. It was by means of the native forms which penetrate matter, that distinction, order, regularity and number were introduced into the universe. Theodoric of Charters Life Theodoric of Charters was Magister Scolier at Charters about the year 1121. It is said that he taught at Paris in the year 1140. It was probably at Paris that he taught rhetoric to John of Salisbury. In 1141, we find Theodoric teaching once more at Charters. Like Bernard, he devoted more attention to the study of the Platonists than to that of the Aristotelians. The most probable date of his death is 1150. Sources Besides the work The Sex Deerum of Peribus, of which a mutilated manuscript copy has come down to us, Theodoric wrote a commentary on the Inventione Rhetorica and Herennium. This commentary, which was first published in 1884, is an indication of the humanistic tendency of the School of Charters. Doctrines Theodoric was an enthusiastic student of the classics, Artium Studiossismus Investigator, as John of Salisbury says. We know that he possessed a Latin translation of the Planet Sphere of Ptolemy, which he obtained from the Arabian schools of Toulouse. It was, however, to the Platonic metaphysics and cosmology that he devoted his attention as a philosopher, taking his stand with the other Chartrians on the side of the Platonic Realists. Metaphysics Going further in his advocacy of neo-Platonic principles than Bernard had gone, identifying unity with divinity and divinity with reality, Theodoric maintained the principles, Divinity's singleist rebus forma essendi est, and omnekvod est ideo est quiya unum est. Now, if divinity is synonymous with reality and is the intrinsic essential principle of all things, Theodoric's system is fully developed pantheism. Quite recently, however, Bayoumkar has shown that here, as in the case of Eckhart and other medieval mystics, we must distinguish between the individual essence, which is proper to each created being, and the formal essence, the divine in each creature, which is God. Technically, therefore, Theodoric must be considered innocent of the charge of teaching explicit pantheism. Cosmology In the work The Sex Theorem of Peribus, Theodoric set himself the task of showing that the neo-Platonic account of the origin of the universe agrees with the mosaic account of the creation. Moses, he declared, was prudentissimus filosoforum. William of Conchy's Life William of Conchy, a pupil of Bernard of Charters, after having taught a system of Platonic realism in the schools at Paris about 1122, was warned by William of Saint Theory that his theological doctrines, and in particular his apparent identification of the Holy Ghost, with the world's soul, would lead to heresy. Thereupon he abandoned the study of theology, and seeking the protection of Geoffrey the Fair, Count of Anjou, devoted himself to the study of nature. William is the first of the medieval philosophers to show acquaintance with the physical science of the Arabians, which through the translations made by Constantine the African began to be known in Europe about the middle of the 12th century. Sources No question of medieval bibliography is more hopelessly intricate than that of the authorship of the works attributed to William of Conchy's. The most recent investigations and discussions seem to warrant the following list. Glosses on the T-Mouse, a commentary on both use the Consolazione Philosopicae, a treatise the Philosophia, of which the Dragmaticon, probably Dramaticon, is a corrected addition cast in dialogue form, and the Magna di Naturis Philosophia. It is almost certain, however, that the last mentioned work, of which no copy is extant, belongs to a later date and was written by William of Overgy. The Dragmaticon, in its earliest form, is published by Migny, under the title Elementorum Philosophie Libri Quator. Doctrines After his retirement from the field of theological and metaphysical controversy, in which he had sustained the cause of the Platonists, who were aging closer and closer to the borderline of Pantheism, William, inspired by the labours of the Arabian physicists, took up the study of psychology and cosmology. Psychology In his study of the processes of knowledge, William distinguishes between sensations, imagination and reason. Rejecting the theory of forms mediating between object and subject, he devotes his attention to what we should call the physiological aspect of the problems of psychology. There are, he says, three departments in the brain. In the front part of the brain is the region of vision, fantastica. In the middle is the region of thought, logistica. And in the rear portion is the region of memory, memorialis. In his commentary on the Timaeus, however, he speaks as a Platonist. Above all, the faculties of the soul, he says, is intelligence, by which alone we are unable to perceive the incorporeal cosmology. In his account of the universe and the elements which compose it, our philosopher is an atomist. Sunt, ighitur, in ono quoque corpore minima quae, simul giungta ono magnum constitunt. And when the interlocutor objects that this is the opinion of Epicurus, William answers that there is no sect that has not some admixture of truth. Gilbert de L'Apore, life Gilbert was born at Poitiers in 1076. He was successively the pupil of Bernard of Charters and of Anselm of Leon. After teaching for about 20 years at Charters, where he held the office of counselor, he went to Paris and there lectured on dialectic and theology. Later on, he returned to Poitiers, of which city he was made bishop in 1142. On account of his theological doctrines concerning the Trinity and the Incarnation, he was suspected of heresy by Saint Bernard and his followers. The Council of Paris, which in 1147 was summoned to consider his doctrines, and which was presided over by Eugenius III, was unable to arrive at the decision. It reassembled at Reims in the following year. According to the account given by John of Salisbury, who was present, and by Otto of Friesing, also a contemporary. It was not the doctrine of Gilbert, but the influence of Saint Bernard that was on trial. The outcome seems to have been that the Council decided nothing. Gilbert returned to his sea and was not further molested. He died in 1154. Sources Gilbert composed a work entitled The Sexprincky Peace, a treatise on the last six of the Aristotelian categories. This book was made The Basis of Commentaries by Albert the Great. It was frequently referred to by Saint Thomas, and it was held in greatest esteem as a textbook on logic until the close of the Middle Ages. Gilbert wrote also a commentary on the treatise The Trinitate, which he was supposed to have been written by Boethius. Mention is also made of a work, The Doubus Naturis at Una Persona Christi. This, however, is apparently the fourth book of the Psoido-Boeithian Compilation. The commentary on the Psoido-Boeithian treatise is published by Miny, part a lot, volume 64, and the treatise The Sexprincky Peace, a bit, volume 188. Doctrines Notwithstanding the renown which Gilbert attained as an exponent of Aristotelian dialectic, his philosophy, as far as we know it, breathes the spirit of Plato and betrays the Platonizing influence of the School of Charters. Doctrine of Universals In his Doctrine of Universals, Gilbert, according to John of Salisbury, attributed universality to the Forma Native existing in things. Est autum Forma Nativa, originalis exemplum, et quae non in mente dei consistit, sedrebus creatis inhairet, hec greco eloquio dicitur eidos. Nativia in the context evidently means new, born, created. But what are these created forms inherent in created things? It is usual to represent them as full-fledged universals, possessing their universality, antecedently, to the act of the human mind. And if this interpretation be correct, Gilbert should be reckoned among the ultra-realists. It is evident, however, from the commentaries on the four books on the Trinity, that Gilbert attached quite a different meaning to the Forma Nativa. He says, for example, non solum enim rationallium, sed etiam non rationallium, substantiarum, individuarum universalia quae damsont, quae ad ipsis, individus humana ratio, quad am modo abstractit, ut earum naturam perspichere posit. It is therefore the mind that abstracts the universal and makes it to be universal, a formula which at once separates Gilbert from the ranks of the ultra-realists. Elsewhere, he bases the unity of the universal on the similarity of essences, another formula which is opposed to ultra-realism. There must, however, be some reason why so many historians have counted Gilbert among the ultra-realists, and the explanation may possibly be found in the fact that his general metaphysical doctrines are platonic. Metaphysical doctrines. Thus, when Gilbert distinguishes between the essential reality, which he calls the subsistence, it quo est, and the individual determination, which he calls the substance, it quoed est, an Aristotelian might admit the distinction. Gilbert, however, goes so far as to maintain that unity, for example, is a subsistence distinct from that which is one. The platonic tendency is also apparent in the doctrine of native forms, although Gilbert is careful to avoid the neo-platonic doctrine, that the forms are in some sense to be identified with the mind of God. Non-invented they consisted. Historical position of the School of Charters. The group of philosophers included under the title of this chapter represents an eclectic tendency, that is, an attempt at uniting Platonism with Aristotelianism. To this eclectic tendency is joined a broader spirit of humanism, and at least in the case of William of Conches, a spirit of scientific inquiry. The spirit of eclecticism, and also the humanistic and scientific spirit, are still more marked in the next group of philosophers. End of chapter 33. Chapter 34 of History of Philosophy. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. History of Philosophy by William Turner. Scholastic Philosophy. Chapters 34 and 35. The Eclectics and the Mystic School. Chapter 34 Eclectics. Although John of Salisbury is perhaps the only professedly eclectic philosopher of this period, the eclectic tendency is apparent in Peter the Lombard, Alanus of Lill, Gerard of Cremona, and others. John of Salisbury, Life. John of Salisbury, after completing his preliminary studies in England, went to Paris, about 1136, where he had, for teachers, many of the most renowned masters of the schools, Abelard, William of Conchies, Theodoric of Charters, Walter of Mortain, and Gilbert de la Paurée. He lived on terms of friendship with Saint Thomas Beckett, Henry II of England, and Pope Adrien IV. In 1176 he became Bishop of Charters, and died there in 1182. Sources. In addition to his letters, which shed so much light on the history of his times, John of Salisbury wrote a large number of philosophical works, of which the most important are the Polycraticus and the Metallogicus. These are published by Minny, Patrlat, volume 199. Doctrines. John contributed very little to the philosophical discussions, which occupied to such an extent the minds of his contemporaries. He was a historian, a humanist, and a critic, rather than a die-election. Indirectly, however, he rendered valuable service to the cause of philosophy, by his advocacy of culture, and by his denunciations of obscurantism, which was represented in those days by the cornificians, pseudonym, a sect which flourished about the middle of the 12th century. But while advocating culture and studying the opinions of his contemporaries, he recognized the danger of dialectic run riot, and strove in his eclectic synthesis to give philosophy a more practical turn. He devoted some attention to the study of psychology, being influenced, apparently, by the physiological method of William of Conches. It must not be forgotten that John of Salisbury is the first medieval historian of philosophy. To him, we owe much of what is known about the great controversy of his century, concerning the problem of universals. Peter the Lombard. Life. Peter the Lombard, surnamed Magister Sententiarum, was born at Novara in Lombardy, about the beginning of the 12th century. He studied first at Bologna and afterwards at Paris. At Paris he taught a theology for many years, and was promoted to the bishopric of that city. He died about the year 1160. Sources. Peter's Four Book of Sentences is a collection of the opinions of the fathers on question of Catholic dogma. It is modeled apparently on previous compilations. It became, and for several centuries remained, the textbook of the schools, and was made the subject of commentaries innumerable. Around the exposition and defense of dogma contained in these commentaries, there grew up problems of metaphysics and psychology, so that in the 13th century, the books of sentences was the core of scholastic literature. The work is published by Miny Patrilat, volume 192. Doctrines. Peter the Lombard was primarily a theologian. In matters of philosophical discussion, he strode to maintain a neutral attitude. His orthodoxy was attacked, though unsuccessfully, by Walter of St. Victor, representative of the mystic school. Another writer of sentences was Cardinal Robert Pallain, or Poulain. He was a distinguished teacher, and was connected both with the theological schools of Paris, and with those of Oxford. The date of his death is 1154. His work is entitled, Cententiarum Libri Octo. Alainus of Lille, up in Sulis. Life. Alainus was born about 1128 at Lille in Flanders. It is probable that towards the middle of the 12th century, he taught at Paris. He died at Citeau in 1202 or 1203. Sources. The most important of Alainus' works are The Ars Catolica Fidei, Tractatus Contra Hereticos, Theologica Eregulae, The Plankto Naturae, and Anticlodianus. These are published by Minyi, Patelat, volume 210. The edition, however, is uncritical, and includes several treatises, the authorship of which is doubtful. The classic work on Alainus is Baumgartner's The Philosophy des Alainus de Insulis. Munster, 1896. Doctrines. It is incorrect to represent Alainus as a mystic. He exhibits it is true some of the characteristics of the mystic style, poetic imagery, allegorical addiction, etc. Nevertheless, he attaches independent value to speculative thought, and while he holds, that reason cannot comprehend the mysteries of faith. He maintains that authority needs the aid of reason. Instead, however, of presenting an original synthesis of philosophical doctrine, he merely collects and tries to reconcile the doctrines of his contemporaries. It is possible that this eclectic spirit of his teaching was the occasion of the surname Dr. Universalis, by which he was known. This eclectism appears in his psychology, which is a somewhat bewildering syncretism of Pythagorean, Augustinian, and Aristotelian doctrines. Having defined matter as chaotic space, and form as the sum of properties, he cannot admit the Aristotelian doctrine of the union of soul and body. The soul and the body are independent substances, united by means of a spiritus fisicus. The relations of body and soul are regulated by number. In his cosmology, which is dominated by the idea of number as constitutive of order, Alainus maintained that the intermediate between God and creatures is a kind of world soul, the servant of God, dei auctoris vicaria. Historical position Alainus of Lil, Peter of the Lombard, and the other writers of this group exhibit a tendency to escape from the dialectical discussions of the schools by taking refuge, either in the eclectic position, that all systems are partially true, or in the mystic position, that all purely rational systems are essentially inadequate. The tendency towards mysticism appears more plainly in the writings of the philosophers belonging to the next group. Chapter 35 The Mystic School Mysticism may mean a tendency of the mind towards the supernatural, or it may mean a science growing out of such a tendency, a body of doctrine having for its object to determine the mode or manner in which the soul of man is directly united with God in contemplation and love. Mysticism as a tendency was a characteristic of neo-Platonism. It reappeared in the philosophy of the Gnostics and in that of Eregina. In fact, wherever philosophy tended towards Penteism, it tended towards mysticism. Thus we find the mystic spirit in the Penteistic systems with which the history of the philosophy of the 12th century closes. Mysticism as a science does not appear in systemized form until the first part of the 12th century, although the principles of Orthodox mysticism are contained in the ascetic and exegetical treatises of the fathers. When, as we have seen, William of Champault left Paris 1108, he retired to the Abbey of St. Victor, and there continued to teach. It was out of this teaching that the mystic movement grew, which during the remainder of the century flourished at that abbey, and with which are associated the Victorines, Hugh, Walter and Richard. The condemnation of Abelard and the suspicion of heterodoxy incurred by Gilbert strengthened the cause of the mystics, who from the outset were opposed to dialectic. St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Dr. Merle Flues, 1091 to 1153 Although he belonged to no school of philosophy, lent all the weight of his authority to the cause of mysticism. He was himself an exponent of the principles of mystic theology, teaching that profane science is not to be studied, except in so far as it may contribute to the cultivation of the spiritual life. The end and aim of life should be to attain by means of the twelve stages, or the grace of humility, a contemplative love of God. Hugh of St. Victor was born at Hardingham in Saxony. From 1125 until his death in 1141, he taught at the Abbey of St. Victor. He is regarded as the founder of the Victorine school. Sources The mystical works of Hugh include The Arcanoe Morale, The Arcanoe Mystica, The Varnitate Mundi, The Arch animae, The Amore Sponsor at Sponsome. These are published by Migny, Potter Lott, volumes 175 to 178. A special work dealing with the philosophy of the Victorines is Mignon's Originals de la Scholastica, etc. Paris, 1895. Doctrines Hugh taught that the contemplation of invisible essences and causes is the true complement of philosophy. Reason cannot penetrate to the truth of the natural order unless aided by God. Ratio per se non sufficit, nisi adeo a giura fuerit. All knowledge is but the preliminary to the mystic life which leads to God. In this mystic life Hugh must distinguish the preparative stage in which the soul engages in soliloquy, etc. thought, cogitatio, by which the soul seeks God in the material world, meditation, meditatio, by which the soul seeks God in the interior of the soul itself, and contemplation, contemplatio, by which the soul is united immediately with God in supernatural intuition. Richard of St. Victor, who succeeded Hugh as prior of St. Victor, taught from 1162 to 1173. Under his influence the mystic movement took up a position of more determined hostility to secular learning. The knowledge, Richard declared, of which profane philosophy boasts, is nothing but error and vanity. He observes with pleasure. It was, however, Walter of St. Victor, successor of Richard, who carried the mystic disapproval of secular learning to the extent of characterizing dialectic as the devil's art. He wrote a work entitled In Quator Labyrinthus Francais, in which Abelard, Peter of Lombardy, Peter of Poitiers, and Gilbert de la Poirée, the Four Labyrinths, were denounced as heretics, because they had treated with scholastic levity the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation. To the same school belonged Archard and Gottfrey of St. Victor. Historical position The mystic school is justly considered to be a reaction against the rationalism of Beringar, Rosalind and Abelard. The Victorians were at first willing to assign to human reason its legitimate scope in philosophy and theology. Later, however, they made common cause with the cornificens, and opposed all profane learning, thus running counter to the scholastic movement. Among those whom they condemned for using dialectical reasoning was Peter of Lombardy, the intellectual precursor of the greatest of the schoolmen of the golden age of scholasticism. Mysticism has, nevertheless, a recognized place in the history of the scholastic movement. It represents an important phase of the neo-Latin civilization of which scholasticism is a product. To the credo ot intelligam and the intelligo ot credam, the mystics added a third principle, amo ot intelligam, a principle which should not be neglected in a complete synthesis of the spiritual and emotional elements of human life, especially if human life be viewed, as it was viewed in the Middle Ages, in relation to the other world as well as to this. Mysticism was necessarily imaginative rather than rational. The neo-Platonic concept of the world harmonized the elements of mysticism better than the Aristotelian concept could have done. It is these elements, imaginativeness and neo-Platonism, that determined the tendency of mysticism towards Pantheism. 36. The Pantheistic School The Pantheism which appeared in the schools towards the end of the 12th century was the outcome of many influences, of which the most important were the realistic Platonism of the School of Shatr, the natural drift of mysticism towards Pantheism, the growing influence of Arabian speculation, and the revival of the study of originals de divisione nature. Pernarov Tur, Pernardo Silvestris, who lived during the second half of the 12th century, composed a work de Mundi Universitate, which he dedicated to Theodoric of Shatr, thus indicating the affiliation of the first form of Pantheism which appeared in the 12th century to the School of Shatr. The work is an attempt at reducing a cosmic system from a monad by means of the doctrine of emanation. In method and manner, it recalls the treatises of the neo-Pythagoreans of Alexandria. 37. Amorie of Ben, Life Amorie, or Amalric of Ben, or of Shatr, taught theology and dialectic at Paris during the second half of the 12th century. After his condemnation in 1204, he was obliged to retire from Paris. His books were destroyed, and the date of his death is unknown. The birthplace of Amorie, which is near Shatr, suggests the early influence of the members of the School of Shatr, and it is now almost universally conceded that during the last decades of the 12th century, the works of Origina were so widely known that it is natural to suppose that Amorie was acquainted with Origina's doctrines. Sources In the absence of primary sources, it is necessary to have recourse to secondary authorities. Chief among these is Gershon, 1363-1429. Daterines Stöckl, relying on Gershon's account, attributes to Amorie the following doctrines. 1. Identity of Creature and Creator 2. Substantial Unity of All Things 3. Realism based on Identity of Specific Nature 4. Alterius Nature is not Abraham and Alterius Isaac, but Unius and Eustem. This account, given by Gershon, is confirmed by the testimony of the Council of Paris, 1210, at which Amorie was condemned, and by the work Contra Amaurianus, written about 1208 against the followers of Amorie, who seem to have been numerous at that time. Associated with Amorie is Joachim de Flores, died 1202, who is referred to by St. Thomas and Albertus Magnus, as maintaining Essence Genuit Essenzium. Council Tenefle, Archive 150FF. David of Dina Life David of Dina seems to have evolved his doctrine of Pantheism, independently of the influence of Amorie and of the School of Schachter. He drew largely from Arabian sources. Tenefle publishes a text in which Albertus Magnus refers to a certain Alexander as the man from whom David derived his heresy. It is more probable that it was Dominicus Gundissalvi, who made David conversant with the literature of Arabian Pantheism. It is certain at all events that David studied the philosophy of Irigena. Little is known of the life of David of Dina. It is uncertain whether he was born at Dina in Brittany or at Dina in Belgium. Sources David wrote a work de Tomes et de Divisionibus and a collection entitled Quaternulli, Little Notebooks. In the Council held in Paris in 1210, at which the doctrines of David were condemned together with those of Amorie, both the above mentioned works were prescribed. Denefle publishes a portion of one of the statutes referring to the Quaternulli. Our secondary sources are Albertus Magnus, who was almost a contemporary of David and Saint Thomas. Doctrines According to Saint Thomas, David identified God with primal matter. Tertius, ever, This is perhaps the only instance in which the angelic doctor so severely characterizes an opponent or an opponent's opinion. The explanation of the unusual severity lies perhaps in the fact that the doctrine in question, a tenet common to the pantheists of the east, was the fundamental principle of the materialistic pantheism which was so formidable a foe of Christian theism in Saint Thomas' day. Elsewhere Saint Thomas tells us that according to David, there are three categories of being, eternal separate substances, souls, and bodies, and that these three are essentially one. Albertus Magnus gives a similar account of David's doctrines. Historical position From what we know of the doctrines of the pantheists of the 12th century and of the influences then at work on the study of philosophy, it is evident that the pantheism of David and Amory was regarded as the logical consequence of the study of the Aristotelian treatises on physics and metaphysics, which were introduced about this time in translations from the Arabic. This association of Aristotle with pantheism explains the action of the ecclesiastical authorities who, at the Council of Paris, 1210, and on several subsequent occasions, condemned Aristotle or ordered his work to be corrected. The 13th century discovered in Aristotle the champion of theism instead of the advocate of pantheism. Before however we enter upon the study of the philosophy of the 13th century, it will be necessary to give an outline of the development of thought among the Byzantines, Arabians, and Jews, for from them was derived the distorted Aristotelian tradition, which was at first regarded as a part of Aristotle's teaching and which led to his condemnation by the ecclesiastical tribunals. Retrospect The second period of the history of scholastic philosophy is virtually comprised within the 12th century. It was a period of growth, but it was also a period of struggle. The 12th century witnessed what may be called the storm and stress of scholasticism. For in that century were brought to bear on the scholastic movement all the anti-scholastic forces which the old civilization had tended down or the new civilization had developed. On the one hand, the rationalist brought discredit on philosophy as well as on theology. On the other hand, the over-enthusiastic advocate of mysticism and the over-timorous defender of orthodoxy found in the heresies of Roslin and Abelard a pretext for carrying their suspicion of the delectations to the point of active hostility. The pantheism, which could be so easily traced to the influence of the school of Chartres, was cited as a terrible example of the effect of profane learning. The 12th century, however, was an age in which the genuine representatives of the scholastic movement knew how to defend themselves. They were strong with the vigor of youth and, believing in the justice of their cause, they successfully repelled every attack, so that out of the struggles which the 12th century witnessed, there came forth a victorious scholasticism prepared for the great constructive task to be accomplished in the following century. The results achieved by scholasticism in the second period of its history include 1. The success of the anti-realists 2. The recognition of the scholastic method as a legitimate method in philosophy and theology 3. The establishment of a broader spirit of culture of a quote-unquote humanism which admitted that the neo-Latin civilization had much to learn from the civilizations of Greece and of the Orient. These results will appear in the writings of the first schoolmen of the third period. Byzantine Arabian and Jewish philosophy Hellenistic philosophy banished from Athens by Justinian 529 and driven from Alexandria by the Arabs 640 was perpetuated at Constantinople by an irregular and intermittent tradition which after the great schism 858 that separated the east from the west took the form of commentary on an exposition of the works of Plato and Aristotle. Michael Psellus the Elder and Photeus are the chief representatives of this tradition in the 9th century. Arathas, Niquetas the Pufflegonian and Pseudas represented in the 10th century. Michael Psellus the Younger is the sole representative of Byzantine learning in the 11th century. Johannes Italus, Anna Camnina, daughter of the Emperor Alexis and Michael Ephesios brought Byzantine learning to its highest degree of development in the 12th century. Finally Nikiforos Blemidis and George Pachimeris are the best known of the Byzantine scholars of the 13th century the age in which the learning of Constantinople made its first impression on the scholastic movement. Although the influence of the learning of Constantinople on the progress of philosophic thought in western Europe may be said to begin with the first crusade 1096 to 1100, yet it was not until the taking of Constantinople by the crusaders in 1204 that the treasures of ancient Greek literature and philosophy were thrown open to the schoolmen. The debt which scholasticism owes to Byzantine learning should not be exaggerated. At the same time we must not underrate the importance of the introduction of the original and complete works of Aristotle into western Europe at a time when the Aristotle of the Arabians was being invoked as the champion of pantheism and rationalism. The Arabians received Aristotle's works from the Syrians and the Persians who in 1529 gave shelter to the philosophers banished from Athens by Justinian. The most important of the translators and commentators who made Aristotle and Plato intelligible to these oriental peoples are David the Armenian, 6th century, the Nestorian Christians of the schools of Edessa and Caelthus, 5th and 6th centuries, and Honine Benesac, who in the 9th century began a series of translations from Syriac into Arabic. It is therefore beyond dispute that the Arabians owe their knowledge of Greek philosophy to the Syrian Christians. Sources The classic works on Arabian philosophy are Monk, Mélange, etc., Paris 1859, articles by Monk in the Dictionnaire des Sciences Philosophiques, Renance des philosophies à pérés pathétiques à apoutes sures, Paris 1852, and his Avers-Royesse et l'Avers-Royism, Paris 1869. To the bibliography given by Weber, page 211 and Hübeweg, page 406, add Monsieur Forger's articles in Neoscholastique, 1894, Figuier, Vie des savants du Moyenage, Paris 1883, and Deux Vaux à Viscennes, Paris 1900. Sketch of Systems of Philosophy Among the Arabians Speculative thought among the Arabians passed to the following phases. 1. Primitive unquestioning belief in the Qur'an From the middle of the 7th century until the middle of the 8th, the authority of the Qur'an was supreme among the followers of Muhammad. 2. Motazilites or dissidents This sect represented a rationalistic movement against the orthodox fatalism and anthropomorphism, a movement occasioned by the contact AD 750 of the musulman with the civilization of Persia, Babylonia, and Assyria. 3. Motakalimin or professors of the word These were the first theologians of Islam. In their effort to expound the Qur'an rationalistically and yet without exceeding the limits of orthodox belief and in the use which they made of the philosophy of the Greeks, they resemble the schoolmen of Christian Europe. The Motakalimin received encouragement and patronage from the Abbasids, who began to rule as caliphs about the year 750. 4. Sufis or mystics These represented a more extreme phase of the theological reaction against rationalism. They flourished chiefly in the Persian portion of the Arabian empire. Distressing reason and philosophy, they thought that the only source of truth is the Qur'an and that the reading of the Qur'an is to be supplemented by ecstatic contemplation. 5. Philosophers The philosophical movement among the Arabians extended from the 9th century to the end of the 12th. The philosophers were, in a sense, the continuators of the dissident movement. As a rule, they disregarded the authority of the Qur'an and built their systems of philosophy upon lines traced by the Greeks, whose works they obtained from the Syrian Christians. They were opposed by the mystics and persecuted by the caliphs both in Asia and in Europe. The chief philosophers are 1. Among the Arabians of the East, Al-Kendi died 870. Al-Farabi died 950. Avicenna, Ibn Sina, 980 to 1037 and Al-Ghazel, 1059 to 1111. 2. Among the Arabians of the West, that is, in Spain, Avim Pache, died 1138. Abu Bakr, 1100 to 1185 and Averuiz, Ibn Rushd, 1126 to 1198. Avicenna, physician, philosopher and theologian, was born in the province of Bohara. He composed a medical canon and numerous philosophical works in which he expounded the doctrines of Aristotle and of his Greek commentators. He devoted special attention to metaphysics, maintaining the existence of a sovereign intelligence as the highest reality and of matter or the non-existent as the lowest in the scale of being. The first emanation from the supreme intelligence is the active intellect, to which Avicenna assigns a metaphysical as well as a psychological role, teaching that it is the source of all heavenly and earthly intellects, and that it is the principle by which the potentially intelligible becomes the actually intelligible to the human mind. Despite these neoplatonic principles, Avicenna maintained the Aristotelian doctrine of sensation and the moderate realistic doctrine of universals. The latter he expressed in the formula so often quoted by Albert and other schoolmen. Intellectus informis agit universalitatem. His definition of the soul is identical with Aristotle's. Still he returns to neoplatonic principles in his account of the origin of intellectual knowledge, as when he teaches that intelligible species are acquired in two ways, by rational discourse or demonstration and by infusion, infusio del manazio divina. Both St. Thomas and Albertus Magnus ascribe to Avicenna the doctrine of the unity and transcendency of the active intellect. The former says, Intellectum agitem ponit Avicenna quandem substanzeem separatem, and Avicenna ponit quod Intellectus agens est unus in omnibus, quam vis non Intellectus posibilis. Historical position. Avicenna was the first of the Arabians of the east to depart from the neoplatonic interpretation of Aristotle. The remnant of neoplatonism in his system of philosophy is proof of his inability to escape altogether from the influence of his predecessors. Avarois, who represents the Arabian philosophy of the west, looked upon Avicenna as a materialistic pantheist. Al-Ghazel and other mystics regarded him as a rationalist, and many of the schoolmen spoke of him as the first of the medieval occasionalists. Avarois was born in the year 1126 at Cordova. His career, like that of Avicenna, shows the bitterness of the intolerance prevailing among the followers of Islam inclined as they were to side with the mystics whom they regarded as orthodox, rather than with the philosophers whom they suspected of hostility to the Quran. Like Avicenna too, he was a physician. Exiled to Morocco, an accountant has said of his political doctrines, he died there in the year 1198. Avarois was regarded as the greatest of all the Arabian commentators of Aristotle. He composed, besides his commentaries, several treatises on astronomy, medicine and philosophy, and also a controversial work, Destruzio Destruzionis, in answer to Al-Ghazel's Destruzio Filosoforum. His admiration for Aristotle knew no bounds. Aristoteles Doctrina, he says, In logic, Avarois limits himself to the task of commenting on Aristotle's organon. He adopts Avicenna's formula, Science, he teaches, treats of individual things under the form of universality which the intellect abstracts. Metaphysics. Matter and form are the principles of being. Matter is not to be conceived as identical with not being. It is the eternal potency out of which the first mover extracted, extractio, is to be substituted for criazio, the successive forms or forces which determine matter to different modes of existence. Heavenly bodies are endowed with a more excellent kind of form than are terrestrial bodies. The prime mover imparts motion to the celestial sphere, which in turn moves the planetary spheres. The mover of the sphere of the moon is the active intellect. Psychology. The most characteristic of Avarois's psychological doctrines is that of the unity of the active intellect. Whenever Aristotle speaks of the intellect as separate from matter or unmixed with matter, Avarois understands him to mean that the power by which the potentially intelligible is rendered actually intelligible is physically and topically separate from the body and is numerically one and common to all men. The passive intellect, which Avarois calls the material intellect, is also one. In the context of the passage just quoted, the active and passive intellects are called parts of the same intellect. Still, in a certain sense, it is true that there are as many intellects as there are individuals. For the separate intellect is communicated to the individual soul just as the light, while remaining one, is communicated to the multiplicity of objects which it illuminates. This communication is described as continuatio or copulatio, and the schoolmen understood Avarois to mean that the continuation of the individual soul with the transcendent intellect takes place by means of the fantasmata of the sensitive soul. It is evident from this doctrine that according to Avarois, the individual soul contains nothing superior to matter and is therefore corruptible. The impersonal intellect is immortal, but there is no personal immortality. Nevertheless, Avarois apparently believed in personal immortality. St. Thomas represents him as saying, perrazionem concludo de necessitate quod intelectus est unus numero, firme tertamen teneo opositum perfidem. The distinction to which illusion is made in this quotation was adopted by the Avarois of the 14th and 15th centuries when they maintained in a position to the fundamental principles of scholasticism that what is true in philosophy may be false in theology and vice versa. Historical Position Avarois was known as the commentator of Aristotle. He intended no doubt to reproduce as faithfully as he could the doctrines of the Staggerites. He did not however succeed in breaking with the pantheistic and rationalistic tradition of the Moorish schools. Indeed, he emphasized in his commentaries those points of Aristotle's teaching which were opposed to Christian dogma, so that St. Thomas was obliged to judge him non tan peripatéticus qu'un peripatéticae filosofie depravator. Jewish Philosophy Authorities In addition to monks, melange, and francs, lacabale, etc., Paris 1843, Marx Doctors, die Philosophie des Josef Benzadik, Münster 1895, Boimke's edition of Avicii Bros., Fonds Vite, Münster 1892, and Goodmans, die Scholastik des 13. Jahrhunderts in ihren Beziehungen zum Judentum, Breslau 1902, may be mentioned as authorities on the history of Jewish philosophy. The Jews, before their contact with Arabian civilization, developed a system of mystic philosophy based upon the cabalistic Sefiroth or mystic numbers. It was however after they came in contact with the Arabians in the east and in the Moorish kingdom that Greek learning passed from the mosque to the synagogue, and the systems of philosophy were developed which influenced the course of Christian thought during the 13th century. Avicii Brole 1020-1070 was born at Malaga. His real name was Salomon Ben Gabirole, the name Avicii Brole being the Latinized form of what was supposed to be an Arabian name. Indeed, it was only in recent times that the nationality of this philosopher was determined with certainty. His principal work, Fonds Vite, was probably composed in Arabic. Mong found a Hebrew copy of this work, and quite recently the Latin translation made about the beginning of the 12th century has been published. Avicii Brole's philosophy is a blending of Jewish religious doctrines with the doctrines of the Neoplatonists. The importance attached to contemplation and to striving towards union with the divine, the doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul, of knowledge by means of reminiscence, of the eternity of matter, all these are evident signs of Neoplatonic influence. The most characteristic of Avicii Brole's tenets is the doctrine ascribed to him by Albertus Magnus and Saint Thomas that all things finite, whether corporeal or incorporeal, are composed of matter and form, that matter is consequently the substratum of all finite existence. Consales calls attention to the similarity existing between Avicii Brole's doctrine of universal matter and the doctrines of Dan Skotus regarding materia prima prima. Indeed, all the first Franciscan masters maintained that matter is co-extensive with finite being. Moses Maimonides 1135-1204, who was born at Cordova in 1135 and died at Cairo in 1204, was the greatest of the Jewish Aristotelians. His philosophical treatise, entitled Guide of the Doubting, is an exposition of Aristotelian philosophy combined with Jewish religious teaching. Intensio Ruius Libri, he says, Moses departs from the teaching of Aristotel whenever he considers that Jewish dogma is opposed to peripatetic philosophy. He maintains, for instance, that the world is not eternal, except in the sense that it proceeds by natural necessity from its cause which is eternal. He is willing, however, to grant that the eternity of the world is possible, although he does not agree with the Aristotelians who hold that it is necessary. In treating of the immortality of the soul, he cites passages from the Bible, quotes the opinions of the Greek and Arabian commentators, distinguishes between the soul that is born with us and the intellect which is acquired, and ends by asserting that only the souls of the just are immortal. This doctrine of acquired immortality became one of the most distinctive doctrines of the Jewish school. Historical position, although less original than Avicii Brawl, Maimonides was destined to exercise a more profound influence on succeeding generations of philosophers. To him may be traced the scientific movement which manifested itself among the Jews of the 13th and the two following centuries, and he is commonly regarded as the one who, of all the Jewish thinkers, contributed most to the system of Spinoza. Anonymous works. There were three works of doubtful authorship which, on being translated from Arabic into Latin, became for the schoolmen common sources of information concerning Arabian, Jewish, and even Greek philosophy. One, the secretum secretorum, a scientific miscellany attributed to Aristotle. Two, Theologia Aristoteles, or the secretiori egyptorum filosofia, which was sometimes attributed to Aristotle but which is in reality a collection of excerpts from the Aeneides of Plotinus. Three, Liber de Causes, which under various titles was ascribed to Aristotle, to St. Augustine, to Avim Pache, and to Gilbert de Lapore. Albertus Magnus and St. Thomas decided against its Aristotelian authorship, the former ascribing it to a certain Jew named David, the latter judging it to be an Arabian compilation of a work by Proclus. The preponderance of evidence is in favor of St. Thomas' opinion. Influence of Arabian and Jewish Philosophy on Scholasticism The influence which Arabian and Jewish learning exercised on the schoolmen of the 13th century was very great. It was the Arabians and Jews who gave the first impulse to the study of the physical and metaphysical works of Aristotle. We must not, however, exaggerate the debt which Christian philosophy owes to the Arabians and Jews. We must remember that, one, although the first translations which brought Greek philosophy within reach of the schoolmen were made from the Arabic, these, as we shall see, were soon followed by the more accurate translations made from the Greek. Two, if Christian Europe owes its knowledge of Aristotle to the Arabians, the Arabians themselves owe their knowledge of Aristotle to the Christian scholars of Syria. Three, although the Arabians contributed largely to the growth and development of the study of medicine in Europe, and although their contributions to medieval geography, astronomy, arithmetic, and chemistry were also important, yet in philosophy they exercised only an indirect influence. They provoked discussion and controversy, but to their direct influence not a single important tenet of scholasticism can be traced. The scholastic movement was a creation of the Christian mind. Arabian philosophy was always anti-Christian in spirit and teaching. The impulse that made scholasticism originated with the Carolingian Renaissance. The movement was continued by Erygina, Gerber, Roslin, Anselm, and other Christian thinkers, and received new force from the introduction of the physical and metaphysical works of Aristotle. Scholastic philosophy owes nothing to the Arabians except what they contributed to the introduction of these works. The influence of the Jews was more important than that of the Arabians. The Jews of Moorish Spain enjoyed a large measure of liberty, and among them philosophy found a home when Arabian philosophers were persecuted and their works consigned to the flames. Among the Jews and in the Jewish schools, the works of the Greeks and of the Arabians were preserved, translated into Hebrew, and handed over to the Christian scholars who in turn translated them into Latin. In this way, the influence of the Arabians, restricted as it was, was chiefly exercised through the literature and philosophy of the Jews. End of chapter 36