Scholasticism was amedieval European philosophical movement or methodology that was the predominant education in Europe from about 1100 to 1700.[1] It is known for employing logically precise analyses and reconcilingclassical philosophy andCatholic Christianity.[2]
Scholasticism is a method of learning more than a philosophy or a theology, since it places a strong emphasis on dialectical reasoning to extend knowledge byinference and to resolvecontradictions. Scholastic thought is also known for rigorous conceptual analysis and the careful drawing of distinctions. In the classroom and in writing, it often takes the form of explicitdisputation; a topic drawn from the tradition is broached in the form of a question, oppositional responses are given, a counterproposal is argued and oppositional arguments rebutted. Because of its emphasis on rigorous dialectical method, scholasticism was eventually applied to many other fields of study.[6][7]
The terms "scholastic" and "scholasticism" derive from theLatin wordscholasticus, the Latinized form of theGreekσχολαστικός (scholastikos), an adjective derived fromσχολή (scholē), "school".[11]Scholasticus means "of or pertaining to schools". The "scholastics", therefore, were roughly "schoolmen".
The foundations of Christian scholasticism were laid byBoethius through his logical and theological essays.[6] Later forerunners (and then companions) to scholasticism were IslamicIlm al-Kalām, meaning "science of discourse",[12] andJewish philosophy, especiallyJewish Kalam.[13]
The first significant renewal of learning in the West came with theCarolingian Renaissance of theEarly Middle Ages.Charlemagne, advised byPeter of Pisa andAlcuin of York, attracted the scholars of England and Ireland, where some Greek works continued to survive in the original. By a 787 decree, he established schools at every abbey in his empire. These schools, from which the namescholasticism derived,[dubious –discuss] became centers of medieval learning.[14]
During this period, knowledge of Ancient Greek had vanished in the West except in Ireland, where its teaching and use was fairly common in itsmonastic schools.[15] Irish scholars had a considerable presence in theFrankish court, where they were renowned for their learning.[16] Among them wasJohannes Scotus Eriugena (815–877), one of the founders of scholasticism.[17] Eriugena was the most significant Irish intellectual of the early monastic period and an outstanding philosopher in terms of originality.[16] He had considerable familiarity with the Greek language and translated many works into Latin, affording access to theCappadocian Fathers and theGreek theological tradition.[16] Three other primary founders of scholasticism were the 11th-century archbishopsLanfranc andAnselm ofCanterbury inEngland andPeter Abelard inFrance.[17]
This period saw the beginning of the "rediscovery" of many Greek works which had been lost to the Latin West. As early as the latter half of the 10th century, theToledo School of Translators inMuslim Spain had begun translating Arabic texts into Latin.[18] After a successful burst ofReconquista in the 12th century, Spain opened even further for Christian scholars and, as these Europeans encounteredJudeo-Islamic philosophies, they opened a wealth of Arab and Judaic knowledge of mathematics and astronomy.[19] TheLatin translations of the 12th century also included figures likeConstantine the African in Italy andJames of Venice in Constantinople. Scholars such asAdelard of Bath traveled to Spain and Sicily, translating works on astronomy and mathematics, including the first complete translation ofEuclid'sElements into Latin.[20]
At the same time, theSchool of Chartres producedBernard of Chartres's commentaries onPlato'sTimaeus and a range of works byWilliam of Conches that attempted to reconcile the use of classical pagan and philosophical sources in a medieval Christian concept using the kludge ofintegumentum, treating the obviouslyheretical surface meanings as coverings disguising a deeper (and more orthodox) truth.[21] Abelard himself was condemned byBernard of Clairvaux at the1141 Council of Sens and William avoided a similar fate through systematic self-bowdlerization of his early work, but his commentaries and encyclopedicDe Philosophia Mundi andDragmaticon were miscredited to earlier scholars likeBede and widely disseminated.Anselm of Laon systematized the production of thegloss on Scripture, followed by the rise to prominence ofdialectic (the middle subject of the medievaltrivium) in the work ofAbelard.Peter Lombard produced a collection ofSentences, or opinions of the Church Fathers and other authorities.[22]
More recently,Leinsle,[23]Novikoff,[24] and others have argued against the idea that scholasticism primarily derived from philosophical contact, emphasizing its continuity with earlierPatristic Christianity. This remains, however, a minority viewpoint.[citation needed]
The 13th and early 14th centuries are generally seen as the high period of scholasticism. The early 13th century witnessed the culmination of therecovery of Greek philosophy. Schools of translation grew up in Italy and Sicily, and eventually in the rest of Europe. Powerful Norman kings gathered men of knowledge from Italy and other areas into their courts as a sign of their prestige.[25]William of Moerbeke's translations and editions of Greek philosophical texts in the middle half of the thirteenth century helped form a clearer picture of Greek philosophy, particularly of Aristotle, than was given by the Arabic versions on which they had previously relied.Edward Grant writes "Not only was the structure of the Arabic language radically different from that of Latin, but some Arabic versions had been derived from earlier Syriac translations and were thus twice removed from the original Greek text. Word-for-word translations of such Arabic texts could produce tortured readings. By contrast, the structural closeness of Latin to Greek, permitted literal, but intelligible, word-for-word translations."[19]
Universities developed in the large cities of Europe during this period, and rival clerical orders within the church began to battle for political and intellectual control over these centers of educational life. The two main orders founded in this period were theFranciscans and theDominicans. The Franciscans were founded byFrancis of Assisi in 1209. Their leader in the middle of the century wasBonaventure, a traditionalist who defended the theology ofAugustine and the philosophy ofPlato, incorporating only a little of Aristotle in with the more neoplatonist elements. Following Anselm, Bonaventure supposed that reason can only discover truth when philosophy is illuminated by religious faith.[26] Other important Franciscan scholastics wereDuns Scotus,Peter Auriol andWilliam of Ockham.[27][28]
By contrast, the Dominican order, a teaching order founded bySt Dominic in 1215, to propagate and defend Christian doctrine, placed more emphasis on the use of reason and made extensive use of thenew Aristotelian sources derived from the East and Moorish Spain. The great representatives of Dominican thinking in this period wereAlbertus Magnus and (especially)Thomas Aquinas, whose artful synthesis of Greek rationalism and Christian doctrine eventually came to define Catholic philosophy.
Aquinas's masterwork,Summa Theologica (1265–1274), is considered to be the pinnacle of scholastic, medieval, and Christian philosophy.[10] It began while Aquinas was regent master at thestudium provinciale ofSanta Sabina in Rome, the forerunner of thePontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas placed more emphasis on reason and argumentation, and was one of the first to use the new translation of Aristotle's metaphysical and epistemological writing. This was a significant departure from theNeoplatonic and Augustinian thinking that had dominated much of early scholasticism. Aquinas showed how it was possible to incorporate much of the philosophy of Aristotle without falling into the "errors" of the Commentator,Averroes.[29]
Following the Reformation,Calvinists largely adopted the scholastic method of theology, while differing regarding sources of authority and content of theology.[31]
As J. A. WeisheiplO.P. emphasizes, within theDominican Order Thomistic scholasticism has been continuous since the time of Aquinas: "Thomism was always alive in the Dominican Order, small as it was after the ravages of the Reformation, the French Revolution, and the Napoleonic occupation. Repeated legislation of the General Chapters, beginning after the death of St. Thomas, as well as the Constitutions of the Order, required all Dominicans to teach the doctrine of St. Thomas both in philosophy and in theology."[33]
Thomistic scholasticism or scholasticThomism identifies with the philosophical and theological tradition stretching back to the time of St. Thomas. It focuses not only on exegesis of the historical Aquinas but also on the articulation of a rigorous system of orthodox Thomism to be used as an instrument of critique of contemporary thought. Due to its suspicion of attempts to harmonize Aquinas with non-Thomistic categories and assumptions, Scholastic Thomism has sometimes been called, according to philosophers likeEdward Feser, "Strict Observance Thomism".[34] A discussion of recent and current Thomistic scholasticism can be found inLa Metafisica di san Tommaso d'Aquino e i suoi interpreti (2002) byBattista Mondin [it], which includes such figures as Sofia Vanni Rovighi (1908–1990),[35]Cornelio Fabro (1911–1995), Carlo Giacon (1900–1984),[36]Tomas TynO.P. (1950–1990), Abelardo LobatoO.P. (1925–2012), Leo Elders (1926– ) andGiovanni Ventimiglia (1964– ) among others. Fabro in particular emphasizes Aquinas' originality, especially with respect to theactus essendi or act of existence of finite beings by participating in being itself. Other scholars such as those involved with the "Progetto Tommaso" seek to establish an objective and universal reading of Aquinas' texts.[37]
Thomistic scholasticism in the English speaking world went into decline in the 1970s when the Thomistic revival that had been spearheaded byJacques Maritain,Étienne Gilson, and others, diminished in influence. Partly, this was because this branch ofThomism had become a quest to understand the historical Aquinas after theSecond Vatican Council.
A renewed interest in the "scholastic" way of doing philosophy has recently awoken in the confines of theanalytic philosophy.[38][39] Attempts emerged to combine elements of scholastic and analytic methodology in pursuit of a contemporary philosophical synthesis. Proponents of various incarnations of this approach includeAnthony Kenny, Peter King, Thomas Williams orDavid Oderberg.[citation needed]
Cornelius O'Boyle explained that Scholasticism focuses on how to acquire knowledge and how to communicate effectively so that it may be acquired by others. It was thought that the best way to achieve this was by replicating the discovery process (modus inveniendi).[40]
The scholasticists would choose a book by a renowned scholar,auctor (author), as a subject for investigation. By reading it thoroughly and critically, the disciples learned to appreciate the theories of the author. Other documents related to the book would be referenced, such as Church councils, papal letters and anything else written on the subject, be it ancient or contemporary. The points of disagreement and contention between multiple sources would be written down in individual sentences or snippets of text, known assententiae. Once the sources and points of disagreement had been laid out through a series ofdialectics, the two sides of an argument would be made whole so that they would be found to be in agreement and not contradictory. (Of course, sometimes opinions would be totally rejected, or new positions proposed.) This was done in two ways. The first was throughphilological analysis. Words were examined and argued to have multiple meanings. It was also considered that theauctor might have intended a certain word to mean something different. Ambiguity could be used to find common ground between two otherwise contradictory statements. The second was through logical analysis, which relied on the rules of formallogic – as they were known at the time – to show that contradictions did not exist but were subjective to the reader.[41]
Scholastic instruction consisted of several elements. The first was thelectio: a teacher would read an authoritative text followed by a commentary, but no questions were permitted. This was followed by themeditatio (meditation or reflection) in which students reflected on and appropriated the text. Finally, in thequaestio students could ask questions (quaestiones) that might have occurred to them duringmeditatio. Eventually the discussion ofquestiones became a method of inquiry apart from thelectio and independent of authoritative texts.Disputationes were arranged to resolve controversialquaestiones.[42]
Questions to be disputed were ordinarily announced beforehand, but students could propose a question to the teacher unannounced –disputationes de quodlibet. In this case, the teacher responded and the students rebutted; on the following day the teacher, having used notes taken during the disputation, summarised all arguments and presented his final position, riposting all rebuttals.[41][43]
Thequaestio method of reasoning was initially used especially when two authoritative texts seemed to contradict one another. Two contradictory propositions would be considered in the form of an either/or question, and each part of the question would have to be approved (sic) or denied (non). Arguments for the position taken would be presented in turn, followed by arguments against the position, and finally the arguments against would be refuted. This method forced scholars to consider opposing viewpoints and defend their own arguments against them.[44]
^See Steven P. Marone, "Medieval philosophy in context" in A. S. McGrade, ed.,The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). On the difference between scholastic and medieval monastic postures towards learning, see Jean Leclercq,The Love of Learning and the Desire for God (New York: Fordham University Press, 1970) esp. 89; 238ff.
^Grayling, A. C. (2019).The History of Philosophy. Penguin Press, pp. 146-7.
^Gracia, Jorge JE, and Timothy B. Noone, eds. A companion to philosophy in the middle ages. John Wiley & Sons, 2008, 55–64
^abPatte, Daniel.The Cambridge Dictionary of Christianity. Ed. Daniel Patte. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010, 11132-1133
^Grant, Edward.God and Reason in the Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press, 2004, 159
^Particularly throughPseudo-Dionysius,Augustine, andBoethius, and through the influence ofPlotinus andProclus on Muslim philosophers. In the case of Aquinas, for instance, see Jan Aertsen, "Aquinas' philosophy in its historical setting" inThe Cambridge Companion to Aquinas, ed. Norman Kretzmann and Eleonore Stump (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). Jean Leclerq,The Love of Learning and the Desire for God (New York: Fordham University Press, 1970).
^Grant, Edward.God and Reason in the Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press, 2004, 56
^abGilson, Etienne (1991).The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy (Gifford Lectures 1933–35). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. p. 490.ISBN978-0-268-01740-8.
^abToman 2007, p. 10: "Abelard himself was ... together with John Scotus Erigena (9th century), andLanfranc andAnselm of Canterbury (both 11th century), one of the founders of scholasticism."
^abGrant, Edward, and Emeritus Edward Grant. The foundations of modern science in the Middle Ages: their religious, institutional and intellectual contexts. Cambridge University Press, 1996, 23–28
^GIACON, Carlo. Treccani Encyclopedia./ Accessed 9 April 2013
^SeeRizzello, Raffaele (1999)."Il Progetto Tommaso". In Giacomo Grasso, O.P.; Stefano Serafini (eds.).Vita quaerens intellectum. Rome: Millennium Romae. pp. 157–161. Archived fromthe original on 28 September 2013. Retrieved25 September 2013.
van Asselt, Willem J. (2011).Inleiding in de Gereformeerde Scholastiek [Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism] (in Dutch). With contributions by T. Theo J. Pleizier, Pieter L. Rouwendal, and Maarten Wisse; Translated by Albert Gootjes. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Reformation Heritage Books.ISBN978-1-60178-121-5.
Clagett, Marshall (1982). "William of Moerbeke: Translator of Archimedes".Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.126 (5):356–366.JSTOR986212.
