We continue our brief survey of Western Philosophy and its relationship to European History. The ideas and events under consideration lead up to the Renaissance and the early Modern period. As always this presentation is a sketch suitable for undergraduates.
We continue our brief survey of Medieval Philosophy in Europe focusing primarily on the various controversies surrounding Aristotle. Again the presentation here is only intended as a sketch suitable for undergraduates.
What follows is Part I of short survey suitable for undergraduates on the integration of Classical Philosophy into Medieval Society. The story is a complex one to be sure, involving many twists and turns. We begin with a sketch of the relationship of the Roman Empire to Christianity.
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) would likely be flattered that we are still reading his works, but probably a little perplexed at the moral furor caused by The Prince. I am sure he would protest that his work is well supported by experience, rigorous logic, and history – which is all very true. Still since he recommends that Christian Virtue should be jettisoned once it ceases to be an expedient means to power, Machiavelli will be forever associated with unscrupulous politics. One of the names for the devil – ‘Old Nick’ – is a reference to Machiavelli.
What follows is a brief introduction to The Prince suitable for undergraduates. It should be noted a more complete assesment of Machiavelli’s political theory should his numerous other writings on the subject.
Moses Maimonides(1138-1204) was one of the great intellectual lights of the Middle Ages. It seemed as if brilliance flowed from his pen as easily as a river flows downstream. Maimonides succeeded in theology, philosophy, medicine, and even politics.
What follows is a brief consideration of some of Maimonides’ discussions in his Guide for the Perplexed, suitable for undergraduates. In this work Maimonides is writing for the educated layperson of his day who may be having difficulty reconciling faith and reason, particularly the potent reasoning of Aristotle. Since Aristotle apparently convincingly demonstrated that the world was eternal and that the soul was not immortal, he was particularly vexing to believers. Of course some things in scripture strike sensible people as strange in any era. Although we don’t have the same difficulties with Aristotle today, science and faith certainly have their disagreements. Perhaps Maimonides can still speak to us.
The thought of Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) would certainly defy a summary – a genre he elevated to an art form. Considering that his working life was around 20 years, Thomas’ literary output was astounding in both quantity and quality. He had a thorough grasp of classical philosophy, Christian Scripture, and Christian Theology. He was also well acquainted with important Muslim and Jewish thinkers, while maintaining a deep involvement with the lively theological and philosophical controversies of his day.
While never entirely out of fashion Thomistic Philosophy experienced a substantial renaissance in the 20th century thanks to the likes of Etienne Gilson and Jacques Maritain – and many others.
One of the classical ideas that has had remarkable persistence is virtue. Linked to it with equal persistence is an idea that has come to be known as Natural Law. Aquinas provides a substantial treatment of both. What follows is a review of these ideas hopefully suitable for undergraduates. We start with a little background on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and move to a little look at Thomas. The relevant section of Aquinas’ Summa Theologia begins at I-II Question 49.
What follows is is a short selection from Averroes (Ibn Rushd) and a brief commentary suitable for undergraduates. Although perhaps not widely studied today, Averroes had a huge impact on Scholasticism in Medieval Europe. His commentaries on Aristotle were very influential, generating a lively intellectual debate. The text is taken from Faith and Reason in Islam: Averroes’ Exposition of Religious Arguments Ibrahim Najjar, trans. Oxford 2005.
drjohnross 