TRANSITION PERIOD. FROM PROCLUS TO BACON. § I. SCHOLASTICISM. ALTHOUGH Modern Philosophy, rigorously defined, commences with Bacon and Descartes, from whom a distinct development is traceable, such as the purpose of this History requires, we must not pass from Proclus to Bacon without at least a rapid glance at the course of speculative activity during the intervening twelve centuries. Mediæval Philosophy has been much decried and much exalted, but very little studied. So vast a subject demands a patience and erudition few can bring to it. Fortunately for me, whose knowledge of Scholasticism is limited to a superficial acquaintance with some of the works of Aquinas, Abelard, and Averroes, the nature of this History excludes any detailed examination of medieval speculations. Consulting my own resources and the reader's interest, I find that the whole career of philosophic inquiry, from Proclus to Bacon, can be presented in three typical figures: namely, ABELARD, as representing Scholasticism; ALGAZZALI, as representing Arabian philosophy; and GIORDANO BRUNO, as representing the philosophic struggle which overthrew the authority of Aristotle and the Church. These three thinkers I have studied more or less in their own writings; and the reader will understand, therefore, that the following sketch is wholly drawn from second-hand knowledge in all but these three instances. With the Alexandrians, Philosophy, as we have seen, became absorbed in Religion. The Alexandrians were succeeded by the Christian Fathers, who of course made Philosophy the handmaid reason. to Religion-ancilla Theologiæ. The whole philosophic effort was to mediate between the dogmas of faith and the demands of Scholasticism derives its name from the schools opened by Charlemagne for the prosecution of speculative studies, which were only prosecuted in those days by the clergy, they alone having leisure or inclination for such work. Thus did the Monasteries form the cradle of Modern Philosophy.* As far as we can separate the philosophic from the theological element, it displays itself in three capital manifestations: 1st, The debate on Universals; 2d, The influence of the Arabians, especially in their introduction of the works of Aristotle; and 3d, The rebellion against Aristotle and all other authority, in the proclamation of the independence of Reason. There was no separation at all until the ninth century, when, in the person of Scotus Erigena, Philosophy timidly claimed its privilege. And even Scotus Erigena said, "There are not two studies, one of philosophy and one of religion; true philosophy is true religion, and true religion is true philosophy." In the eleventh century appeared Roscellinus, who, in advocating the philosophic doctrine of Nominalism, not only separated Philosophy from Religion, but placed it in direct antagonism with the fundamental dogma of the Trinity. To understand this we must remember that in those days there was a profound and even servile submission to the double authority of the Church and the Greek Philosophers,-a submission necessarily resulting from the teaching of the Fathers, who always combined the two. The works of Greek Philosophers were, however, but scantily known through Latin translations and commentaries; but this perhaps increased the eagerness to know them; and thus all doctrine be Victor Cousin, Hist. de la Phil. ii. 9ème Leçon. The various historians of Philosophy, especially Ritter and Tennemann, should be consulted; but the clearest and most readable work known to me is M. Rousselot's Etudes sur la Philosophie dans le Moyen Age, 8 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1840. M. Rémusat's Abelard, 2 vols. Paris, 1845, by its analysis of Abelard's works, gives also a very good idea of Scholastic speculation. |