The theory of notitiae naturales or κοιναὶ ἔννοιαι was part of the ancient Stoic epistemology. It served as precondition of any knowledge. Within the framework of the humanist rediscovery of ancient sources this theory became an important aspect of Philipp Melanchthon’s theological anthropology. This paper examines the polyvalent perspectives of the theory of notitiae naturales in Melanchthon’s philosophy and the role it played among Lutheran and Calvinist scholars, particularly regarding Rom 1: 19, where Paul stated some kind of a natural knowledge of God. The idea of notitiae communes or “common notions” as an a priori precondition of knowledge was widely spread both on the continent and in England in early modernity. It came to an end by John Locke’s critique in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding.
{"title":"“Deus vult aliquas esse certas notitias…”","authors":"Günter Frank","doi":"10.5840/jems2019812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems2019812","url":null,"abstract":"The theory of notitiae naturales or κοιναὶ ἔννοιαι was part of the ancient Stoic epistemology. It served as precondition of any knowledge. Within the framework of the humanist rediscovery of ancient sources this theory became an important aspect of Philipp Melanchthon’s theological anthropology. This paper examines the polyvalent perspectives of the theory of notitiae naturales in Melanchthon’s philosophy and the role it played among Lutheran and Calvinist scholars, particularly regarding Rom 1: 19, where Paul stated some kind of a natural knowledge of God. The idea of notitiae communes or “common notions” as an a priori precondition of knowledge was widely spread both on the continent and in England in early modernity. It came to an end by John Locke’s critique in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding.","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71263086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The essay draws on the concept of ‘asymmetric counter-concepts’ as developed by Reinhart Koselleck starting with twin-formulas such as ‘the familiar and the unfamiliar’ which are generally used to establish collective designations of the self and others and which institutionalize the axiological and the epistemological. These counter-concepts can have different semantic temperatures. The focus is on the underlying meaning-production schemes which produce value-asymmetries. The essay tries to show that a process of heating up these value-asymmetries is only one side of the history of such asymmetric counter-concepts from medieval to modern times. Simultaneously a cooling down can be observed in written texts from different periods; examples include the 12th century Rolandslied and the 16th century Essais of Michel de Montaigne. Full negation eliminates uncertainties and value insecurities. But the complexities and contingencies that emerge since Early Modern times then lead to losses of negatability (Negierbarkeitsverluste), which in turn render gains in unfamiliarity. The modern experience of the foreign is indeterminate otherness instead of determined negation that characterized pre-modern alterity. Modern societies therefore need to mediate between validity and contingency under the circumstances of plurality. Interpretational demands and uncertainty about the relevant interpretive frames increase. Foreignness is then experienced as unfamiliarity. This presupposes intellectual attitudes like irritability, curiosity, and willingness to learn. The modern concept of ‘culture’ then is proposed as a comparative pattern where only unavoidable structural asymmetry remains. It explains cultural differences and the experience of foreignness through heterogeneity. Using this specifically modern pattern, there is no longer a legitimate value slope between one’s own position and its negation. The distinction is then between the familiar and the unfamiliar.
{"title":"Foreigners in Pre-Modernity","authors":"Peter Strohschneider","doi":"10.5840/jems20198214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems20198214","url":null,"abstract":"The essay draws on the concept of ‘asymmetric counter-concepts’ as developed by Reinhart Koselleck starting with twin-formulas such as ‘the familiar and the unfamiliar’ which are generally used to establish collective designations of the self and others and which institutionalize the axiological and the epistemological. These counter-concepts can have different semantic temperatures. The focus is on the underlying meaning-production schemes which produce value-asymmetries. The essay tries to show that a process of heating up these value-asymmetries is only one side of the history of such asymmetric counter-concepts from medieval to modern times. Simultaneously a cooling down can be observed in written texts from different periods; examples include the 12th century Rolandslied and the 16th century Essais of Michel de Montaigne. Full negation eliminates uncertainties and value insecurities. But the complexities and contingencies that emerge since Early Modern times then lead to losses of negatability (Negierbarkeitsverluste), which in turn render gains in unfamiliarity. The modern experience of the foreign is indeterminate otherness instead of determined negation that characterized pre-modern alterity. Modern societies therefore need to mediate between validity and contingency under the circumstances of plurality. Interpretational demands and uncertainty about the relevant interpretive frames increase. Foreignness is then experienced as unfamiliarity. This presupposes intellectual attitudes like irritability, curiosity, and willingness to learn. The modern concept of ‘culture’ then is proposed as a comparative pattern where only unavoidable structural asymmetry remains. It explains cultural differences and the experience of foreignness through heterogeneity. Using this specifically modern pattern, there is no longer a legitimate value slope between one’s own position and its negation. The distinction is then between the familiar and the unfamiliar.","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71263885","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores how, according to three early modern philosophers, philosophical theory should relate to our pre-theoretical picture of reality. Though coming from very different backgrounds, the Spanish scholastic, Domingo de Soto, and the English natural philosopher, Kenelm Digby, agreed that an ability to accommodate our pre-theoretical picture of the world and our ordinary way of speaking about reality is a virtue for a philosophical theory. Yet at the same time, they disagreed on what kind of ontology of the material world is implied by these. The Dutch Cartesian, Johannes de Raey, took a very different approach, and argued that the picture of reality we naturally develop from our early days onwards and the language associated with it have their use in domains such as law and medical practice, but are a poor guide to the ontology of the material world. Thus, if we are to arrive at a proper understanding of the nature of matter, we need to move beyond the picture of reality we naturally develop from our early days onwards in order to come to see that the nature of matter consists in bare extension.
根据三位早期现代哲学家的观点，本文探讨了哲学理论应该如何与我们的理论之前的现实图景联系起来。尽管来自不同的背景，西班牙学者多明戈·德·索托(Domingo de Soto)和英国自然哲学家凯尼姆·迪格比(Kenelm Digby)一致认为，对于哲学理论来说，能够容纳我们在理论之前的世界图景和我们谈论现实的普通方式是一种美德。但与此同时，他们对这些隐含着什么样的物质世界本体论存在分歧。荷兰笛卡尔学派的约翰内斯·德雷(Johannes de Raey)采取了一种截然不同的方法，他认为，我们从早期开始自然形成的现实图景，以及与之相关的语言，在法律和医疗实践等领域都有应用，但对物质世界的本体论却没有什么指导作用。因此，如果我们要达到对物质本质的正确理解，我们需要超越我们从早期自然发展起来的现实图景，以便看到物质的本质包含着纯粹的延伸。
{"title":"Common Conceptions and the Metaphysics of Material Substance","authors":"H. T. Adriaenssen","doi":"10.5840/jems2019815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems2019815","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores how, according to three early modern philosophers, philosophical theory should relate to our pre-theoretical picture of reality. Though coming from very different backgrounds, the Spanish scholastic, Domingo de Soto, and the English natural philosopher, Kenelm Digby, agreed that an ability to accommodate our pre-theoretical picture of the world and our ordinary way of speaking about reality is a virtue for a philosophical theory. Yet at the same time, they disagreed on what kind of ontology of the material world is implied by these. The Dutch Cartesian, Johannes de Raey, took a very different approach, and argued that the picture of reality we naturally develop from our early days onwards and the language associated with it have their use in domains such as law and medical practice, but are a poor guide to the ontology of the material world. Thus, if we are to arrive at a proper understanding of the nature of matter, we need to move beyond the picture of reality we naturally develop from our early days onwards in order to come to see that the nature of matter consists in bare extension.","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71263254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Making Mathematical Culture: University and Print in the Circle of Lefèvre d’Étaples, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018 (Iovan Drehe)","authors":"R. Oosterhoff","doi":"10.5840/jems2019819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems2019819","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p />","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71263540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ursula Franke, Baumgartens Erfindung der Asthetik. Mit einem Anhang: Baumgartens Asthetik im Uberblick von Nicolas Kleinschmidt","authors":"Alessandro Nannini","doi":"10.5840/jems20198217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems20198217","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p />","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71263565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the years after the first circulation of Sidereus Nuncius, Galileo’s Padua anti-Copernican colleague, the staunch Aristotelian philosopher, Cesare Cremonini, published a book on ‘traditional’ cosmology, Disputatio de coelo in tres partes divisa (Venice, 1613) which puzzled the Roman authorities of the Inquisition and the Index much more than any works on celestial novelties and ‘neo-Pythagorean’ astronomy. Cremonini’s disputation on the heavens has the form of an over-intricate comment of Aristotle’s conceptions, in the typically argumentative style of Scholasticism. Nonetheless, it immediately raised the concern of Cardinal Bellarmin, the Pope and other Inquisitors. At a close reading, Cremonini’s interpretation of Aristotle’s cosmos proved radically anti- Christian. It represented a radicalization of Pomponazzian Alexandrism. In fact, Cremonini did not only circulate Aristotelian principles used by Pomponazzi to argue for the soul’s mortality (first, no thought is possible without imagination and the latter faculty is dependent on the body; secondly, all that is generated will eventually perish). He also wiped away all transcendence from the Aristotelian cosmos. In fact, he marginalized the function of the motive Intelligences by explaining heavenly motions through the action of animal-like inseparable souls although he did not erase nor reduced all Intelligences to only one, in accordance with Alexander. Also, he put at the center of Aristotle’s cosmos the idea of its eternity, a thesis which he explicitly connected with the rejection of the idea of God the Creator. Cremonini assumed that the universal efficiens, that is the efficient cause of all motion and change in the world, is nothing but the first heaven. As a result of this radically naturalist reading of Aristotle, he banned God from the cosmos, reduced Him to the final cause of the world, and deprived Him of any efficiency and will. This essay on less explored sources of Renaissance astronomical debates considers the institutional, cultural and religious setting of Cremonini’s teaching and conceptions. It assesses the reasons for his troubles with the religious authorities, and the political support he was granted by the Serenissima Republic of Venice inspite of the scandalous opinions he circulated as a university professor. My reconstruction of his views is based on the Disputatio de coelo of 1613 and later works, which are directly connected with cosmo-theological polemics with the religious authorities: his Apologia dictorum Aristotelis de quinta coeli substantia (1616) and the unpublished book De coeli efficientia, two manuscript copies of which are preserved in the libraries of Padua and Venice.
伽利略的帕多瓦反哥白尼派同事、坚定的亚里士多德哲学家切萨雷·克雷莫尼尼(Cesare Cremonini)出版了一本关于“传统”宇宙学的书《论论》(Disputatio de coelo In treres partes divisa, 1613年，威尼斯)，这本书比任何关于天体新奇事物和“新毕达哥拉斯”天文学的著作更让罗马宗教法庭和索引当局感到困惑。克雷莫尼尼关于天堂的辩论，以典型的经院哲学论辩风格，对亚里士多德的概念进行了过于复杂的评论。尽管如此，它立即引起了红衣主教贝拉明、教皇和其他宗教裁判官的关注。仔细一读，克雷莫尼尼对亚里士多德宇宙的解释被证明是完全反基督教的。它代表了庞庞纳齐派亚历山大主义的激进化。事实上，克雷莫尼尼不仅传播了庞帕纳齐用来论证灵魂死亡的亚里士多德原则(首先，没有想象力就不可能有思想，想象力依赖于身体;其次，所有产生的东西最终都会消亡。他还从亚里士多德的宇宙中抹去了所有的超越性。事实上，他通过动物般的不可分割的灵魂的活动来解释天堂的运动，从而边缘化了动机智能的功能，尽管他没有抹去也没有将所有智能简化为一个，这与亚历山大的观点一致。此外，他把宇宙的永恒性观念置于亚里士多德的宇宙理论的中心，他明确地把这个论点与拒绝上帝是创造者的观念联系起来。克雷莫尼尼假定宇宙效率，即世界上一切运动和变化的有效原因，只不过是第一个天堂。这种对亚里士多德的极端自然主义解读的结果是，他将上帝排除在宇宙之外，将他贬为世界的最终原因，并剥夺了他的任何效率和意志。这篇关于文艺复兴时期天文学辩论的较少探索的来源的文章考虑了克雷莫尼尼的教学和概念的制度，文化和宗教背景。书中分析了他与宗教当局之间的矛盾，以及尽管他作为一名大学教授散布着一些诽谤性言论，但威尼斯塞雷尼西马共和国仍给予他政治支持的原因。我对他的观点的重建是基于1613年的《论辩》(Disputatio de coelo)和后来的作品，这些作品与与宗教权威的宇宙神学论战直接相关:他的《亚里士多德的辩词》(Apologia dictorum Aristotelis de quinta coeli substantia, 1616)和未出版的《效率论》(de coeli efficientia)，两本手稿副本保存在帕多瓦和威尼斯的图书馆。
{"title":"A Cosmos Without a Creator","authors":"P. Omodeo, Zeta Books","doi":"10.5840/jems20198211","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems20198211","url":null,"abstract":"In the years after the first circulation of Sidereus Nuncius, Galileo’s Padua anti-Copernican colleague, the staunch Aristotelian philosopher, Cesare Cremonini, published a book on ‘traditional’ cosmology, Disputatio de coelo in tres partes divisa (Venice, 1613) which puzzled the Roman authorities of the Inquisition and the Index much more than any works on celestial novelties and ‘neo-Pythagorean’ astronomy. Cremonini’s disputation on the heavens has the form of an over-intricate comment of Aristotle’s conceptions, in the typically argumentative style of Scholasticism. Nonetheless, it immediately raised the concern of Cardinal Bellarmin, the Pope and other Inquisitors. At a close reading, Cremonini’s interpretation of Aristotle’s cosmos proved radically anti- Christian. It represented a radicalization of Pomponazzian Alexandrism. In fact, Cremonini did not only circulate Aristotelian principles used by Pomponazzi to argue for the soul’s mortality (first, no thought is possible without imagination and the latter faculty is dependent on the body; secondly, all that is generated will eventually perish). He also wiped away all transcendence from the Aristotelian cosmos. In fact, he marginalized the function of the motive Intelligences by explaining heavenly motions through the action of animal-like inseparable souls although he did not erase nor reduced all Intelligences to only one, in accordance with Alexander. Also, he put at the center of Aristotle’s cosmos the idea of its eternity, a thesis which he explicitly connected with the rejection of the idea of God the Creator. Cremonini assumed that the universal efficiens, that is the efficient cause of all motion and change in the world, is nothing but the first heaven. As a result of this radically naturalist reading of Aristotle, he banned God from the cosmos, reduced Him to the final cause of the world, and deprived Him of any efficiency and will. This essay on less explored sources of Renaissance astronomical debates considers the institutional, cultural and religious setting of Cremonini’s teaching and conceptions. It assesses the reasons for his troubles with the religious authorities, and the political support he was granted by the Serenissima Republic of Venice inspite of the scandalous opinions he circulated as a university professor. My reconstruction of his views is based on the Disputatio de coelo of 1613 and later works, which are directly connected with cosmo-theological polemics with the religious authorities: his Apologia dictorum Aristotelis de quinta coeli substantia (1616) and the unpublished book De coeli efficientia, two manuscript copies of which are preserved in the libraries of Padua and Venice.","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71263591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Emergence of Modern Aesthetic Theory: Religion and Morality in Enlightenment Germany and Scotland","authors":"Eduard Ghiţă, Zeta Books","doi":"10.5840/JEMS20187218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/JEMS20187218","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"7 1","pages":"124-127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49606459","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Indecorous Thinking: Figures of Speech in Early Modern Poetics","authors":"R. Vuillemin, Zeta Books","doi":"10.5840/jems20187215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems20187215","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"7 1","pages":"107-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42598769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"L’ateismo dei moderni. Filosofia e negazione di Dio da Spinoza a d’Holbach","authors":"Diego Lucci, Zeta Books","doi":"10.5840/jems20187217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems20187217","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"7 1","pages":"118-124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45717958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Philosophical Duelism: Fencing in Early Modern Thought","authors":"K. Delapp, Zeta Books","doi":"10.5840/jems20187212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems20187212","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"7 1","pages":"31-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44486337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：