One of the famous thinkers of the European Middle Ages of the 11th century was also formed in the circle of R. Grossetest.
He had to throw his work into the fire with his own hands and then go to a monastery with a strict charter.
However, Abelard soon reopened the school, whose fame quickly spread beyond France. This is of concern to the Orthodox circles of the Catholic Church. Bernard Cleveron (1091-1153), the abbot of the monastery of Clevro, known for his mystical-irrationalist convictions and sharply negative attitude to any attempt, even a limited definition of the self-worth of reason, actively intervened in the situation. Bernard takes steps to convene a new council and finally condemn Abelard.
Abelard, meanwhile, consistently conducting a rationalist analysis of theological literature, finds numerous contradictions, and even simple errors, not only in authoritative church authors, but also in the Holy Scriptures. These points are reflected in Abelard’s book "Yes and No". "Blessed Augustine, too," writes Abelard, "reviewing many of his works, declares that he asserted much more on the basis of the statements of others than on the basis of his own convictions."
Attempts to rationalize the Christian doctrine quite naturally led to a critical analysis of the latter, and this objectively opened the way to the liberation of philosophy from the spiritual dictatorship of the church. After interpreting Christ as the embodiment of the Divine mind, Abelard, in essence, seeks to equate the concepts of "Christian" and "philosopher" to equate theology with philosophy, which objectively meant removing philosophy from the control of theology.
In fact, Abelard interprets the very founder of Christianity (Christ) as a kind of rationalist philosopher who recruits his followers by the relentless force of logical arguments. Such an interpretation, of course, had nothing to do with the traditional interpretation of Christ and therefore naturally led to accusations of heresy.
In 1140 a council convened in Sansa to consider Abelard’s ideas. And then Abelard realized that his reasoning at the council – this is a pre-determined matter. Refusing to speak at the council, Abelard went to Rome seeking justice from the pope himself. But the council condemned Abelard in absentia, and Pope Innocent II approved the verdict in his rescript. Upon learning of this on the way to Rome, Abelard fell into despair and became seriously ill. He died two years later in the monastery of Cluny.
Giving a rational interpretation of theology and thus the self-worth of the human mind, Abelard at the same time approaches the idea of substantial autonomy (in relation to "divine love" and "grace") moral (good and evil) human actions. Fundamental autonomy (albeit still significantly limited by tradition, theological framework) of reason and conscience (moral sense).
The rationalist activity of the official scholastic orthodoxy, along with the Abelard version, was clearly represented by the position of the participants in the so-called Chartres school. Chartres thinkers were interested in ancient culture, made many translations of ancient authors. Abelard also cooperated quite actively with the Chartres, especially when the school was headed by Bernier of the Tent. The most famous of the authors of the school was a pupil of Berner Gilbert de la Porre, or Porretonus (1076-1154).
Adhering to a realistic (in the average sense) orientation, like Abelard, to conceptualism. Unlike Abelard, who wanted to give theology a rational-conceptual form, the head of the Chartres school believed that the conceptual form can reflect only the specifics of the world of things and is based on experience and induction. Theology, using deduction, proceeds from the provisions of divine revelation, which are fundamentally unexperienced.
Thus Porre initiated a concept that in the subsequent history of medieval philosophy, up to the humanistic Renaissance, would spread under the name of the theory of "double truth" and become a worldview form of gradual liberation of philosophy from the role of "servant of theology. "
Such a clear distinction between philosophical and theological truth, the impossibility of providing theology and philosophy with a single (rationalist as Abemer dreamed of) approach, became quite obvious to the participants of the Chartres school due to their rather intensive studies of nature and the corresponding "naturalistic" generalizations. Christian picture of the world. And although the Chartres school is somewhere in the late twelfth century. ceased to exist, its naturalistic guidelines are continued in the twelfth century. in the ideas of David Daninsky, who interprets matter as a universal substrate of all substances (in the spirit of Aristotle’s "first matter"). For this D. Danansky was condemned by church ideologues.
After some time, the University of Paris, where D. Daninsky taught, was the source of the spread of materialist ideas of overroism (on behalf of the Arab philosopher Ibn Rushd, which was transcribed into Latin as Averroyas), a doctrine based on the materialist elements of Aristotle’s philosophy. The main propagandist of overrorism (Latin averroism, as the European version of this doctrine was called) became Seager Bratonsky at the University of Paris (c. 1235-c. 1282).
Seeger fought for the independence of philosophical knowledge from theological, although, of course, could not (in the spirit of the times) deny the legitimacy of theology and especially religion. Recognizing the necessity and inevitability of a contradiction between philosophical and theological knowledge, Seeger openly takes the position of "dual truth." lab report writer help He and his followers, without denying the legitimacy of the theological path to truth, themselves follow the path of rational comprehension of the nature and natural order of things. Naturalism and even the materialism of Seeger’s position were manifested in her denial of the ideas of the creation of nature by God from "nothing". Matter, nature, being exist forever in opposition to God, as a result of which God is not so much the creator as the "first engine" (in the Aristotelian spirit) of the world.
If the rationalist orientations of Abelard and the members of the Chartres school provoked various opposition from orthodox church circles, Averroism aroused no less resistance from the disciple of the Franciscan leader Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) Bonaventure, or Giovanni Fidantsi (as he was called) (1221-1274). opposed averroism from the standpoint of "classical"
Augustinianism, somewhat supplemented by the ideas of Jewish-Arab Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism. The naturalistic ideas of the Chartres school find their specific continuation at the University of Oxford in a circle of original thinking, which in addition to traditional theological and philosophical topics, was widely interested in astronomy, meteorology, linguistics, etc. – Robert Grossetest (1175-1253). Being an Augustinian in the general principles of philosophizing, the Grosse test believes that the leading role in the development of scientific research belongs to mathematics.
Grossetest also paid great attention to the development of empirical methodology. He attached great importance to the world, which he considered to be a particularly "subtle" matter, which realized the unity of the origin of the universe and the connection between its individual parts. Bonoventura ascribed a similar meaning to the world, but, unlike Grossetest, gave it a mystical interpretation.
One of the famous thinkers of the European Middle Ages of the 11th century was also formed in the circle of R. Grossetest. Roger Bacon (1214-1292). Under the influence of Grossetest, Bacon became acquainted with the works of Aristotle and the Arabic-speaking philosophers al-Farati, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, and others. Bacon was also deeply interested in the idea of natural science and experienced knowledge of nature. The unorthodox position of Bacon, for which he was persecuted, differed somewhat from the unorthodox nature of Seeger of Brabant and even the Chartres school. Bacon categorically denied the theory of "dual truth" and Averroism in general, describing the latter as "sinful."
He defended the idea of the unity of philosophy and theology. "Philosophy and theology," wrote Bacon, "do not contradict each other, because the second teaches why all objects are destined by God, the first – how and why this purpose is fulfilled." However, the unity of theology with philosophy is conceived by Bacon not as a subordination of the second to the first, but as a recognition of the rational necessity of philosophy, its, so to speak, "sovereignty" of self-rational necessity of philosophy , its, so to speak, "sovereignty" of self-worth.
All sciences, Bacon argues, must serve theology. This is the value of science. Theology itself answers the question of the "divine" order: the essence of God, the Holy Trinity, the glory and grace of God. To cover all other issues, theology uses philosophy (questions of motion of celestial bodies, matter and essence, questions about species of animals and plants, time and eternity of the world, the presence of the soul in the human body, questions about infinite kinds of matter). To all these questions theology only briefly formulates the answers taken from philosophy. Theology points to the properties of supernatural beings, while philosophy reveals the properties of the external world.
Objecting to Tertulion’s principle of "super-intelligence" of the dogmas of theology. Bacon considers it necessary for the triumph of theology necessary development of philosophy and generally positive significance, with the help of knowledge we can, Bacon argues, to convert infidels to Christianity, without resorting to violence and crusades. Thus, speaking with the thesis of strengthening theology (quite frankly), Bacon, in fact, shakes it from within by so-called "total rationalization". Here Bacon is somewhat close to Abelard.
Taking the position of moderate nominalism, Bacon considers nature to be more fundamental to individual nature. The latter is decisive in the existence of things, because Bacon argues that God did not create the world for the sake of a universal man, but for each individual; God did not create man at all, but Adam. These nominalist principles of Bacon have, as we see, a clear humanistic connotation. Bacon singled out his original position, which is essentially a whole program for the development of scientific knowledge, as opposed to the system of orthodox scholasticism, in three of his works, The Great Work, The Third Work, and The Smaller Work, which together constitute a true encyclopedia of contemporary knowledge.