A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

A HISTORY OF

PHILOSOPHY

A HISTORY OF

PHILOSOPHY

VOLUME II

Medieval Philosophy

Frederick Copleston, S.J.

New York

-~

IMAGE BOOKS DOUBLEDAY

London Toronto Sydney

Auckland

AN IMAGE BOOK PUBLISHED BY DOUBLEDAY a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc. 1540 Broadway, New York, New York 10036

IMAGE, DOUBLEDAY, and the portrayal of a deer drinking from a stream are trademarks of Doubleday, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.

First Image Books edition of Volume II of A History ofPhilosophy published 1962 by special arrangement with The Newman Press.

This Image edition published April 1993

De Licentia Superiorum Ordinis: Martinus D'Arcy, S.J., Praep. Provo Ang!iae Nihil Obstat: T. Corbishley, S.J. Censor Deputatus

Imprimatur: Joseph, Archiepiscopus BirmiDgamiensis Die 24 Aprilis 1948

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Copleston, Frederick Charles.

A history of philosophy / Frederick Copleston.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and indexes..

Contents: V. 1. Greece and Rome-v. 2. Augustine to Scotus-v.

3. Middle Ages and early Renaissance.

1. Philosophy, Ancient. 2. Philosophy, Medieval. 3. Philosophy,

Renaissance. I. Title.

B72.C62 1993

190-dc20

92-34997

CIP

Volume II copyright 1950 by Frederick Copleston

ISBN 0-385-46844-X

3 5 798 642 All Rights Reserved

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CONTENTS

Chapter

Page

I. INTRODUCTION

1

PART I

PRE-MEDIAEVAL INFLUENCE&

II. THE PATRISTIC PERIOD

13

Christianity and Greek philosophy-Greek Apologists (A ristides, St. Justin Martyr, Tatian. Athenagoras, Theophilus)-Gnosticism and writers against Gnosticism (St. Irenaeus. Hippolytus)-Latin Apologists (Minucius Felix, Tertullian. Arnobius. Lactantius)-Catechetical School of Alexandria (Clement, Origen)-Greek Fathers (St. Basil, Eusebius. St. Gregory of Nyssa)-Latin Fathers (St. Ambrose)-St. John Damascene-Summary.

III. ST. AUGUSTINE-I

Life and writings-St. Augustine and Philosophy.

IV. ST. AUGUSTINE-II: KNOWLEDGE

51

Knowledge with a view to beatitude-Against scepticism _Experiential knowledge-Nature of sensation-Divine ideas-Illumination and Abstraction.

V. ST. AUGUSTINE-III: GOD .

68

Proof of God from eternal truths-Proofs from creatures and from universal consent-The various proofs as stages

in one process-Attributes of God-Exemplarism.

VI. ST. AUGUSTINE-IV: THE WORLD

74

Free creation out of nothing-Matter-Rationes seminales

-Numbers-Soul and body-Immortality-Origin of

soul.

VII. ST. AUGUSTINE-V: MORAL THEORY

81

Happiness and God-Freedom and Obligation-Need of grace-Evil-the two Cities.

VIII. ST. AUGUSTINE-VI: THE STATE

The State and the City of Babylon not identical-The pagan State does not embody true justice-Church superior to State.

IX. THE PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS

91

Writings and author-Affirmative way-Negative way-

Neo-Platonic interpretation of Trinity-Ambiguous teaching on creation-Problem of evil-Orthodoxy or un~

thodoxy?

X. BOETHIUS. CASSIODORUS. ISIDORE

101

Boethius's transmission of Aristotelian ideas-Natural

theology-Influence on Middle Ages-Cassiodorus on the

seven liberal arts and the spirituality of the soulIsidore's Etymologies and Senlences.

CONTENTS

PART II

Chaplet'

THE CAROLINGIAN RENAISSANCE

XI. THE CAROLINGIAN RENAISSANCE.

Charlemagne-Alcuin and the Palatine School-Other schools, curriculum, libraries-Rhabanus Maurus.

XII. JOHN SCOTUS ERIUGENA-I

1I2

Life and works.

XIII. JOHN SCOTUS ERIUGENA-II

1I6

Nature-God and creation-Knowledge of God by affir-

mativeand negative ways; inapplicability of categories to God-How, then, can God be said to have made the

world?-Divine Ideas in the Word-Creatures as participations and theophanies; creatures are in God-Man's nature-Return of all things to God-Eternal punish-

ment in light of cosmic return-Interpretation of John Scotus's system.

PART III

THE TENTH, ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES

XIV. THE PROBLEM OF UNIVERSALS

136

Situation following death of Charlemagne-Origin of dis-

cussion in texts of Porphyry and Boethius-Importance of the problem-Exaggerated realism-Roscelin's 'nomi-

nalism'-St. Peter Damian's attitude to dialecticWilliam of Champeaux-Abelard-Gilbert de la Porr~

and John of Salisbury-Hugh of St. Victor-St. Thomas Aquinas.

XV. ST. ANSELM OF CANTERBURY

156

St. Anselm as philosopher-Proofs of God's existence in the Monoiocium-The proof of God's existence in the Prosiocium-Idea of truth and other Augustinian elements in St. Anselm's thought.

XVI. THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES .

166

Universalism of Paris, and systematisation of sciences in twelfth century-Regionalism, humanism-Platonism of Chartres-Hylomorphism at Chartres-Prima facie pantheism-John of Salisbury's political theory.

XVII. THE SCHOOL OF ST. VICTOR

175

Hugh of St. Victor; proofs of God's existence, faith, mysticism-Richard of St. Victor; proofs of God's exis-

tence-Godfrey of St. Victor and Walter of St. Victor.

XVIII. DUALISTS AND PANTHEISTS

183

Albigensians and Cathari-Amalric of Bene--David of Oinant.

CONTENTS

PART IV

ISLAMIC AND JEWISH PHILOSOPHY TRANSLATIONS Claapler

XIX. ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY

Reasons for discussing Islamic philosophy-Origins of Islamic philosophy- AUarabi - Avicenna- AverroesDante and the Arabian philosophers.

P."

186

XX. JEWISH PHILOSOPHY .

201

The Cabala-Avicebron-Maimonides.

XXI. THE TRANSLATIONS

205

The translated works-Transl_tions from Greek and from

Arabic-Effects of translations and opposition to Aristotelianism.

PART V

THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY

XXII, INTRODUCTION

212

The University of Paris-Universities closed and privileged corporations-Curriculum-Religious Orders at Paris-Currents of thought in the thirteenth century.

XXIII. WILLIAM OF AUVERGNE

218

Reasons for treating of William of Auvergne-Cod and

creatures; essence and existencfr-Creation by God directly and in time-Proofs of God's existence-Hylomorphism-The soul-Knowledge-William of Auvergne a transition-thinker.

XXIV. ROBERT GROSSETESTE AND ALEXANDER OF HALES 228

(a) Robert Grosseteste's life and writings-Doctrine of light-God and creatures-Doctrine of truth and of illumination. (6) Alexander of Hales's attitude to philosophy-Proofs of God's existence-The divine attributes-Comp08ition in creatures-Soul, intellect, will-Spirit of Alexander's philosophy.

XXV, ST. BONAVENTURE-I

240

Life and works-Spirit-Theology and philosophyAttitude to Aristotelianism.

XXVI. ST. BONAVENTURE-II: GoD'S EXISTENCE

250

Spirit of Bonaventure's proofs of God's existenceProofs from sensible world-A priari knowledge of God -The Anselmian argument-Argument from truth.

XXVII. ST. BONAVENTURE-III: RELATION OF CREATURES

TO GoD

258

Exemplarism-The divine knowledge-Impossibility of

creation from eternity-Errors which follow from denial

of exemplarism and creation-Likeness of creatures to God, an&logy-II this world the best possible world?

CONTENTS

Chapter XXVIII. ST. BONAVENTURE-IV: THE MATERIAL CREATION

Hylomorphic composition in all creatures-Individuation -Light-?-Plurahty of forms-Rahones semlnales.

XXIX.

ST. BONAVENTURE-V: THE HUMAN SOUL

Unity of human soul-Relation of soul to body~Immor talityof the human soul-Fal~lty of ;\verrOlsbc monopsychism-Knowledge of sensible o.bJects an~ of first logical principles-Knowledge of spmtual realities-illumination-The soul's ascent to God-Bonaventure as philosopher of the Christian life.

XXX. ST. ALBERT THE GREAT

293

Life and intellectual activity-Philosophy and theology -God-?Creation-The soul-Reputation and importance

of St. Albert.

XXXI. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-I

302

Life-Works-Mode of exposing St. Thomas's philosophy --The spirit of St. Thomas's philosophy.

XXXII. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-II: PHILOSOPHY AND

THEOLOGY

312

Distinction betwcpn philosophy and theology-Moral necessity of revelation-Incompatibility of fait~ and

science in the same mind concernmg the same obJectNatural end and supernatural end-St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure-St. Thomas as 'innovator'.

XXXIII. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-III: PRINCIPLES OF CREATED

BEING

3~

Reasons for starting with corporeal being-Hylomorphism -Rejection of rationes semina!es-Rejection of. plurality of substantial forms-RestTictlOn of hylomorphlc compo-

sition to corporeal substances-Potentiality and act-

Essence and existence.

XXXIV. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-IV: PROOFS OF GOD'S

EXISTENCE

336

Need of proof-St. Anselm's argument-Possibility of proof-The first three proofs-The fourth proof-The proof from finality-The 'third way' fundamental.

XXXV. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-V: GOD'S NATURE

347

The negative way-The affirmative way-AnalogyTypes of analogy-A difficulty-The di~ine ideas-No real distinction between the divine attributes-God as

existence itself.

XXXVI. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-VI: CREATION

363

Creation out of nothing-God alone can create-God created freely-The motive of creation-Impossibility of creation from eternity has not been demollstrated-Could God create an actually infinite multitude?-Divine omnipotence-The problem of evil.

CONTENTS

Cllapur XXXVII.

ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-VII: PSYCHOLOGY

One substantial form in man-The powers of the soulThe interior senses-Free will-The noblest facultyImmortality-The active and passive intellects are not numerically the same in all men.

Pag, 375

XXXVIII.

ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-VIII: KNOWLEDGE

'Theory of knowledge' in St. Thomas-The process of knowledge; knowledge of the universal and of the particular-The soul's knowledge of itself-The possibility of metaphysics.

XXXIX.

ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-IX: MORAL THEORY.

Eudaemonism-The vision of God-Good and bad-The virtues-The natural law-The eternal law and the foundation of morality in God-Natural virtues recognised by St. Thomas which were not recognised by Aristotle; the virtue of religion.

XL. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS-X: POLITICAL THEORY

412

St. Thomas and Aristotle-The natural origin of human society and government-Human society and political

authority willed by God-Church and State-Individual

and State - Law - Sovereignty - Constitutions - St. Thomas's political theory an integral part of his total system.

Note on St. Thomas's aesthetic theory.

XLI. ST. THOMAS AND ARISTOTLE: CONTROVERSIES

St. Thomas's utilisation of Aristotle-Non-Aristotelian elements in Thomism-Latent tensions in the Thomist synthesis-Opposition to Thomist 'novelties'.

XLII. LATIN AVERROISM: SIGER OF BRABANT

435

Tenets of the 'Latin Averroists'-Siger of BrabantDante and Siger of Brabant-Opposition to Averroism; condemnations.

XLIII. FRANCISCAN THINKERS

442

Roger Bacon, life and works-Philosophy of Roger Bacon -Matthew of Aquasparta-Peter John Olivi-Roger Marston-Richard of Middleton-Raymond Lull.

XLIV. GILES OF ROME AND HENRY OF GHENT

460

(a) Giles of Rome. Life and works-The independence of Giles as a thinker-Essence and existence-Form and matter; soul and body-Political theory.

(b) Henry of Ghent. Life and works-Eclecticism, illustrated by doctrines of illumination and innatism-Idea of metaphysics-Essence and existence-Proofs of God's existence-General spirit and significance of Henry's philosophy.

XLV. SCOTus-I

476

Life-Works-Spirit of Scotus's philosophy.

CONTENTS

Chapter XLVI. ScoTus-II: KNOWLEDGE

The primary object of the human intellect-Why the intellect depends on the phantasm-The soul's inability to intuit itself in this life-Intellectual apprehension of the individual thing-Is theology a science?-Our knowledge is based on sense-experience, and no special illumination is required for intellectual activity-Intuitive and abstractive knowledge--Induction.

XLVII. ScoTus-III: METAPHYSICS

500

Being and its transcendental attributes-The univocal

concept of being-The formal objective distinction-

Essence and existence-Universals-HylomorphismRationes semi1lQles rejected, plurality of forms retained -Individuation.

XLVIII. ScoTUs-IV: NATURAL THEOLOGY

518

Metaphysics and God-Knowledge of God from creatures -Proof of God's existence-Simplicity and intelligence of God-God's infinity-The Anselmian argumentDivine attributes which cannot be philosophically demonstrated-The distinction between the divine attnbutes-The divine ideas-The divine will-Creation.

XLIX. ScOTUS-V: THE SoUL

535

The specific form of man-Union of soul and body-Will

and intellect-Soul's immortality not strictly demon-

strated.

L. ScoTus-VI: ETHICS

545

Morality of human acts-Indifferent acts-The moral

law and the will of God-Political authority.

LI. CONCLUDING REVIEW

552

Theology and philosophy-'Christian philosophy'-The

Thomist synthesis-Various ways of regarding and inter-

preting mediaeval philosophy.

APPENDICES

1. HONORIFIC TITLES APPLIED IN THE MIDDLE AGES TO PHILOSOPHERS TREATED OF IN THIS VOLUME 567

II. A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY

568

INDEX OF NAMES

589

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

598

MEDIAEVAL PHILOSOPHY

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1. IN this second volume of my history of philosophy I had originally hoped to give an account of the development of philosophy throughout the whole period of the Middle Ages, understanding by mediaeval philosophy the philosophic thought and systems which were elaborated between the Carolingian renaissance in the last part of the eighth century A.D, (John Scotus Eriugena, the first outstanding mediaeval philosopher was born about 810) and the end of the fourteenth century. Reflection has convinced me, however, of the advisability of devoting two volumes to mediaeval philosophy. As my first volume1 ended with an account of neo-Platonism and contained no treatment of the philosophic ideas to be found in the early Christian writers, I considered it desirable to say something of these ideas in the present volume. It is true that men like St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Augustine belonged to the period of the Roman Empire, that their philosophic affiliations were with Platonism, understood in the widest sense, and that they cannot be termed mediaevals; but the fact remains that they were Christian thinkers and exercised a great influence on the Middle Ages. One could hardly understand St. Anselm or St. Bonaventure without knowing something of St. Augustine, nor could one understand the thought of John Scotus Eriugena without knowing something of the thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa and of the Pseudo-Dionysius. There is scarcely any need, then, to apologise for beginning a history of mediaeval philosophy with a consideration of thinkers who belong, so far as chronology is concerned, to the period of the Roman Empire.

The present volume, then, begins with the early Christian period and carries the history of mediaeval philosophy up to the end of the thirteenth century, including Duns Scotus (about 1265-1308). In my third volume I propose to treat of the philosophy of the fourteenth century, laying special emphasis on Ockhamism. In

1 A History of Philosophy, Vol. I, Greece and Rome, London, 1946.

I

2

INTRODUCTION

that volume I shall also include a treatment of the philosophies of the Renaissance, of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and of the 'Silver Age' of Scholastic thought, even though Francis Suarez did not die until the year 1617, twenty-one years after the birth of Descartes. This arrangement may appear to be an arbitrary one, and to some extent it is. But it is extremely doubtful if it is possible to make any hard and fast dividing line between mediaeval and modern philosophy, and a good case could be made out for including Descartes with the later Scholastics, contrary to tradition as this would be. I do not propose, however, to adopt this course, and if I include in the next volume, the third, some philosophers who might seem to belong properly to the 'modern period', my reason is largely one of convenience, to clear the decks, so that in the fourth volume I may develop in a systematic manner the interconnection between the leading philosophical systems from Francis Bacon in England and Descartes in France up to and including Kant. Nevertheless, whatever method of division be adopted, one has to remember that the compartments into which one divides the history of philosophic thought are not watertight, that transitions are gradual, not abrupt, that there is overlapping and interconnection, that succeeding systems are not cut off from one a.nother with a hatchet.

2. There was a time when mediaeval philosophy was considered as unworthy of serious study, when it was taken for granted that the philosophy of the Middle Ages was so subservient to theology that it was practically indistinguishable therefrom and that, in so far as it was distinguishable, it amounted to little more than a barren logic-chopping and word-play. In other words, it was taken for granted that European philosophy contained two main periods, the ancient peri~d, which to all intents and purposes meant the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, and the modern period, when the speculative reason once more began to enjoy freedom after the dark night of the Middle Ages when ecclesiastical authority reigned supreme and the human reason, chained by heavy fetters, was compelled to confine itself to the useless and fanciful study of theology, until a thinker like Descartes at length broke the chains and gave reason its freedom. In the ancient period and the modern period philosophy may be considered a free man, whereas in the mediaeval period it was a slave.

Apart from the fact that mediaeval philosophy naturally shared in the disesteem with which the Middle Ages in general were

INTRODUCTION

3

commonly regarded, one factor which was partly responsible for the attitude adopted towards mediaeval thinkers was doubtless the language used concerning Scholasticism by men like Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes. Just as Aristotelians are prone to evaluate Platonism in terms of Aristotle's criticism, so admirers of the movement apparently initiated by Bacon and Descartes were prone to look on mediaeval philosophy through their eyes, unaware of the fact that much of what Francis Bacon, for instance, has to say against the Scholastics could not legitimately be applied to the great figures of-mediaeval thought, however applicable it may have been to later and 'decadent' Scholastics, who worshipped the letter at the expense 'of the spirit. Looking on mediaeval philosophy from the very start in this light historians could perhaps scarcely be expected to seek a closer and first-hand acquaintance with it: they condemned it unseen and unheard, without knowledge either of the rich variety of mediaeval thought or of its profundity: to them it was all of a piece,an arid playing with words and a slavish dependence on theologians. Moreover, insufficiently critical, they failed to realise the fact that, if mediaeval philosophers were influenced by an external factor, theology, modern philosophers were also influenced by external factors, even if by other external factors than theology. It would have seemed to most of these historians a nonsensical 'proposition were one to suggest to them that Duns Scotus, for example, had a claim to be considered as a great British philosopher, at least as great as John Locke, while in their praise of the acumen of David Hume they were unaware that certain thinkers of the late Middle Ages had already anticipated a great deal of the criticism which used to be considered the peculiar contribution to philosophy of the eminent Scotsman.

I shall cite one example, the treatment accorded to mediaeval philosophy and philosophers by a man who was himself a great philosopher, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. It is an interesting example, since Hegel's dialectical idea of the history of philosophy obviously demanded that mediaeval philosophy should be portrayed as making an essential contribution to the development of philosophic thought, while Hegel personally was no mere vulgar antagonist of mediaeval philosophy. Now, Hegel does indeed admit that mediaeval philosophy performed one useful function, that of expressing in philosophic terms the 'absolute content' of Christianity, but he insists that it is only formalistic repetition

INTRODUCTION

of the content of faith, in which God is represented as something 'external', and if one remembers that for Hegel faith is the mode of religious consciousness and is definitely inferior to the philosophic or speculative standpoint, the standpoint of pure reason, it is clear that in his eyes mediaeval philosophy can be philosophy only in name. Accordingly he declares that Scholastic philosophy is really theology. By this Hegel does not mean that God is not the object of philosophy as well as of theology: he means that mediaeval philosophy considered the same object as is considered by philosophy proper but that it treated that object according to the categories of theology instead of substituting for the external connections of theology (for example, the relation of the world to God as external effect to free creative Cause) the systematic, scientific, rational and necessary categories and connections of philosophy. Mediaeval philosophy was thus philosophy according to content, but theology according to form, and in Hegel's eyes, the history of mediaeval philosophy is a monotonous one, in which men have tried in vain to discern any distinct stages of real progress and development of thought.

In so far as Hegel's VIew of mediaeval philosophy is dependent on his own particular system, on his view of the relation of religion to philosophy, of faith to reason, of immediacy to mediacy, I cannot discuss it in this volume; but I wish to point out how Hegel's treatment of mediaeval philosophy is accompanied by a very real ignorance of the course of its history. It would be possible no doubt for an Hegelian to have a real knowledge of the development of mediaeval philosophy and yet to adopt, precisely because he was an Hegelian, Hegel's general standpoint in regard to it; but there can be no shadow of doubt, even allowing for the fact that the philosopher did not himself edit and publish his lectures on the history of philosophy, that Hegel did not possess the real knowledge in question. How could one, for instance, attribute a real knowledge of mediaeval philosophy to a writer who includes Roger Bacon under the heading 'Mystics' and simply remarks 'Roger Bacon treated more especially of physics, but remained without influence. He invented gunpowder, mirrors, telescopes, and died in I297'? The fact of the matter is that Hegel relied on authors like Tennemann and Brucker for his information concerning mediaeval philosophy. whereas the first valuable studies on mediaeval philosophy do not antedate the middle of the nineteenth century.

INTRODUCTION

5

In adducing the instance of Hegel I am not, of course, concerned to blame the philosopher: I am rather trying to throw into relief the great change that has taken place in our knowledge of mediaeval philosophy through the work of modem scholars sinc~ about 1880. Whereas one can easily understand and pardon the nusrepresentations of which a man like Hegel was unconsciously guilty, one would have little patience with similar misrepresentations to-day, after the work of scholars like Baeumker, Ehrle, Grabmann, De Wulf, Pelster, Geyer, Mandonnet, Pelzer, etc. After the light that has been thrown on mediaeval philosophy by the publication of texts and the critical editing of already published works, after the splendid volumes brought out by the Franciscan Fathers of Quaracchi, after the publications .of so m~y ~um~ers of the Beitrdge series, after the producbon of histones like that of Maurice De Wulf, after the lucid studies of Etienne Gilson, after the patient work done by the Mediaeval Academy of America, it should no longer be possible to think that mediaeval philosophers were 'all of apiece', that mediaeval philosophy lacked richness and variety, that mediaeval thinkers were uniformly men of low stature and of mean attainments. Moreover, writers like Gilson have helped us to realise the continuity between mediaeval and modem philosophy. Gilson has shown how Cartesianism was more dependent on mediaeval thought than was formerly supposed. A good deal still remains to be done in the way of edition and interpretation of texts (one needs only to mention William of Ockham's Commentary on the Sentences), but it has now become possible to see the currents and development, the pattern and texture, the high lights and low lights of mediaeval philosophy with a synoptic eye.

3. But even if mediaeval philosophy was in fact richer and more varied than has been sometimes supposed, is it not true to say that it stood in such a close relation to theology that it is practically indistinguishable therefrom? Is it not, for example, a fact that the great majority of mediaeval philosophers were priests and theologians, pursuing philosophic studies in the spirit of a theologian or even an apologist?

In the first place it is necessary to point out that the relation of theology to philosophy was itself an important theme of mediaeval thought and that different thinkers adopted different attitudes in regard to this question. Starting with the endeavour to understand the data of revelation, so far as this is possible to human reason,

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download