Nicole Oresme | |
|---|---|
 Portrait of Nicole Oresme: Miniature from Oresme'sTraité de l'espère, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, France, fonds français 565, fol. 1r. | |
| Born | (1325-01-01)1 January 1325 Fleury-sur-Orne, Normandy, Kingdom of France |
| Died | 11 July 1382(1382-07-11) (aged 57)[1] |
| Education | |
| Alma mater | College of Navarre (University of Paris) |
| Philosophical work | |
| Era | Medieval philosophy |
| Region | Western philosophy |
| School | Nominalism[2] |
| Institutions | College of Navarre (University of Paris) |
| Main interests | Natural philosophy, astronomy, theology, mathematics |
| Notable ideas | Rectangularco-ordinates, first proof of thedivergence of theharmonic series,mean speed theorem |
Nicole Oresme (/ɔːˈrɛm/;[3]French:[nikɔlɔʁɛm];[4] 1 January 1325 – 11 July 1382), also known asNicolas Oresme,Nicholas Oresme, orNicolas d'Oresme, was a French philosopher of the laterMiddle Ages. He wrote influential works on economics, mathematics, physics,astrology,astronomy, philosophy, and theology. He served asBishop of Lisieux, translated Aristotelian texts for KingCharles V of France, and was a prominent scholar of 14th-century Europe.[5]
Nicole Oresme was bornc. 1320–1325 in the village of Allemagne (today'sFleury-sur-Orne) in the vicinity ofCaen, Normandy, in thediocese of Bayeux. Little is known about his family background, but his attendance at the royally sponsored College of Navarre in Paris, which supported students of modest means, suggests he likely came from a peasant or modest family.[6]
Oresme studied the "arts" in Paris, together withJean Buridan (the so-called founder of the French school of natural philosophy),Albert of Saxony and perhapsMarsilius of Inghen, and there received theMagister Artium. By 1342, he was a regent master in arts during debates overWilliam of Ockham'snatural philosophy.[7]
In 1348, he was a student of theology in Paris.
In 1356 he received his doctorate and in the same year he became grand master (grand-maître) of theCollege of Navarre.
In 1364 he was appointed dean of the Cathedral ofRouen. From 1369, at the request of Charles V, he translated Aristotelian works into French, receiving a pension in 1371. In 1377, with royal support, he became bishop ofLisieux, where he died in 1382.[8]
In hisLivre du ciel et du monde Oresme discussed a range of evidence for and against the dailyrotation of the Earth on its axis.[9] From astronomical considerations, he maintained that if the Earth were moving and not thecelestial spheres, all the movements that we see in the heavens that are computed by the astronomers would appear exactly the same as if the spheres were rotating around the Earth. He rejected the physical argument that if the Earth were moving the air would be left behind causing a great wind from east to west. In his view theEarth,Water, andAir would all share the same motion.[10] Regarding scriptural references to the Sun's motion, he argued they reflect common linguistic usage rather than literal truth.[11] He suggested that a rotating Earth would be simpler than the rotation of the heavens.[12] However, he concluded that the evidence was inconclusive and adhered to the prevailing view that the heavens rotate while the Earth remains stationary.[13]
In his mathematical work, Oresme developed the notion of incommensurate fractions, fractions that could not be expressed as powers of one another, and made probabilistic, statistical arguments as to their relative frequency.[14] From this, he argued that it was very probable that the length of the day and the year were incommensurate (irrational), as indeed were the periods of the motions of themoon and theplanets. From this, he noted that planetaryconjunctions andoppositions would never recur in quite exactly the same way. Oresme maintained that this disproves the claims ofastrologers who, thinking "they know with punctual exactness the motions,aspects, conjunctions and oppositions... [judge] rashly and erroneously about future events."[15]
Oresme's critique ofastrology in hisLivre de divinacions treats it as having six parts.[16] The first, essentially astronomy, the movements of heavenly bodies, he considers good science but not precisely knowable.The second part deals with the influences of the heavenly bodies on earthly events at all scales. Oresme does not deny such influence, but states, in line with a commonly held opinion,[17] that it could either be that arrangements of heavenly bodies signify events, purelysymbolically, or that they actually cause such events, deterministically. Mediaevalist Chauncey Wood remarks that this major elision "makes it very difficult to determine who believed what about astrology".[17]
The third part concerns predictiveness, covering events at three different scales: great events such as plagues, famines, floods and wars; weather, winds and storms; and medicine, with influences on thehumours, the fourAristotelian fluids of the body. Oresme criticizes all of these as misdirected, though he accepts that prediction is a legitimate area of study, and argues that the effect on the weather is less well known than the effect on great events. He observes that sailors and farmers are better at predicting weather than astrologers, and specifically attacks the astrological basis of prediction, noting correctly that thezodiac has moved relative to the fixed stars (because ofprecession of the equinoxes) since the zodiac was first described inancient times.[17] These first three parts are what Oresme considers the physical influences of the stars and planets (including sun and moon) on the earth, and while he offers critiques of them, he accepts that effects exist. The last three parts are what Oresme considers to concern (good or bad) fortune. They areinterrogations, meaning asking the stars when to do things such as business deals; elections, meaning choosing the best time to do things such as getting married or fighting a war and nativities, meaning the natal astrology with birth charts that forms much of modern astrological practice. Oresme classifies interrogations and elections as "totally false" arts, but his critique of nativities is more measured. He denies that any path is predetermined by the heavenly bodies, because humans havefree will, but he accepts that the heavenly bodies can influence behaviour and habitual mood, via the combination of humours in each person. Overall, Oresme's skepticism is strongly shaped by his understanding of the scope of astrology. He accepts things a modern skeptic would reject, and rejects some things – such as the knowability of planetary movements, and effects on weather – that are accepted by modern science.[18]
In discussing the propagation of light and sound, Oresme adopted the common medieval doctrine of the multiplication of species,[19] as it had been developed by optical writers such asAlhacen,Robert Grosseteste,Roger Bacon,John Pecham, andWitelo.[20] Oresme maintained that these species were immaterial, but corporeal (i.e., three-dimensional) entities.[21]
Oresme's most important contributions to mathematics are contained inTractatus de configurationibus qualitatum et motuum. In a quality, or accidental form, such as heat, he distinguished theintensio (the degree of heat at each point) and theextensio (as the length of the heated rod). These two terms were often replaced bylatitudo andlongitudo. For the sake of clarity, Oresme conceived the idea of visualizing these concepts by plane figures, approaching what we would now call rectangularcoordinates. The intensity of the quality was represented by a length orlatitudo proportional to the intensity erected perpendicular to the base at a given point on the base line, which represents thelongitudo. Oresme proposed that the geometrical form of such a figure could be regarded as corresponding to a characteristic of the quality itself. Oresme defined a uniform quality as that which is represented by a line parallel to the longitude, and any other quality as difform. Uniformly varying qualities are represented by a straight line inclined to the axis of the longitude, while he described many cases of nonuniformly varying qualities. Oresme extended this doctrine to figures of three dimensions. He considered this analysis applicable to many different qualities such as hotness,whiteness, andsweetness. Significantly for later developments, Oresme applied this concept to the analysis of local motion where thelatitudo or intensity represented the speed, thelongitudo represented the time, and the area of the figure represented thedistance travelled.[22] He formulated a theorem foruniformly accelerated motion, showing distance traveled as the area under a velocity-time graph, predatingGalileo.[1][23] have been cited to credit Oresme with the discovery of "proto bar charts".[24][25] He also proved the divergence of theharmonic series and introduced early concepts ofcurvature.[26] Oresme was the first mathematician to prove this fact, and (after his proof was lost) it was not proven again until the 17th century byPietro Mengoli.[27] He exploredfractional powers andprobability over infinite sequences, concepts developed centuries later.[14]: 142–3
Oresme, like many of his contemporaries such asJohn Buridan and Albert of Saxony, shaped and critiqued Aristotle's and Averroes's theories of motion to his own liking.[28] Taking inspiration from the theories offorma fluens andfluxus formae, Oresme would suggest his own descriptions for change and motion in his commentary ofPhysics.Forma fluens is described by William of Ockham as "Every thing that is moved is moved by a mover," andfluxus formae as "Every motion is produced by a mover."[29] Buridan and Albert of Saxony each subscribed to the classic interpretation of flux being an innate part of an object, but Oresme differs from his contemporaries in this aspect.[28] Oresme agrees withfluxus formae in that motion is attributed to an object, but that an object is "set into" motion, rather than "given" motion, denying a distinction between a motionless object and an object in motion. To Oresme, an object moves, but it is not a moving object.[28] Once an object begins movement through the three dimensions it has a new "modus rei" or "way of being," which should only be described through the perspective of the moving object, rather than a distinct point.[28] This line of thought coincides with Oresme's challenge to the structure of the universe. Oresme's description of motion was not popular, although it was thorough.[30] A Richard Brinkley is thought to be an inspiration for the modus-rei description, but this is uncertain.[30]
Oresme provided the first modern vernacular translations ofAristotle's moral works that are still extant today. Between 1371 and 1377 he translated Aristotle'sEthics,Politics andEconomics (the last of which is nowadays considered to be pseudo-Aristotelian) intoMiddle French. He also extensivelycommented on these texts, thereby expressing some of his political views. Like his predecessorsAlbert the Great,Thomas Aquinas andPeter of Auvergne (and quite unlike Aristotle), Oresme favours monarchy as the best form of government.[31] His criterion for good government is thecommon good. A king (by definition good) takes care of the common good, whereas atyrant works for his own profit. A monarch can ensure the stability and durability of his reign by letting the peopleparticipate in government. This has rather confusingly andanachronistically been calledpopular sovereignty.[32] Like Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Peter of Auvergne and especiallyMarsilius of Padua, whom he occasionally quotes, Oresme conceives of this popular participation as rather restrictive: only the multitude of reasonable, wise and virtuous men should be allowed political participation by electing and correcting the prince, changing the law and passing judgement.[33] Oresme, however, categorically denies theright of rebellion since it endangers the common good.[34] Unlike earlier commentators, however, Oresme prescribes the law as superior to the king's will.[35] It must only be changed in cases of extreme necessity.[36] Oresme favours moderate kingship,[37] thereby negating contemporaryabsolutist thought, usually promoted by adherents ofRoman law.[38] Furthermore, Oresme doesn't comply to contemporary conceptions of theFrench king assacred, as promoted byÉvrart de Trémaugon in hisSonge du vergier orJean Golein in hisTraité du sacre.[39] Although he heavily criticises theChurch as corrupt, tyrannical and oligarchical, he never fundamentally questions its necessity for the spiritual well-being of the faithful.[40]
It has traditionally been thought that Oresme's Aristotelian translations had a major influence onKing Charles V's politics: Charles' laws concerning theline of succession and the possibility of aregency for anunderage king have been accredited to Oresme, as has the election of several high-ranking officials by theking's council in the early 1370s.[41] Oresme may have conveyed Marsilian and conciliarist thought toJean Gerson andChristine de Pizan.[42]
With hisTreatise on the origin, nature, law, and alterations of money (De origine, natura, jure et mutationibus monetarum), one of the earliest manuscripts devoted to an economic matter, Oresme brings an interesting insight on the medieval conception of money. Oresme's viewpoints of theoretical architecture are outlined in Part 3 and 4 of his work fromDe moneta, which he completed between 1356 and 1360. His belief is that humans have a natural right to own property; this property belongs to the individual and community.[43] In Part 4, Oresme provides a solution to a political problem as to how a monarch can be held accountable to put the common good before any private affairs. Though the monarchy rightfully has claims on all money given an emergency, Oresme states that any ruler that goes through this is a "Tyrant dominating slaves". Oresme was one of the first medieval theorists that did not accept the right of the monarch to have claims on all money as well as "his subjects’ right to own private property.”
Oresme was known to be a well rounded psychologist. He practiced the technique of "inner senses" and studied the perception of the world. Oresme contributed to 19th and 20th century psychology in the fields ofcognitive psychology,perception psychology,psychology of consciousness, andpsychophysics. Oresme discovered the psychology of unconscious and came up with the theory of unconscious conclusion of perception. He developed many ideas beyond quality, quantity, categories and terms which were labeled "theory of cognition".[44]
Oresme's economic thought remained well regarded centuries after his death. In a 1920Essay on Medieval Economic Teaching, Irish economistGeorge O'Brien summed up the favorable academic consensus over Oresme'sTreatise on the origin, nature, law, and alterations of money:
The merits of this work have excited the unanimous admiration of all who have studied it.Roscher says that it contains 'a theory of money, elaborated in the fourteenth century, which remains perfectly correct to-day, under the test of the principles applied in the nineteenth century, and that with a brevity, a precision, a clarity, and a simplicity of language which is a striking proof of the superior genius of its author.' According toBrants, 'the treatise of Oresme is one of the first to be devotedex professo to an economic subject, and it expresses many ideas which are very just, more just than those which held the field for a long period after him, under the name of mercantilism, and more just than those which allowed of the reduction of money as if it were nothing more than a counter of exchange.' 'Oresme's treatise on money,' saysMacleod, 'may be justly said to stand at the head of modern economic literature. This treatise laid the foundations of monetary science, which are now accepted by all sound economists.' 'Oresme's completely secular and naturalistic method of treating one of the most important problems of political economy,' saysEspinas, 'is a signal of the approaching end of the Middle Ages and the dawn of the Renaissance.'Dr. Cunningham adds his tribute of praise: 'The conceptions of national wealth and national power were ruling ideas in economic matters for several centuries, and Oresme appears to be the earliest of the economic writers by whom they were explicitly adopted as the very basis of his argument.... A large number of points of economic doctrine in regard to coinage are discussed with much judgment and clearness.'Endemann alone is inclined to quarrel with the pre-eminence of Oresme; but on this question, he is in a minority of one.[45]
Oresme like many who were skeptical during the medieval period, considered theShroud of Turin to be a complete forgery, his thoughts are found in his treatise called "Problemata" (1370-1392).[46]
Duhem, Pierre (1911). "Nicole Oresme". In Herbermann, Charles (ed.).Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. New York: Robert Appleton Company.Nicole Oresme ... was the first to prove the divergence of the harmonic series (c. 1350). His results were lost for several centuries, and the result was proved again by Italian mathematician Pietro Mengoli in 1647 and by Swiss mathematician Johann Bernoulli in 1687.
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Academics | |
| People | |
| Other | |
