Grosseteste, Robert (c.1170–1253)

Author(s):  
Scott MacDonald

Grosseteste’s thought is representative of the conflicting currents in the intellectual climate of Europe in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. On the one hand, his commitment to acquiring, understanding and making accessible to his Latin contemporaries the texts and ideas of newly discovered Arabic and Greek intellectual traditions places him in the vanguard of a sweeping movement transforming European thought during his lifetime. His work in science and natural philosophy, for example, is inspired by material newly translated from Arabic sources and by the new Aristotelian natural philosophy, especially the Physics, On the Heavens and Posterior Analytics (Aristotle’s treatise on the nature of scientific knowledge). Similarly, in his work in metaphysics, ethics and theology Grosseteste turns to ancient sources previously unknown (or incompletely known) to Western thinkers, prominent among which are Aristotle’s Ethics and the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius. His work as a translator of and commentator on Aristotle and Pseudo-Dionysius places Grosseteste among the pioneers in the assimilation of these important strands of the Greek intellectual heritage into the mainstream of European thought. On the other hand, Grosseteste’s views are in significant respects conservative. His greatest debt is to Augustine, and his most original ideas – such as his view that light is a fundamental constituent of all corporeal reality – are extensions of recognizably Augustinian themes. Moreover, although his work on Aristotle is groundbreaking, his approach is judicious and measured, lacking any hint of the crusader’s zeal that marks the work of the later radical Aristotelians. In general his practice conforms to the traditional Neoplatonist line, viewing Aristotle as a guide to logic and natural philosophy while turning to Platonism – in Grosseteste’s case, Augustinian and Pseudo-Dionysian Platonism – for the correct account of the loftier matters of metaphysics and theology.

2021 ◽  
Vol 153 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-318
Author(s):  
Alexander Fidora ◽  
Nicola Polloni

This contribution engages with the problematic position of the mechanical arts within medieval systems of knowledge. Superseding the secondary position assigned to the mechanical arts in the Early Middle Ages, the solutions proposed by Hugh of St Victor and Gundissalinus were highly influential during the thirteenth century. While Hugh’s integration of the mechanical arts into his system of knowledge betrays their still ancillary position as regards consideration of the liberal arts, Gundissalinus’s theory proposes two main novelties. On the one hand, he sets the mechanical arts alongside alchemy and the arts of prognostication and magic. On the other, however, using the theory put forward by Avicenna, he subordinates these “natural sciences” to natural philosophy itself, thereby establishing a broader architecture of knowledge hierarchically ordered. Our contribution examines the implications of such developments and their reception afforded at Paris during the thirteenth century, emphasising the relevance that the solutions offered by Gundissalinus enjoyed in terms of the ensuing discussions concerning the structure of human knowledge.


Author(s):  
Arthur Fine

Traditionally, scientific realism asserts that the objects of scientific knowledge exist independently of the minds or acts of scientists and that scientific theories are true of that objective (mind-independent) world. The reference to knowledge points to the dual character of scientific realism. On the one hand it is a metaphysical (specifically, an ontological) doctrine, claiming the independent existence of certain entities. On the other hand it is an epistemological doctrine asserting that we can know what individuals exist and that we can find out the truth of the theories or laws that govern them. Opposed to scientific realism (hereafter just ‘realism’) are a variety of antirealisms, including phenomenalism and empiricism. Recently two others, instrumentalism and constructivism, have posed special challenges to realism. Instrumentalism regards the objects of knowledge pragmatically, as tools for various human purposes, and so takes reliability (or empirical adequacy) rather than truth as scientifically central. A version of this, fictionalism, contests the existence of many of the objects favoured by the realist and regards them as merely expedient means to useful ends. Constructivism maintains that scientific knowledge is socially constituted, that ‘facts’ are made by us. Thus it challenges the objectivity of knowledge, as the realist understands objectivity, and the independent existence that realism is after. Conventionalism, holding that the truths of science ultimately rest on man-made conventions, is allied to constructivism. Realism and antirealism propose competing interpretations of science as a whole. They even differ over what requires explanation, with realism demanding that more be explained and antirealism less.


Philosophy ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 63 (244) ◽  
pp. 161-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Campbell

This paper raises once more the question of the relationship between philosophy on the one hand and common sense on the other. More particularly, it is concerned with the role which common sense can play in passing judgment on the rational acceptability (or otherwise) of large-scale hypotheses in natural philosophy and the cosmological part of metaphysics. There are, as I see it, three stages through which the relationship has passed in the course of the twentieth century. There is the era of G. E. Moore, the Quine–Feyerabend period, and now a new and modest vindication of common sense is emerging in the work of Jerry Fodor.


Author(s):  
Sascha Salatowsky

In order to attain a deeper understanding of Aristotelian philosophy in the Renaissance, it is necessary to consider the theological implications of given facts. This article discusses a basic problem centring on the reception of Aristotle’s Ethics. The Nicomachean Ethics was widely regarded as the basis for a virtuous ethical life, yet how could a pagan philosophy, with its concepts of happiness, virtue, justice, etc., be the basis of a Christian society? The aim of the present article is to show how Lutheran scholars solved this problem in confrontation with Catholic and Calvinist scholars of the time. The first part deals with the two basic components of Aristotle’s Ethics, namely the doctrines of happiness (Eudaimonologia) and virtue (Aretologia), and attempts to show that Aristotle’s Ethics should not be understood as a system of rules, but rather as a handbook for the cultivation of practical habits in the free human being who strives to live a good life. The second part examines two key ideological confrontations in relation to Aristotle’s philosophy: between Lutherans and Calvinists in respect of definition of theology and philosophical and theological virtues on the one hand, and between Lutherans and ›the Enthusiasts‹ in respect of the concept of virtues on the other.


2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 289-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Schramm

The article argues that Frederick II of Hohenstaufen and his court played a unique role in the transfer and diffusion of Arabic science (with its Greek, Hebrew and Christian elements). Scientists at the court translated and elaborated upon it. Moreover, there existed a two-way traffic of scientific knowledge between Frederick and his court scholars, on the one hand, and several oriental courts and their scientists on the other hand. Thus the reader gains a view of Frederick's scientific activities from the Arab perspective, too.Frederick's contribution to the existing biological sciences of his time was his “Book of Falconry”, which was exceptional in the then contemporary approach and methods employed in those fields. Even in this treatise on falconry, Frederick drew upon the fund of knowledge of Arab practitioners. This chain of arguments concerning Arabic science is situated within the setup of Frederick's oriental political practice and sumptuous court life.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 23-34
Author(s):  
D. V. Mukhetdinov

The present article is devoted to the issue of determining the disciplinary boundaries of Islamic theology in the context of the ‘Western’ views on nature and place of theological thought in the framework of intellectual subjects. The author emphasizes the historical dependency of the terms used in academic study of religion (religious studies) on the religious teaching of religion, as it has formed in Christian tradition. It is shown that the further progress of critical optics of social sciences and humanities is tied with decolonization of the scholar’s thinking. The urgent need for dialogue between different intellectual traditions is substantiated, for it is necessary to create a conceptual framework that is to be adequate to heterogeneous nature of the historical forms of religion. It is being proven in the article presented that there is only one alternative to the scholar’s consideration of the inner connections and the structure of discursive tradition of Islam itself: a covert ‘missionary contention’ conducted by the scholar against those belonging to the other tradition. It is stressed that any genuine (as opposed to formal) solution to the problem of unequivocal classification of Islamic theology in Western academic system may only be conditional. In conclusion the author turns to the essential affinity in the nature of authority of Islamic theologian, on the one hand, and that of Western scientist or philosopher, on the other.


Author(s):  
M. H. Crawford

It is commonplace that historical enquiry evolves as successive generations ask different questions, in a complex interplay between, on the one hand, the intellectual traditions in which individual historians have grown up, the different traditions that they discover, and the world as a whole in which they move; on the other hand, an ever greater body of knowledge and a wider range of historical tools. This chapter explores, by way of the particular example of the edicts of the Emperor Diocletian on maximum prices and on the coinage, the story of the discovery and study of their texts. It examines the impact on historical enquiry both of chance discoveries and of deliberate autopsy.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Edward Harcourt

The chapters in this volume have mostly been selected from papers given at a workshop and three conferences which brought together on the one hand a group of philosophers, most of whom were interested in one way or another in what has come to be known as ‘virtue ethics’—moral psychology in the wake of Aristotle—and, on the other, some developmental psychologists working, albeit in different ways, in an attachment paradigm. I organized these meetings partly because my own reading of attachment theory persuaded me there were a number of exciting points of contact between developmental psychology done this way and the kinds of questions Aristotle’s ethics raises, and which interest me; partly because almost no philosophers back then seemed even to have heard of attachment theory. This Introduction presents, inevitably through the eyes of a philosopher, what I take to be attachment theory’s main claims, and then tries to identify why philosophical moral psychologists should take it much more seriously than they have done to date—as I hope this volume itself will help them to do....


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 872-872
Author(s):  
B. Barber ◽  

. . . Medical institutions and individual investigators operate today with two powerful sets of values and goals. On the one hand there is the pursuit and advancement of scientific knowledge. On the other there is the provision of humane and effective therapy for patients. . . . There is evidence that the enhanced excitement attending scientific achievement and the rewards bestowed on it in recent decades have skewed the decision-making process in many cases of conflict. . . . Our data show that the social structure of competition and reward is one of the sources of permissive behavior in experimentation with human subjects...


2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masashi Haneda

AbstractThis article attempts to demonstrate that the notion of “Islamic world” was a creation of the modern age, emanating from north-western Europe in the nineteenth century. The term incorporates two opposing ideological meanings: on the one hand, Europe representing modern, positive values is set against the Islamic world, representing pre-modern, minus values, while on the other hand, the Islamic world was the common bond among all Muslims for their solidarity and unification against European colonialism. The article goes on to investigate why, how and when precisely the two concepts of “Islamic world” were created under the influence of modern European thought. It is stressed that in much of today's discourse too we can still perceive the two different meanings of the term, and this has often led to confusion and misunderstanding in discussion. Modern historians have played a role in substantiating the ideology of the “Islamic world”, because modern historiography has often described political objectives as actual reality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document