Psychology History entry

76 CHAPTER 3 In his training in Greek philosophy, St. Paul as immortal. The mind, the rational part of humans, was especially influenced by Plato. Paul took was seen as caught between the body and the spirit— Plato’s notion that true knowledge can be attained sometimes serving the body, which is bad, and at only by escaping from the influence of sensory in- other times serving the spirit, which is good. formation and transformed it into a battle between Humans, then, are caught in an eternal struggle the soul, which contains the spark of God, and the between sinful, bodily urges and God’s law. The desires of the flesh. But then he did something that law can be understood and accepted and a desire most Greek philosophers would have found abhor- can exist to act in accordance with it, but often the rent: He placed faith above reason. Faith alone can passions of the body conflict with the law, and they provide personal salvation. The good life is no lon- win the struggle. To know what is moral does not ger defined in terms of rationality but in terms of guarantee moral behavior. This perpetual struggle our willingness to surrender our existence to God’s results from the fact that humans are animals who will. God is the cause of everything, knows every- possess a spark of God. We are partly animalistic thing, and has a plan for everything. By believing— and partly divine; conflict is the necessary conse- by having faith—we affiliate ourselves with God quence. For Paul, all physical pleasure was sinful, and receive his grace. By living a life in accordance but most sinful of all was sexual pleasure. This state with God’s will, we are granted the privilege of of conflict involving the good, the bad, and the spending eternity in God’s grace when our mortal rational is very much like the one described by coil is shed. For many, given their earthly condi- Freud many centuries later. tions, this seemed to be a small price to pay for eternal bliss. Paul’s Attitude toward Women. It is often said Paul’s efforts left major questions for future that Paul was guilty of misogyny (hatred of theologians to answer. Given the fact that God is women). This is partly because of his negative atti- all knowing and all powerful, is there any room for tude toward sex. He glorified celibacy and only human free will? And given the importance of faith reluctantly sanctioned sex even within marriage: for salvation, what is the function or value of hu- “It is a good thing for a man to have nothing to man reason? These questions can be stated in do with women; but because there is so much im- slightly different terms: Given the fact that every- morality, let each man have his own wife and each thing is determined by God’s will, why did God woman her own husband” (1 Corinthians 7:1–3). apparently give humans the ability to choose? However, this negative attitude went beyond sex. And if we are incapable of understanding God’s Paul said, plan—and, indeed, if it is not necessary for us to do so—why do we possess reasoning powers? Let a women learn in silence and with all There was also a third question: Given the fact submissiveness. I permit no woman to that God is perfect and loving, what accounts for teach or to have authority over men; she is the evil in the world? Following St. Paul, theolo- to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, gians were to agonize over these and related ques- then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but tions for many centuries. the women was deceived and became a The human was now clearly divided into three transgressor. (1 Timothy 1:11–14) parts: the body, the mind, and the spirit. As it was And elsewhere Paul said: for the Pythagoreans, Platonists, and Neoplatonists, the body was the major source of difficulty for As in all the churches of the saints, the early Christians. The spirit was the spark of God women should keep silent in the churches. within us and was the most highly valued aspect of For they are not permitted to speak, but human nature. Through our spirit, we were capable should be subordinate, as even the law of becoming close to God, and the spirit was viewed says. If there is anything they desire to

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 77 know, let them ask their husbands at Emperor Constantine home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. (1 Corinthians 14:34–35) In 312, the emperor Constantine (ca. 272–337) was said to have had a vision that changed the Furthermore, Paul said, man “is the image and course of Christian history. Supposedly, just before glory of God; but woman is the glory of man … for a major battle (the Battle of the Milvian Bridge), he man was not made from woman, but woman from visualized the Christian cross in the sky accompa- man (1 Corinthians 11:7–8). nied by the words, “By this sign you shall On the other hand, there are elements of gen- conquer.” Kousoulas (1997, pp. 239–244) provides der equality in Paul’s writing. For example, he said, evidence that Constantine actually had no vision “There are no such things as a Jew and Greek, but invented it to inspire his troops. In any case, slave and freeman, male and female; for you are he instructed his soldiers to mark their shields all one person in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). In with an abbreviation, in Greek, of the word any case, insofar as Paul believed women were so- “Christ,” and the next day, although his troops cially and intellectually inferior to men, he was re- were greatly outnumbered, they won the battle de- flecting a belief that was prevalent throughout cisively. Constantine attributed his victory to the Roman history (Fagan, 1999, lecture 40). For god of the Christians and, thereafter, concerned more on Paul’s sometimes conflicting attitudes to- himself with Christian affairs. In 313, Constantine ward women, see Ehrman, 2003, pp. 38–39; and signed the Edict of Milan, making Christianity a Maccoby, 1986, pp. 200–203. tolerated religion in the Roman Empire. It should In the 300 years following the death of Jesus, be emphasized that the Edict of Milan did not make there was a gradual increase in the acceptance of Christianity the official religion of the Roman Christianity within the Roman Empire. At first, Empire, as is often claimed. Although Constantine Christianity was mainly the type described by clearly came to favor the Christian religion, the St. Paul—that is, a combination of Judaism and purpose of his Edict was to promote religious toler- Neoplatonism. Salvation was attained by living a ance within the empire, and he never varied from simple, pure life and recognizing the poverty of ma- that position. It was Theodosius I (emperor 379– terial things. Concerning the latter, “it has been ar- 395) who made Christianity the official religion of gued that the Cynics provided an important pagan the Roman Empire (Ehrman, 2003, p. 251). model for early Christian communities” (Branham In Constantine’s time, there were several and Goulet-Cazé, 1996, p. 19). A confession of sin conflicting versions of Christianity, and this was and ignorance paved the way for eternal salvation unacceptable to him. For example, there was debate through God’s grace. As Christianity became in- concerning the nature of Jesus: Was God the Father creasingly sophisticated, many debates occurred superior to Jesus the Son, did they have equal status, within the church concerning what was true or was Jesus simply an exceptional individual? To Christian belief and what was heretical. We will decide the matter, Constantine convened at sample these debates shortly. Outside the church, Nicaea, in 325, a meeting of bishops from through- pagans (originally the term pagan meant “peasant” out the Roman Empire. The Nicaean Council con- but came to mean “non-Christian”) tended to cluded after much bitter debate that God the Father view Christians as atheists, magicians, and noncon- and Jesus the Son had equal status. Thereafter, it was formists (Benko, 1984; Wilken, 2003). As the heresy to suggest otherwise. Also, in Constantine’s number of Christians increased, their nonconfor- time there was no universally accepted set of docu- mity was viewed as a threat by some Roman ments concerning the life and teachings of Jesus. emperors, and they were sometimes severely per- Rather, different Christian communities used differ- secuted. The first 300 years of Christianity were ent documents to define their faith. For example, in anything but tranquil. addition to the four gospels that eventually became

78 CHAPTER 3 part of the New Testament, there were many that popularity. Christianity became widely known not did not. It’s not possible to know with certainty only among common people but among intellec- how many gospels there were, but 25 to 30 nonca- tuals as well. This awareness by intellectuals caused nonical Gospels still survive. At the time, the various the further questioning of the tenets of Christianity, Christian communities had no uniformity as to and before long it was not enough to accept which of these gospels were considered Christian beliefs simply on faith. Such beliefs “Scripture” (Ehrman, 2005, lecture 7). This too needed to be explained, defended, and justified. was unacceptable to Constantine, and he charged In other words, Christianity needed a philosophical the bishops with the task of arriving at a single set framework, and it was Augustine, more than any- of documents to be used by all Christian communi- one, who provided that framework. ties. Thus was created the “Constantine Bible,” For excellent reviews of the intellectual criti- which, unfortunately, is lost to history, so its con- cisms of Christianity to which Augustine and others tents are unknown. So what is the origin of the responded, see Benko, 1984, and Wilkins, 2003. New Testament as we know it today? In fact, it wasn’t until 367 that Athanasius (296–373), the con- St. Augustine troversial and influential bishop of Alexandria, first decreed the 27 books that now constitute the New Once Christianity was a tolerated religion, a debate Testament and only those books be regarded as ca- ensued within the church concerning the status of nonical. Although debate continued after non-Christian (pagan) beliefs. On one side was St. Athanasius concerning which books should be in- Jerome (ca. 347–420), who argued that non- cluded in the New Testament, his decree ultimately Christian philosophy should be condemned. On became orthodoxy (Ehrman, 2005, lecture 12). the other side was St. Ambrose (ca. 340–397), In spite of his deep involvement in the affairs of who argued that the elements of other philosophies the Christian church, Constantine continued to compatible with Christianity should be accepted by embrace a number of pagan beliefs, and it has often the church. St. Ambrose’s position was victorious, been argued that his sympathy toward Christianity and its greatest spokesman was St. Augustine (ca. was more a matter of political expediency than re- 354–430). It was Augustine who combined ligious conviction. The Edict of Milan reduced Stoicism, Neoplatonism, and Judaism into a power- much social turmoil and significantly increased ful Christian worldview that would dominate Constantine’s power. Also, Constantine was bap- Western life and thought until the 13th century. tized a Christian only on his deathbed, in 337. The authoritative, theological works of Augustine Scarre (1995) suggests the truth lies somewhere be- are often taken as marking the beginning of the tween true belief and political expediency: “There Middle Ages, also called the medieval period of is certainly no reason to doubt that Constantine was history (from the Latin medius, meaning “middle,” a man of sincere religious conviction. But he was and aevium, meaning “age”). also an able propagandist, a gifted military com- Augustine concentrated almost exclusively on mander, and an unscrupulous and determined ma- human spirituality. About the physical world, we nipulator” (p. 213). need only know that God created it. Augustine Before Constantine, Christianity was very shared with the Pythagoreans, Platonists, much a minority religion. It has been estimated Neoplatonists, and earlier Christians a contempt that Christians constituted only about 5 percent of for the flesh. When thoughts are focused on God, the population of the Roman Empire and pagans there is little need for worldly things. Arrival at true about 95 percent (Ehrman, 2002, lecture 13). knowledge requires the passage from an awareness However, after Constantine, and largely due to of the body to sense perception, to an internal his efforts, a single set of beliefs and documents knowledge of the forms (universal ideas), and, fi- defined Christianity, and this helped promote its nally, to an awareness of God, the author of the

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 79 forms. For Augustine, as for the earlier Christians, to Augustine, certain people are, before they are ultimate knowledge consisted of knowing God. born, chosen by God to eventually enter heaven. The human was seen as a dualistic being consisting In other words, there is nothing people can do in of a body not unlike that possessed by animals and a their lifetime that allows them to eventually enter spirit that was close to or part of God. The war the kingdom of God. Entrance into heaven is de- between the two aspects of human nature, already termined by God’s grace alone. The reason for present in Platonic philosophy, became the God’s choice concerning those who go to heaven Christian struggle between heaven and hell—that (the elect) and those who do not is incomprehensi- is, between God and Satan. ble to humans and must forever remain a mystery. The fact that some humans are damned is only just The Will. God speaks to each individual through because we are all worthy of damnation; the fact his or her soul, but the individual need not listen. that some are granted salvation demonstrates According to Augustine, individuals are free to God’s mercy. Augustine’s doctrine of predestina- choose between the way of the flesh (Satan), which tion raised many questions that were never satisfac- is sinful, and the way of God. The human ability to torily answered. For example, if salvation is a gift choose explains why evil is present in the world: from God independent of one’s actions, what pre- evil exists because people choose it. This, of course, vents moral carelessness? (Chadwick, 2001, p. 124). raises the thorny question, Why did God give hu- In the centuries following Augustine’s death, the mans the ability to choose evil? For example, why doctrine of predestination was frequently debated did God allow the original sin to occur in the by Christian theologians. In most cases, the doctrine Garden of Eden? Concerning such questions was rejected in favor of the belief that all humans Augustine said, “We ought not try to understand can earn salvation by accepting Christ as their savior more than should be understood” (Bourke, 1993, and by avoiding sin during their lifetime. The the- p. 241). ologies of Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John According to Augustine, people have an inter- Calvin (1509–1564) are examples to the contrary. nal sense that helps them evaluate their experi- Both accepted Augustine’s doctrine of predestina- ences by providing an awareness of truth, error, tion. We will elaborate Luther’s thoughts on this personal obligation, and moral right. Deviation matter in the next chapter. Interestingly, through- from this internal sense causes the feeling of guilt. out the long history of this debate, both those sup- In fact, one need not actually act contrary to this porting the doctrine and those opposing it use internal sense to feel guilty but only ponder doing scripture to defend their positions. so. Just thinking about doing something sinful will cause as much guilt as actually doing something Augustine’s Confessions. Augustine was instru- sinful. All this results in behavior being controlled mental in shifting the locus of control of human internally rather than externally. That is, instead of behavior from the outside to the inside. For him, controlling behavior through externally adminis- the acceptance of free will made personal responsi- tered rewards and punishments, it is controlled by bility meaningful. Because individuals are personally personal feelings of virtue or guilt. responsible for their actions, it is possible to praise Does being baptized a Christian and consis- or blame them, and people can feel good or bad tently choosing good over evil grant a person access about themselves depending on what choices they to heaven after his or her death? Not according to make. If people periodically chose evil over good, Augustine. Since the fall in the Garden of Eden, all however, they need not feel guilty forever. By dis- humans have inherited original sin and are, there- closing the actual or intended sin (as by confession), fore, worthy of eternal damnation. This is true they are forgiven and again can pursue the pure, whether or not we are Christians and choose Christian life. In fact, Augustine’s Confessions (writ- good over evil in our lifetime. However, according ten about 400) describes a long series of his own sins

80 CHAPTER 3 that Augustine abandoned his lusty ways and con- verted to Christianity. Following his conversion, Augustine was consumed by the passion to know God, and the rest of his life was lived to that end. The Christian ideology had wide appeal. To people suffering hunger, plague, and war, a religion that focused on a more perfect, nonphysical world was comforting. To slaves and others with low sta- tus, a feeling of justice came from knowing that all humans were created in God’s image. The poor were consoled by learning that material wealth was irrelevant to living the good life. Criminals did not need to remain criminals; they could be ©Bettman/CORBIS salvation. All humans were part of a brotherhood; forgiven and were as likely as anyone to be granted our origins were the same, as was our ultimate goal. Knowing God. For Augustine, it was not neces- St. Augustine sary to wait for the death of the body to know God; knowledge of God was attainable within an indivi- ranging from stealing for the sake of stealing to the dual’s lifetime. Before arriving at this conclusion, sins of the flesh. The latter involved having at least Augustine needed to find something about human two mistresses, one of whom bore him a child. experience of which he could be certain. He When Augustine’s mother decided it was time for searched for something that could not be doubted him to marry, he was forced to abandon his mis- and finally concluded that the fact that he doubted tress, an event that caused Augustine great anguish. could not be doubted. In Book 20, Chapter 10, of On the Trinity, Augustine said, My concubine being torn from my side as a hindrance to my marriage, my heart Who ever doubts that he himself lives, and which clave unto her was torn and remembers, and understands, and wills and wounded and bleeding. [She left] vowing thinks, and knows, and judges? Seeing that unto Thee never to know any other man, even if he doubts, he lives; if he doubts, he leaving with me my son by her. (Pusey, remembers why he doubts; if he doubts, 1961, p. 94) he understands that he doubts; if he doubts, he wishes to be certain; if he Augustine’s marriage had to be delayed for two doubts, he thinks; if he doubts, he knows years because his bride-to-be was so young; how- that he does not know; if he doubts, he ever, he took another mistress in the meantime. judges that he ought not to assert rashly. Augustine was beginning to realize that he was a Whosoever therefore doubts about any- “wretched young man,” and he prayed to God, thing else, ought not to doubt of all these “Give me chastity and continency, only not yet.” things; which if they were not, he would His explanation to God for such a prayer was, “I not be able to doubt of anything. (Hadden, feared lest Thou shouldest hear me too soon, and 1912, pp. 133–134) soon cure me of the disease of [lust], which I wished to have satisfied, rather than extinguished” Thus, Augustine established the validity of inner, (Pusey, 1961, p. 125). It was not until he was 32 subjective experience. (As we will see in Chapter 4,

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 81 Descartes used the same technique to arrive at his moment between the future and the past, occurs too famous conclusion “I think, therefore I am.”) The quickly to be measured. “We measure neither times internal sense, not outer (sensory) experience, could to come, nor past, nor present, nor passing; and yet be trusted. For Augustine then, a second way of we do measure times” (Pusey, 1961, p. 203). It was knowing God (the first being the scriptures) was clear to Augustine that the terms past, present, and introspection, or the examination of one’s inner future could not refer to the physical world. What experiences. We see here the influence of Plato, then accounts for the human experiences of past, who also believed that truth must be attained present, and future? Augustine’s answer was surpris- through introspection. Augustinian introspection, ingly modern. however, became a means of achieving a personal It is in thee, my mind, that I measure times…. communion with God. According to St. Augustine, The impression, which things as they pass by the feeling of love that one experiences when one is cause in thee, remains even when they are contemplating God creates an ecstasy unsurpassed gone; this it is which still present, I measure, among human emotions. Such a feeling is the pri- not the things which pass by to make this mary goal of human existence; anything that is com- impression. (Pusey, 1961, p. 203) patible with achieving such a state of ecstasy is good, whereas anything that distracts from its achievement For Augustine, then, the experience of time is bad. Faith and a personal, emotional union with depended on sensory experience and the memory God were, for Augustine, the most important ingre- of sensory experience. In a sense, humans, like God, dients of human existence. Reason, which had been experience only the present. The past is the pres- supreme for the Greeks, became inferior not only to ence in the mind of things remembered, and the faith but also to human emotion. Reason remained future is the present anticipation of events based in an inferior position for almost 1,000 years, during on the memory of past experience. The present is which time the writings of Augustine prevailed and simply current sensory experience. provided the cornerstone of church dogma. Augustine wrote extensively on memory, and Augustine had demonstrated that the human mind some of his observations were not unlike those that could know itself without confronting the empirical emerged later in modern empiricism (see Chapter 5). world. Because the Holy Spirit dwelled in this realm An example is his concept of the memory trace, of pure thought, intense, highly emotional intro- which he described as follows: spection was encouraged. Such introspection carried the individual farther away from the empirical world. Although when past facts are related, there are drawn out the memory, not the things Augustine’s Analysis of the Experience of themselves which are past, but words Time. Augustine’s Confessions is an extended con- which, conceived by the images of the versation with God in which he often asks God’s help things, they, in passing, have through the in solving the mysteries of human existence. One senses left as traces in the mind. (Pusey, such mystery is the experience of time. God, he ob- 1961, p. 197) served, has no sense of time because he lives in the eternal present. Mortals, however, have conceptions of the past, present, and future, and therein lies the mystery. We claim to measure how long in the past THE DARK AGES an event occurred, but past events no longer exist and therefore cannot be measured. We claim to measure Some historians mark the beginning of that portion how far in the future a forthcoming event is, but of the Middle Ages known as the Dark Ages with the future events do not yet exist and therefore cannot sack of Rome by the Visigoths in 410; others with be measured. Even the present, which is the fleeting the death of Augustine in 430; and others with the

82 CHAPTER 3 abdication of the last Roman emperor in 476. In any contact with Aristotle’s philosophy. At first, church case, it is about this time in history when Greek and authorities welcomed Aristotle’s writings; then, af- Roman books were lost or destroyed; little or no ter more careful analysis, they banned the works. It progress was made in science, philosophy, or litera- was clear that for Aristotle’s thoughts to be “ac- ture; uniform Roman law collapsed and was replaced cepted,” they needed to be Christianized. by a variety of local customs; and villages armed Long before Aristotle’s writings were rediscov- themselves against attack from both their neighbors ered by the West, however, the Muslims were and invaders from afar. During all this uncertainty, or benefiting greatly from them. In fact, more than perhaps because of it, the Christian church became 200 years before the West attempted to increasingly powerful. From about 400 to 1000, Christianize Aristotle’s philosophy, several Muslim Europe was dominated by mysticism, superstition, philosophers busied themselves attempting to make and anti-intellectualism; Europe was generally dark. it compatible with Islam. Because church dogma was no longer chal- lengeable, it wielded tremendous power during the Dark Ages. The questions with which the TH E ISLAMI C AND JEWISH church grappled concerned inconsistencies within church doctrine. The question of what was true INFLUENCES had already been answered, and there was no need to look elsewhere. People were either believ- Although the years between about 400 and 1000 ers or heretics, and heretics were dealt with harshly. are often referred to as the Dark Ages, they are dark The church owned vast properties; the pope could only with reference to the Western world. During make or break kings; and priests controlled the be- this time, Islam was a powerful force in the world. havior, feelings, and thoughts of the citizens. The Muhammad was born in Mecca in 570, and in mid- eight crusades (1095–1291) against the Muslims dle age, believers say he received a revelation from showed Christianity’s power to organize its fol- God instructing him to preach. He called his reli- lowers to stop the Islamic influence that had been gion Islam, which means “surrender to God,” and spreading so rapidly throughout Europe. his followers were called Muslims (or Moslems). It was during these “holy wars” that Aristotle’s His teachings are contained in the Koran. Islam writings were rediscovered. Many centuries earlier, spread with incredible speed, and within 30 years mainly because of the conquests of Alexander the of Muhammad’s death in 632, the Muslims had Great, the Greek influence had been spread over a conquered Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Persia, Sicily, and large area in which Greek philosophy, science, and Spain. Within 100 years after the prophet’s death, art came to flourish. In fact, many believe that the the Islamic empire extended over an area larger Greeks overextended themselves and were thus un- than that of the Roman Empire at its peak (R. I. able to control their empire. When the Romans Watson, 1978, p. 106). This expansion brought the began to invade this empire, Greek scholars fled Muslims into contact with ancient works long lost into territories later conquered by the Muslims. to the Western world. Islamic philosophers trans- These scholars carried with them many Greek lated, studied, and expanded on the ancient wisdom works of art and philosophy, among them the of Greece and Rome, and the writings of Aristotle works of Aristotle. Aristotle’s works were preserved were of special interest. By utilizing this wisdom, in the great Islamic universities and mosques and the Muslims made great strides in medicine, sci- were used to develop Islamic philosophy, religion, ence, and mathematics—subjects that were of mathematics, and medicine. The Muslim armies greatest interest during the expansion of the moved west, and the Christian armies moved east. Islamic empire because of their practical value. The clash between the two resulted in the bloody When conditions stabilized, however, there was holy wars, but it also brought the West back into greater interest in making the ancient wisdom com-

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 83 patible with Islam. Although these efforts focused approached. Human compositive imagination, mainly on Aristotle’s philosophy, Neoplatonism however, allows the creative combination of infor- was also examined. The Arabic translations of the mation from the common sense and from the re- Greek and Roman philosophers, and the questions tentive imagination. For example, humans can raised in attempting to make this ancient wisdom imagine a unicorn without ever having experienced compatible with Islam, were used many years later one; nonhuman animals do not possess this ability. when the Christians attempted to make them com- Fifth is the estimative power, the innate ability to patible with Christianity. In a surprising number of make judgments about environmental objects. ways, the two efforts were similar. Lambs may have an innate fear of wolves, and hu- mans may have an innate fear of spiders and snakes, Avicenna or there may be a natural tendency to approach the things conducive to survival. Sixth is the ability to There were many outstanding Muslim philosophers, remember the outcomes of all the information pro- but we will briefly consider only two. Avicenna cessing that occurs lower in the hierarchy, and sev- (Persian name, Ibn Sinä; 980–1037) was a child prod- enth is the ability to use that information. igy who had memorized the Koran by the age of 10. Although Aristotle postulated only three inter- As an adolescent, “he had read Aristotle’s Metaphysics nal senses (common sense, imagination, and mem- forty times and could practically recite it by heart” ory) and Avicenna seven, Avicenna was essentially (Goodman, 1992, p. 38). He became a physician be- an Aristotelian. His major departure from Aristotle’s fore he was 20, and as a young adult was considered philosophy concerns the active intellect. For the best of the Muslim physicians (Alexander and Aristotle, the active intellect was used in under- Selesnick, 1966, p. 63). He wrote books on many standing the universal principles that could not be topics, including medicine, mathematics, logic, gained by simply observing empirical events. For metaphysics, Islamic theology, astronomy, politics, Avicenna, the active intellect took on supernatural and linguistics. His book on medicine, The Canon, qualities; it was the aspect of humans that allowed was used in European universities for more than them to understand the cosmic plan and to enter five centuries (S. Smith, 1983). In most of his work, into a relationship with God. For Avicenna, an un- he borrowed heavily from Aristotle, but he made derstanding of God represented the highest level of modifications in Aristotle’s philosophy that persisted intellectual functioning. for hundreds of years. As a physician, Avicenna employed a wide In his analysis of human thinking, Avicenna range of treatments for physical and mental illnesses. started with the five external senses—sight, hearing, For example, he attempted to treat melancholic pa- touch, taste, and smell. Then he postulated seven tients by reading to them or by using music as ther- “interior senses,” which were arranged in a hierar- apy. At times, he even tried to frighten patients out chy. First is the common sense, which synthesizes of their ailments. Alexander and Selesnick (1966) the information provided by the external senses. give the following example: Second is retentive imagination, the ability to re- member the synthesized information from the When one of his patients claimed he was a common sense. The third and fourth are composi- cow and bellowed like one, Avicenna told tive animal imagination and compositive human the patient that a butcher was coming to imagination. Compositive imagination allows both slaughter him. The patient was bound hand humans and animals to learn what to approach or and foot; then Avicenna proclaimed that he avoid in the environment. For animals, this is a was too lean and had to be fattened, and strictly associative process. Those objects or events untied him. The patient began to eat associated with pain are subsequently avoided, enthusiastically “gained strength, gave up and those associated with pleasure are subsequently the delusion, and was cured.” (p. 64)

84 CHAPTER 3 Avicenna’s work had great significance for sub- and because the active intellect is the same for ev- sequent philosophical development in the West: eryone, nothing personal survives death. This was, “Had it not been for Avicenna and his colleagues of course, contrary to Christian thought, and in the Islamic world of the eleventh century, the Averroës’s interpretation of Aristotle was labeled philosophical achievements of twelfth- and Averroism and was severely attacked by later thirteenth-century Europe—achievements based Christian philosophers. so sturdily upon Aristotelianism—are nearly un- Although Averroës was known primarily for imaginable” (D. N. Robinson, 1986, p. 145). his philosophical work, he also made a number of impressive scientific contributions. For example, Averroës Crombie (1961) credits him with discovering that the retina, not the lens, is the light-sensitive part of Averroës (Persian name, Ibn Rushd; 1126–1198) the eye. He was also among the first to observe that disagreed with Avicenna that human intelligence is those afflicted with smallpox and who survived arranged in a hierarchy with only the highest level were thereafter immune to the disease, thus sug- enabling humans to have contact with God. gesting inoculation as a way of preventing disease. According to Averroës, all human experiences re- flect God’s influence. In almost everything else, though, Averroës agreed with Avicenna, and he Maimonides too was basically an Aristotelian. Averroës’s writings Maimonides (or Moses ben Maimon; 1135–1204) are mainly commentaries on Aristotle’s philosophy, was a Jew born on March 30 in Cordova, Spain, with special emphasis on Aristotle’s work on the where, at the time, Jews and Muslims lived in har- senses, memory, sleep and waking, and dreams. mony. (Incidentally, Averroës was also born in Also, following Aristotle, Averroës said that only Cordova at about the same time as Maimonides.) the active intellect aspect of the soul survives death, Maimonides, in addition to being a biblical and talmudic scholar, was a physician who, among other things, anticipated the modern concern with psychosomatic disorders by showing the relation- ship between ethical living and mental health (Alexander and Selesnick, 1966, p. 64). As the writings of ancient philosophers, espe- cially those of Aristotle, became more widely available, tension increased between philosophy and religion. Maimonides wrote The Guide for the Perplexed (Friedländer, 1956) for scholars who were confused by the apparent conflict between Medicine religion and the scientific and philosophical thought of the day. Specifically, Maimonides of sought a reconciliation between Judaism and Library Aristotelian philosophy. He attempted to show National that many passages from the Old Testament and the Talmud could be understood rationally and, the therefore, need not be taken on faith alone. of Other passages were to be understood only as al- Courtesy legory and not taken as literally true. Maimonides went so far as to say that if something is demon- Avicenna strably false, it should be rejected, even if it is

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 85 stated as true in the Bible or the Talmud. For famous ontological argument for the existence example, when he was asked his opinion of astrol- of God (see Deane, 1962). This is a complex argu- ogy, which is mentioned in the Bible and the ment, but essentially it says that if we can think of Talmud as true, Maimonides said, something, something must be causing the thought. That is, when we think of things, there must exist Man should only believe what he can grasp real things corresponding to those thoughts (reifica- with his intellectual faculties, or perceived tion). St. Anselm beckoned us to continue thinking by his senses, or what he can accept on of a being until we could think of no better or trustworthy authority. Beyond this noth- greater a being “than which nothing greater can be ing should be believed. Astrological state- conceived.” This perfect being that we have con- ments, not being founded on any of these jured up is God, and because we can think of him, sources of knowledge must be rejected. he exists. Of course, the existence of the devil can (Friedländer, 1956, p. xxv) be “proved” by applying the same logic in reverse. Like the Muslim philosophers, Maimonides’ ef- St. Anselm was one of the first Christian theolo- forts to reconcile faith and reason, or more specifically, gians to attempt to use logic to support religious Judaism and Aristotelianism, were to substantially belief. St. Anselm, like all the Christian theologians influence Christian theologians when they would at the time, was attempting to support what he later attempt to do the same for their religion. already believed to be true. In other words, faith It was almost time for the Western world to preceded efforts to understand. Addressing God, assimilate Aristotelianism into its religious beliefs, St. Anselm said, but an intermediate step needed to be taken. I long to understand in some degree thy Human reasoning powers, which had been mini- truth, which my heart believes and loves. mized in St. Augustine’s philosophy but were so For I do not seek to understand that I may important in Aristotle’s philosophy, had to be believe, but I believe in order to under- made respectable again. Reason and faith had to stand. For this also I believe—that unless I be made compatible. We will cover only two of believe, I should not understand. (Deane, the philosophers who took on this important task. 1962, p. 53) St. Anselm’s ontological argument for the exis- tence of God was highly influential and was later RECONCILIATION OF accepted by such notable philosophers as Descartes CHRISTIAN FAITH AND and Leibniz (Treash, 1994, p. 12). On the other hand, the argument has been a target of criticism REASON for centuries (see, for example, Deane, 1962) and continues to be (see, for example, Bencivenga, St. Anselm 1993). Others, however, believe Anselm’s argu- In Faith Seeking Understanding, (Deane, 1962), ment has been misunderstood and has considerable St. Anselm (ca. 1033–1109) argued that percep- validity (see, for example, Hartshorne, 1965). tion and reason can and should supplement Christian faith. Although St. Anselm was basically Peter Lombard an Augustinian, his acceptance of reason as a means of understanding God represented a major depar- Also an Augustinian, Peter Lombard (ca. 1095– ture from Christian tradition, which had empha- 1160) argued even more forcefully for the place of sized faith. St. Anselm exemplified how reason reason within Christianity than did St. Anselm. could be used within the Christian faith with his Perhaps even more important, Lombard insisted

86 CHAPTER 3 and Christian theology and showing what implica- tions that synthesis had for living one’s life. This synthesis came to be called Scholasticism. Peter Abelard Medicine Peter Abelard (1079–1142) marks the shift to- of ward Aristotle as the philosopher in Western philos- Library ophy. In addition to translating Aristotle’s writings, National Abelard introduced a method of study that was to characterize the Scholastic period. In his book Sic et the Non (sometimes translated as For and Against and of sometimes as Yes and No), Abelard elaborated his Courtesy dialectic method. He listed some 158 theological questions that were answered in contradictory ways by scripture and by various Christian theologians. Averroës Abelard believed that examining arguments and counterarguments was a good way of clarifying is- that God could be known by studying his works. sues and of arriving at valid conclusions. His goal There is no need to escape from the empirical was not to contradict church dogma but to over- world to understand God; one can learn about come inconsistencies in the statements made by God by studying the empirical world. Thus, for theologians through the years. Using his dialectic Lombard, there were three ways to learn about method, he pitted conflicting authorities against God: faith, reason, and the study of God’s works one another; but through it all, the authority of (the empirical world). Philosophers such as St. the Bible was expected to prevail. The dialectic Anselm and Lombard helped create a receptive at- method was controversial because it sometimes mosphere for the works of Aristotle, which were seemed to question the validity of religious assump- about to have a major and long-lasting impact on tions. Abelard was not overly concerned about this Western philosophy. issue, however, because he believed that God ex- isted and therefore all methods of inquiry should prove it. The believer, then, has nothing to fear SCHOLASTICISM from logic, reason, or even the direct study of nature. The holy wars had brought the Western world into contact with the works of Aristotle. The question Realism versus Nominalism. During Abelard’s now was what to do with those works. The reac- time, there was great debate over whether uni- tion of the church to the recovered works from versals existed—that is, whether there really are antiquity occurred in three stages. At first the works essences such as “catness,”“humanness,” or were welcomed, but when the inconsistencies with “sweetness” independent of individual instances church dogma were realized, the works were con- of such things. One side said yes, such essences demned as pagan. Finally, efforts were made to do exist in pure form and individual members of modify the works, especially those of Aristotle, such classes differ only by accident. Those claim- and in modified form, they were incorporated ing that universals and essences had a real, inde- into church dogma. Some of the keenest minds in pendent existence were called realists. The other the history of Western thought took on the monu- side said that what we call universals are nothing mental tasks of synthesizing Aristotle’s philosophy more than verbal labels allowing the grouping of

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 87 objects or events that resemble one another. To periences (nominalism) but, once formed, concepts, these nominalists, what others call universals are in a sense, exist apart from the individual experi- nothing more than convenient verbal labels that ences upon which they were formed (realism). summarize similar experiences. The debate was Radice (1974) summarizes Abelard’s conceptualism profound because both the philosophies of Plato as follows: “Universals were neither realities nor and Aristotle accepted realism. Nominalism was mere names but the concepts formed by the intel- much more in accordance with empirical philos- lect when abstracting the similarities between per- ophy than it was with rationalism. ceived individual things” (p. 14). Abelard’s position At this time, the cathedral school of Notre has been referred to as moderate realism, but clearly Dame, in Paris, was the most famous school in it was more in the nominalist’s camp than it was in Christendom, and William of Champeaux was its the realist’s. most famous teacher. His lecture hall was typically At first, William was full of admiration for filled with students from all over Europe, and “the Abelard as a promising young student, but he be- excitement produced by his brilliant discourses came increasingly annoyed: “The upshot of the sometimes ran so high that the civil authorities matter was that the world’s most famous professor were obliged to interfere in the interests of good or- felt obliged to modify his doctrine under pressure der” (Luddy, 1947, p. 3). At the age of 20, Abelard from this … stripling of twenty” (Luddy, 1947, decided to debate William on the matter of realism p. 4). Having conquered William, Abelard decided versus nominalism. William was a devout and in- to study theology with the famous Anselm, and formed realist, but Abelard, using his considerable Abelard was not impressed by him either. skills in rhetoric and logic, skillfully exposed the fal- A few lectures gave him enough of the lacies in William’s position. The main thrust of Doctor of Doctors [Anselm], whom … he Abelard’s argument was that we should not confuse found eloquent enough, but utterly devoid words with things. The conclusions reached when of sense and reason. He compares the un- logic is applied to words do not necessarily generalize fortunate professor to a barren fig-tree, to the physical world. When applied to the debate abounding in leaves, but bare of fruit; and concerning universals, this meant that just because to a greenwood fire that blinds us with we use words to describe and understand universals, smoke instead of giving us light. (Luddy, and even use words to logically deduce their exis- 1947, p. 5) tence, it does not necessarily follow that they actually exist. Abelard argued that logic and physics were two Anselm suffered greatly from his clash with different disciplines, and he wanted to keep them Abelard and died soon afterward. sharply separate. Abelard accused William of confus- Abelard decided to open his own school, and as ing the two disciplines, and in the process, commit- a teacher he displayed “a most amazing originality, ting the fallacy of reification (believing that if you can vivacity and versatility” (Luddy, 1947, p. 6). Soon name something, there must necessarily be some- Abelard, or “Master Peter” as his students called thing real that corresponds to the name). him, was so famous a teacher that the classrooms In a way reminiscent of Socrates, and some- of the older professors were essentially empty: what of Aristotle, Abelard proposed conceptual- ism as a compromise between realism and nomi- His eloquence, wit and power of luminous nalism. He argued that universal essences do not exposition, his magnificent voice, noble exist but similarities among categories of experi- bearing, and beauty of face and figure, his ences do. For example, all instances of things we boldness in criticising the most venerable call beautiful have something in common. Based authorities and attempting a natural solu- on the commonalities, we form the concept of tion of the mysteries of faith: all combined beauty. Thus, concepts summarize individual ex- to make him beyond comparison the most

88 CHAPTER 3 popular teacher of his age. (Luddy, 1947, suspicion I sometimes struck her, but these pp. 6–7) blows were prompted by love and tender feeling rather than anger and irritation, and Abelard’s Relationship with Heloise. And so were sweeter than any balm could be. In continued Abelard’s fame and glory until, at the short, our desires left no stage of love- age of 42, he met Heloise, a girl of 17. As a canon making untried, and if love could devise of Notre Dame, Abelard’s fame and influence as a something new, we welcomed it. We en- teacher brought him wealth and distinction, which tered on each joy the more eagerly for our pleased his friends but angered his enemies, such as previous inexperience, and were the less his old teacher, William of Champeaux. However, easily sated. (Radice, 1974, pp. 67–68) for Abelard success created a problem: The “tutoring” went on for several months Success always puffs up fools with pride, before Heloise’s uncle found out what was really and worldly security weakens the spirit’s happening and threw Abelard out of the house. resolution and easily destroys it through When Heloise announced her pregnancy, Abelard carnal temptations. I began to think myself took her to his sister’s home where she eventually the only philosopher in the world, with gave birth to their son, Astralabe. Abelard offered to nothing to fear from anyone, and so I marry Heloise, but she at first refused because she yielded to the lusts of the flesh. (Radice, believed that marriage would damage his chances of 1974, p. 65) advancement within the church. In addition, both had a low opinion of marriage and cited scripture, Heloise was the bright and beautiful niece of church authorities, and a number of practical con- another canon of Notre Dame named Fulbert. By cerns to support that opinion. So, Heloise would his own admission, when Abelard first saw Heloise, have preferred to remain Abelard’s mistress, saying he set out to seduce her. Heloise’s uncle, who loved that she preferred “love to wedlock and freedom to her dearly, was very much interested in continuing chains” (Radice, 1974, p. 114). To emphasize her her education, and being aware of Abelard’s con- point, Heloise famously said, siderable skill as a scholar and teacher, he struck a deal with Abelard. The uncle offered Abelard room God is my witness that if Augustus, and board in his (and Heloise’s) home if Abelard Emperor of the whole world, thought fit would agree to tutor his niece. Abelard was aston- to honour me with marriage and conferred ished at the canon’s naïveté: “I was amazed by his all the earth on me to possess for ever, it simplicity—if he had entrusted a tender lamb to a would be dearer and more honourable to ravening wolf it would not have surprised me me to be called not his Empress but your more” (Radice, 1974, p. 67). Abelard described whore. (Radice, 1974, p. 114) what happened next: The situation became so complicated, how- With our lessons as a pretext we abandoned ever, that marriage became necessary, and they ourselves entirely to love. Her studies al- were married in Paris. For various reasons, lowed us to withdraw in private, as love Abelard wanted to keep the marriage a secret, and desired, and then with our books open be- Heloise’s uncle wanted it known for fear of fore us, more words of love than our reading Heloise’s reputation. Finally, Abelard could stand passed between us, and more kissing than the strain no longer, and he dressed Heloise in a teaching. My hands strayed oftener to her nun’s habit and took her to a convent, where she bosoms than to the pages; love drew our could appear to be a nun without actually taking eyes to look on each other more than vows. There, Abelard would secretly visit his loved reading kept them on our texts. To avert one from time to time.

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 89 Believing that Abelard had forced Heloise to be- and Jewish scholars’ interpretations of them. This was come a nun to cover his own sins, her uncle’s wrath no mean feat, considering that the church still re- became uncontrollable. Abelard described the action garded Aristotle as a heretic. Magnus presented taken by the uncle and some of his aides: Aristotle’s views on sensation, intelligence, and memory to the church scholars and attempted to One night as I slept peacefully in an inner show how human beings’ rational powers could be room in my lodging, they bribed one of used to achieve salvation. Following Aristotle, my servants to admit them and took cruel Magnus performed detailed observations of na- vengeance on me of such appalling bar- ture, and he himself made significant contributions barity as to shock the whole world; they to botany. He was among the first since the Greeks to cut off the parts of my body whereby I had attempt to learn about nature by making careful, em- committed the wrong of which they pirical observations. But as instrumental as Abelard complained. (Radice, 1974, p. 75) and Magnus were in bringing Aristotle’s philosophy Other than for the obvious reasons, this partic- into the Christian tradition, the greatest Scholastic of ular form of punishment for his sins was especially all was St. Thomas Aquinas. distressing for Abelard because he recalled passages of the Bible that condemned castrated individuals. St. Thomas Aquinas For example, “He whose testicles are crushed or whose male member is cut off shall not enter the St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) was a large, assembly of the Lord (Deuteronomy 23:1). introspective person, whom his fellow students re- Incidentally, two of those responsible for Abelard’s ferred to as the dumb ox. He came from a distin- castration were caught, blinded, and themselves ca- guished, aristocratic family, and his father had con- strated” (Radice, 1974, p. 75). siderable influence at the Benedictine abbey of Abelard became a monk, Heloise became a Monte Cassino, which was only a few miles from nun, and their future intercourse was limited to their castle home. It was assumed that following his romantic and spicy love letters. training for the priesthood, Aquinas would return After recovering from his ordeal, Abelard re- to Monte Cassino, where the family’s influence sumed his studies and his teaching using the dialectic would help him become abbot. Instead, he joined method. This controversial method and his abrasive the Dominican order and became a begging friar. manner again led to trouble with church authorities. With this decision, Aquinas turned his back on In 1140, Pope Innocent II ordered Abelard to stop family wealth and power and reduced his chances teaching and writing, and within a few years he died of advancement within the church hierarchy. His a lonely and bitter man. Heloise became the widely father had already died, but his mother was so an- respected and influential abbess of the Paraclete, a gered by Aquinas’s choice that she and a group of school and monastery founded many years earlier relatives kidnapped and imprisoned him in their by Abelard. The Paraclete survived as a center of family castle for about a year. Strangely enough, learning until the French Revolution. Heloise out- the imprisonment did not anger him. In fact, he lived Abelard by some 21 years and was buried be- spent the time attempting to convert his family side him at the Paraclete. Little is known about the members. Aquinas did become angry, however, fate of their son (Radice, 1974, p. 43). when his brothers tested his willingness to remain chaste by slipping a seductive prostitute into his prison quarters. He drove her from the room with St. Albertus Magnus a hot iron from the fire. He was more upset that his St. Albertus Magnus (ca. 1200–1280) was one of brothers believed that something so mundane the first Western philosophers to make a comprehen- would tempt him than he was by the temptation sive review of both Aristotle’s works and the Islamic itself. In 1245, Aquinas was set free by his family,

90 CHAPTER 3 and he returned to the Dominicans. As a student, or through logic, reason, and the examination of Aquinas was prodigious. The University of Paris nature. had a rule that a doctorate in theology could not Although sensory information was again ac- be earned until after one’s 34th birthday. An excep- cepted as an accurate source of knowledge, tion was made in Aquinas’s case, however, and the Aquinas, following Aristotle, said that the senses degree was given to him at the age of 31. He was could provide information only about particulars, then appointed to one of the two Dominican chairs not about universals, which reason must abstract at the University of Paris. from sensory information. Reason and faith cannot Aquinas did as much as anyone to synthesize conflict because both lead to the same ultimate re- Aristotle’s philosophical works and the Christian ality, God. The philosopher uses logical proof and tradition. This was a major feat, but it had an im- demonstration to verify God’s existence, whereas portant negative aspect. Once Aristotle’s ideas were the Christian theologian takes the existence of assimilated into church dogma, they were no longer God on faith. Each arrived at the same truth but challengeable. In fact, Aristotle’s writings became by different means. Aquinas spent considerable time almost as sacred as the Bible. This was unfortunate discussing the differences between humans and because much of what Aristotle had said later lower animals. The biggest difference he recognized turned out to be false. With Aristotle, as earlier was that nonhuman animals do not possess rational with Plato, the church emphasized those ideas souls and therefore determined that salvation is not that were most compatible with its theology. available to them. Ideas that were not compatible were either changed Aquinas’s synthesis of Aristotelian and Christian or ignored. Although this Christianization was eas- thought was bitterly argued within the church. ier to perform with Plato’s philosophy than with Earlier in this chapter, we saw that the conservative Aristotle’s, Aristotle had said several things that, members of the early Christian church (such as St. with minor shifts and embellishments, could be Jerome) argued that non-Christian philosophers construed as supporting church doctrine—for ex- should be condemned and ignored. Augustine ar- ample, his thoughts on the immortality of active gued, however, that as much non-Christian philoso- reason, on the scala naturae (the hierarchical design phy as possible should be assimilated into church of nature), on the earth being the center of the dogma. Augustine won the debate. Now, some universe, and on the unmoved mover. 900 years later, we have a similar debate over the works of Aristotle. One of the most influential voices The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason. The of conservatism was St. Bonaventure (ca. 1217– Aristotelian emphasis on reason was so great that it 1274), who condemned the works of Aristotle. could not be ignored. After all, the huge body of in- Bonaventure, following Augustine, believed that formation Aristotle had generated was a product of one comes to know God through introspection, empirical observation guided by reason. This emphasis not through reasoning or by studying nature. on reason placed the church in a difficult position be- Aquinas’s position prevailed, however, and was fi- cause,from its inception, it hademphasized revelation, nally accepted as official church doctrine. With faith, and spiritual experience and minimized empiri- some modifications, it remains the philosophical cor- cal observation and rationality. It turned out that nerstone of Catholicism to this day. The view repre- Aquinas’s greatest task (and achievement) was the rec- sented by Bonaventure lives on in Protestantism, onciliation of faith and reason, which he accomplished where scripture is valued more highly than reason by arguing effectively that reason and faith are not incom- and a personal relationship with God is valued patible. For him, as for the other Scholastics, all paths more highly than ritual and church prescriptions. led to the same truth—God and his glory. Thus, God could now be known through revelation; through Aquinas’s Influence. Aquinas’s work eventually scripture; through examination of inner experience; had several effects: It divided reason and faith, mak-

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 91 ing it possible to study them separately. It made the ciples that were beyond the world of appearance. study of nature respectable. And it showed the For the Pythagoreans, it was numerical relation- world that argument over church dogma was pos- ships; for Platonists, it was the pure forms, or ideas; sible. Although his goal was to strengthen the posi- for Aristoteians, it was the entelechy, which gave a tion of the church by admitting reason as a means class of things its essence; and for the Scholastics, it of understanding God, Aquinas’s work had the was God. All assumed that there was a higher truth opposite effect. Several philosophers following beyond the one that could be experienced through Aquinas argued that faith and reason could be stud- the senses. ied separately and that reason could be studied As mentioned earlier, once Aquinas separated without considering its theological implications. faith and reason, it was only a matter of time before Philosophy without religious overtones was be- there would be those wishing to exercise reason coming a possibility—a possibility that had not ex- while remaining unencumbered by faith. William isted for well over a thousand years. of Occam was one who took this step. Aquinas at least partially shifted attention away from the heavens and back to earth, although his emphasis was still on the heavens. This shift had to WILLIAM OF OCCAM: A occur before the Renaissance could take place. The Renaissance was still in the future, however, and TURNING POINT the church still controlled most human activities. William of Occam (sometimes spelled Ockham; ca. 1285–1349), a British-born Franciscan monk, Limitations of Scholastic Philosophy accepted Aquinas’s division of faith and reason and It is one thing to examine nature and try to arrive at pursued the latter. Occam believed that in explain- the principles that seem to govern it, as most Greek ing things, no unnecessary assumptions should be philosophers did; it is another thing to assume that made—in other words, that explanations should al- something is true and then attempt to make nature ways be kept as parsimonious (simple) as possible. conform to that truth. The Christian theologians This belief that extraneous assumptions should be attempted to do the latter. During the time from “shaved” from explanations or arguments came to Augustine to and including Aquinas, scholarship be known as Occam’s razor. In his extensive writ- consisted of demonstrating the validity of church ings, Occam stated his principle in several ways—for dogma. New information was accepted only if it example, “It is futile to do with many what can be could be shown to be compatible with church done with fewer” and “Plurality should not be as- dogma; if this was not possible, the information sumed without necessity” (Kemp, 1998, p. 280). was rejected. “The truth” had been found, and Occam applied his “razor” to the debate con- there was no need to search elsewhere. cerning the existence of universals. As we have Although the Scholastics were outstanding seen, some scholars believed that universal ideas scholars and hairsplitting logicians, they offered lit- or principles existed and that individual empirical tle of value to either philosophy or psychology. experiences were only manifestations of those uni- They were much more interested in maintaining versals. Again, those believing in the independent the status quo than in revealing any new informa- existence of universals were called realists. tion. Certainly, there was little concern with physi- Conversely, scholars believing that so-called uni- cal nature, except for those aspects that could be versals were nothing more than verbal labels used used to prove God’s existence or to show some- to describe groups of experiences that had some- thing about God’s nature. As with the major thing in common were called nominalists. Because Greek philosophers who preceded them, the Occam saw the assumption that universals had an Scholastics searched for the universal truths or prin- independent existence as unnecessary, he sided with

92 CHAPTER 3 to a psychological problem. He was not concerned with a transcendent reality that could be under- stood only by abstract reasoning or intense intro- spection. For him, the question was how the mind classifies experience, and his answer was that we woodcut habitually respond to similar objects in a similar 1450 1700cm.) way. We apply the term female to a person because ca. IX that person has enough in common with others we DC. (Schreiber have called female. Previously, we saw that Abelard offered a simi- Washington, ink, lar solution to the realism-versus-nominalism prob- Art, and lem. That is, universals are nothing but concepts by of pen which we organize our experiences. Occam Gallery in inscription reached the same conclusion by applying his razor. For Occam, the assumption that essences exist was National with unnecessary. We can simply assume that nature is as Trustees, yellow; we experience it. In his empiricism, Occam went beyond of and Aristotle. Aristotle believed that sensory experience Board orange, was the basis of knowledge but that reason needed 2000 to be applied to extract knowledge of universals and © brown, essences from individual experiences. For Occam, Collection, dark in sensory experience provided information about the world—period. Occam’s philosophy marks the Rosenwald hand-colored end of Scholasticism. Despite the church’s efforts to suppress them, Occam’s views were widely taught and can be viewed as the beginning of modern St. Thomas Aquinas empirical philosophy. Indeed, we see in Occam a strong hint of the coming Renaissance. Despite the nominalists, arguing forcefully that so-called his radical empiricism, Occam was still a universals were nothing more than verbal labels. Franciscan monk, and he believed in God. He did For example, because all cats have certain features say, however, that God’s existence could never be in common, it is convenient to label all objects with confirmed by studying nature because there was those features as cats. The same thing is true for nothing in nature that directly proved his existence. dogs, trees, books, or any other class of objects or God’s existence, then, must be accepted on faith. experiences. According to Occam, the fact that ex- periences have features in common allows us to use general labels to describe those experiences; but the TH E SPIRIT OF THE TIMES use of such labels does not mean that there is a pure idea, essence, or form that exists beyond our ex- BEFORE THE RENAISS ANCE periences. Occam believed we can trust our senses to tell us what the world is really like, that we can During the 14th and 15th centuries, philosophy still know the world directly without needing to worry served religion, as did everyone and everything else. about what lurks beyond our experience. There were two classes of people: believers and Occam changed the question concerning the nonbelievers. The latter, if they could not be con- nature of knowledge from a metaphysical problem verted, were physically punished, imprisoned, or

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 93 killed, and they were considered either stupid or mal science, is concerned only with exploring the possessed by the devil. There was no in-between. implications of the accepted paradigm. Little crea- If the God contemplated through introspection was tivity is involved in either normal science or normal real, so must other objects of thought be real, such philosophy. Kuhn tells us that for there to be a as demons, devils, and monsters. Astrology was ex- paradigm shift, anomalies must arise within the ac- tremely popular, and magic was practiced almost cepted paradigm; that is, consistent observations everywhere and by almost everyone. Superstition that cannot be explained must occur. As the anom- was not confined only to the peasant but also char- alies persist, a new paradigm gradually gains recruits acterized kings, scholars, and clergy. and eventually overthrows the old paradigm. The Clearly, this was not a time of open inquiry. To process is long, difficult, and often traumatic for the use Kuhn’s (1996) terminology, inquiry was char- early dissenters from the old paradigm. In the pe- acterized by a single paradigm: the Christian con- riod before the Renaissance, anomalies were ap- ception of humans and the world. Although Kuhn pearing everywhere in Christian doctrine, and it was mainly concerned with science, his notion of was clear that church authority was on the decline. paradigms can also be applied to other fields of in- For centuries there had been little philosophical, quiry. As with other paradigms, the Christian para- scientific, or theological growth. For progress to digm determined what was acceptable as a problem occur, the authority of the church had to be bro- and what counted as a solution. Philosophers were ken, and the cracks were beginning to appear al- engaged in “normal philosophy,” which, like nor- most everywhere. SUMMARY After Aristotle’s death, philosophers began to con- everything happens for a reason, one should accept cern themselves with principles of human conduct whatever happens with courage and indifference. and asked the question, What constitutes the good The Stoics believed material possessions to be un- life? Pyrrho of Elis preached Skepticism. To him, important, and they emphasized virtue (the accep- nothing could be known with certainty, so why tance of one’s fate). believe anything? The Skeptic did not commit Clearly, the preceding moral philosophers were himself or herself to any particular belief. Life often contradictory, and they lacked a firm philo- should be guided by simple sensations, feelings, sophical base. This problem was “solved” when and the conventions of one’s society. Antisthenes philosophers switched their attention from ethics and Diogenes advocated a back-to-nature approach to religion. In Alexandria, Greek philosophy, to life because they viewed society as a distortion of Judaic tradition, Eastern religions, and mystery re- nature that should be rejected. A simple life, close ligions coexisted. Philo, a Neoplatonist, combined to nature and free of wants and passions, was best. Judaism with Plato’s philosophy and created a sys- The position of Antisthenes and Diogenes was later tem that glorified the spirit and condemned the called Cynicism. Epicurus of Samos said the good flesh. Plotinus, another Neoplatonist, believed that life involved seeking the greatest amount of plea- from the One (God) emanates the Spirit, from the sure over the longest period of time. Such pleasure Spirit emanates the Soul, and from the Soul ema- did not come from having too little or too much nates the physical world. The Soul then reflects the but from a life of moderation. Zeno of Citium, the Spirit and God. Like all the Neoplatonists, Plotinus founder of Stoicism, claimed that the good life in- taught that it is only by pondering the contents of volved living in harmony with nature, which was the Soul that one can embrace eternal, immutable designed in accordance with a divine plan. Because truth. St. Paul claimed that Jesus was the son of God

94 CHAPTER 3 and thereby established the Christian religion. In Lombard were instrumental in showing that reason 313, Emperor Constantine made Christianity a tol- and faith were compatible, whereas Abelard and St. erated religion in the Roman Empire, and under Albertus Magnus were among the first Western his leadership the many diverse versions of philosopher-theologians to embrace the work of Christianity that existed at the time were trans- Aristotle. Within the church, there was a debate formed into a standard set of documents and beliefs. between the realists and the nominalists. The realists However, it was Bishop Athanasius who, in 367, believed in the existence of universal (essences), of first canonized the New Testament as we know it which individual, empirical events were only man- today. ifestations. The nominalists believed that so-called St. Augustine said that humans can know God universals were nothing more than verbal labels ap- through intense introspection. The ecstasy that plied to classes of experiences. Abelard offered a comes from cognitively embracing God was con- compromise solution to the problem. According sidered the highest human emotion and could be to his conceptualism, concepts were viewed as less achieved only by avoiding or minimizing experi- than essences but more than mere words. ences of the flesh. By postulating human free will, Those who attempted to synthesize Aristotle’s Augustine accomplished several things: He ex- philosophy with the Christian religion were called plained evil as the result of humans choosing evil Scholastics. The greatest Scholastic was St. Thomas over good, humans became responsible for their Aquinas, and the major outcome of his work was own destiny, and personal guilt became an impor- the acceptance of both reason and faith as ways of tant means of controlling behavior. Augustine knowing God. Before Aquinas, faith alone had claimed that an internal sense reveals to each person been emphasized. The acceptance of reason as a how he or she should act as a Christian. Acting means of knowing God made respectable the ex- contrary to this internal sense, or even intending amination of nature, the use of logical argument, to act contrary to it, causes guilt. However, liv- and even debate within the church itself. It is ing a life free of sin does not guarantee eternal life widely believed that Aquinas inadvertently created in heaven. That can only be provided by God’s an atmosphere that led ultimately to the decline of grace. Augustine argued that the experiences of church authority and therefore to the Renaissance. the past, present, and future are accounted for by Concerning the realism-nominalism debate, memories, ongoing sensory impressions, and antici- William of Occam sided with the nominalists by pations, respectively. explaining universals as simply verbal labels. He During the Dark Ages, Islamic culture flour- took this position because it required the fewest ished and expanded throughout Europe. Muslim assumptions. Occam’s razor is the belief that of and Jewish scholars translated the works of the two or more adequate explanations, the one requir- Greek and Roman philosophers and used this wis- ing the fewest assumptions should be chosen. dom to make great advances in medicine, science, In the heyday of early Christianity, a largely and mathematics. Avicenna and Averroës concen- negative social climate prevailed in the Western trated mainly on the works of Aristotle, translating world. There was widespread superstition, fear, and expanding them and attempting to make them and persecution of nonbelievers. The church had compatible with Islam. Maimonides attempted, absolute power, and any dissension from church among other things, to reconcile Aristotelianism dogma was dealt with harshly. Clearly, the spirit with Judaism. of the times was not conducive to open, objective Before the Western world could embrace inquiry. For such inquiry to occur, a paradigm shift Aristotle’s philosophy, human reasoning powers was required, and one was on the horizon. had to be made respectable. St. Anselm and

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 95 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 13. In what way were the Dark Ages dark? 1. Briefly state what constituted the good life ac- Explain. cording to Skepticism, Cynicism, Epicureanism, and Stoicism. 14. What was the importance of Avicenna’s, Averroës’s, and Mainonides’ philosophies to 2. What did the Skeptics mean by dogmatism, and Western thought? why did they oppose it? 15. How did the works of St. Anselm and 3. In what sense were Epicureanism and Stoicism Lombard prepare the Western world for the materialistic philosophies? acceptance of Aristotle’s philosophy? 4. Describe the factors that contributed to the 16. What was St. Anselm’s ontological argument development of early Christian theology. for the existence of God? 5. What characterized St. Paul’s version of 17. What was the significance of the work of Christianity? Abelard and Magnus? 6. Summarize the philosophy of Neoplatonism. 18. Summarize the debate between the realists and 7. Discuss how Constantine influenced the his- the nominalists. What was Abelard’s position in tory of Christianity. this debate? 8. Discuss the importance of free will in 19. How, according to Aquinas, can humans know Augustine’s philosophy. God? What are some of the implications of 9. How did Augustine change the locus of con- Aquinas’s position? trol of human behavior from forces outside the 20. What was Scholasticism? Give an example of person to forces inside the person? what the Scholastics did. 10. Describe the doctrine of predestination. 21. Why does William of Occam represent an 11. What did Augustine feel humans could be important turning point in the history of certain of, and how did he arrive at his con- psychology? clusion? How, according to Augustine, could 22. Was William of Occam a realist or a nominal- humans experience God, and what type of ist? Explain. emotion resulted from this experience? 23. What is Occam’s razor? 12. According to Augustine, what allows humans to have a sense of the past, present, and future? SU GGE STIONS FOR FURTHER READING Annas, J. E. (1994). Hellenistic philosophy of mind. Chadwick, H. (2001). Augustine: A very short introduction. Berkeley: University of California Press. New York: Oxford University Press. Bourke, V. J. (1993). Augustine’s quest of wisdom: His life, Copleston, F. C. (2001). Medieval philosophy: An intro- thought, and works. Albany, NY: Magi Books. duction. Mineola, NY: Dover. (Original work pub- Branham, R. B., & Goulet-Cazé, M.O. (Eds.) (1996). lished 1952) The Cynics: The Cynic movement in antiquity and its Deane, S. N. (Trans.). (1994). St. Anselm: Basic writings. legacy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. La Salle, IL: Open Court. Bury, R. G. (Trans.). (1990). Sextus Empiricus: Outlines of Grane, L. (1970). Peter Abelard: Philosophy and Christianity Pyrrhonism. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books. in the Middle Ages (F. Crowley & C. Crowley, Trans.). New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

96 CHAPTER 3 Gregory, J. (1991). The Neoplatonists. London: Kyle Pusey, E. B. (Trans.). (1961). The confessions of St. Cathie. Augustine. New York: Macmillan. Hankinson, R. J. (1998). The Sceptics. New York: Saunders, J. L. (Ed.). (1966). Greek and Roman philosophy Routledge. after Aristotle. New York: The Free Press. Kurtz, P. (1992). The new Skepticism: Inquiry and reliable Schoedinger, A. B. (Ed.). (1996). Readings in medieval knowledge. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books. philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press. McInerny, R. (1990). A first glance at St. Thomas Aquinas: Theissen, G. (1987). Psychological aspects of Pauline theology A handbook for peeping Thomists. South Bend, IN: (J. P. Galvin, Trans.). Edinburgh: T & T Clark. University of Notre Dame Press. Wilken, R. L. (2003). The Christians as the Romans saw O’Connor, E. (Trans.). (1993). The essential Epicurus: them (2nd ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press. Letters, principal doctrines, Vatican sayings, and frag- ments. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books. GLOSSARY Abelard, Peter (1079–1142) One of the first Western Conceptualism Abelard’s proposed solution to the philosopher-theologians to emphasize the works of realism-nominalism debate. Abelard argued that concepts Aristotle. do not have independent existence (realism), but that, Anselm, St. (ca. 1033–1109) Argued that sense per- being abstractions, they are more than mere names ception and rational powers should supplement faith. (nominalism). (See also Ontological argument for the existence of Constantine (ca. 272–337) Roman Emperor whose God.) Edict of Milan in 313 made Christianity a tolerated re- Antisthenes (ca. 445–365 B.C.) Founder of ligion within the Roman Empire. Under Constantine’s Cynicism. leadership, widely diverse Christian writings and beliefs were formalized, thus facilitating the widespread accep- Aquinas, St. Thomas (1225–1274) Epitomized tance of Christianity. Scholasticism. He sought to “Christianize” the works of Aristotle and to show that both faith and reason lead to Cynicism The belief that the best life is one lived close the truth of God’s existence. to nature and away from the rules and regulations of society. Augustine, St. (354–430) After having demonstrated the validity of inner, subjective experience, said that one Dialectic method The technique used by Abelard in can know God through introspection as well as through seeking truth. Questions are raised, and several possible the revealed truth of the scriptures. Augustine also wrote answers to those questions are explored. extensively on human free will. Diogenes (ca. 412–323 B.C.) Like his mentor Averroës (1126–1198) A Muslim physician and phi- Antisthenes, advocated natural impulse as the proper losopher who, among other things, wrote commentaries guide for action instead of social convention. on Aristotle’s work on the senses, memory, sleep and Dogmatist According to the Skeptics, any person waking, and dreams. claiming to have arrived at an indisputable truth. Avicenna (980–1037) A Muslim physician and philos- Epicureanism The belief that the best life is one of opher whose translations of, and commentaries on, the long-term pleasure resulting from moderation. works of Aristotle strongly influenced subsequent Epicurus of Samos (ca. 341–270 B.C.) Founder of Western philosophers. Epicureanism. Bonaventure, St. (ca. 1217–1274) A contemporary of Hedonism The belief that the good life consists of St. Thomas Aquinas who argued that Christianity should seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. remain Augustinian and should reject any effort to as- similate Aristotelian philosophy into church dogma.

A FTER ARIS TOTLE: A S EA RCH FOR TH E GOOD LIFE 97 Internal sense The internal knowledge of moral right Philo (ca. 25 B.C.–A.D. 50) A Neoplatonist who that individuals use in evaluating their behavior and combined Jewish theology with Plato’s philosophy. thoughts. Postulated by St. Augustine. Philo differentiated between the lower self (the body) Introspection The examination of one’s inner and a spiritual self, which is made in God’s image. The experiences. body is the source of all evil; therefore, for the spiritual self to develop fully, one should avoid or minimize sen- Jesus (ca. 6 B.C.–A.D. 30) A simple, sensitive man who St. Paul and others claimed was the Messiah. Those sory experience. who believe Jesus to be the son of God are called Plotinus (205–270) A Neoplatonist who emphasized Christians. the importance of embracing the soul through intro- spection. These subjective experiences were more im- Lombard, Peter (ca. 1095–1160) Insisted that God portant and informative than physical experiences. could be known through faith, reason, or the study of his work in nature. Predestination The belief that God has preordained, even before birth, which people will be granted salvation Magnus, St. Albertus (ca. 1200–1280) Made a com- prehensive review of Aristotle’s work. Following (the elect) and which are condemned to eternal Aristotle’s suggestion, he also made careful, direct ob- damnation. servations of nature. Pyrrho of Elis (ca. 360–270 B.C.) Founder of Skepticism. Maimonides (1135–1204) Jewish physician and phi- losopher who attempted to reconcile Aristotelian phi- Realism The belief that abstract universals (essences) losophy and Judaism. exist and that empirical events are only manifestations of those universals. Mystery religions Ancient religions (cults) that were characterized by secret rites of initiation; ceremonies Scholasticism The synthesis of Aristotelian philosophy designed to bring initiates closer to a deity or deities, to with Christian teachings. symbolize death and rebirth, to offer purification and Skepticism The belief that all beliefs can be proved forgiveness of sins, and to cause the exaltation of a new false; thus, to avoid the frustration of being wrong, it is life; the confession of sin; and a strong feeling of com- best to believe nothing. munity among members. Stoicism The belief that one should live according to Neoplatonism Philosophy that emphasized the most nature’s plan and accept one’s fate with indifference or, mystical aspects of Plato’s philosophy. Transcendental in the case of extreme hardship, with courage. experiences were considered the most significant type of Vedantism The Indian religion that emphasized the human experience. importance of semiecstatic trances. Nominalism The belief that so-called universals are William of Occam (ca. 1285–1349) Denied the nothing more than verbal labels or mental habits that are contention of the realists that what we experience are used to denote classes of experience. but manifestations of abstract principles. Instead, he sided Occam’s razor The belief that of several, equally ef- with the nominalists who said that so-called abstract fective alternative explanations, the one that makes the principles, or universals, were nothing more than verbal fewest assumptions should be accepted. labels that we use to describe classes of experiences. For Ontological argument for the existence of God St. Occam, reality is what we experience directly; there is no Anselm’s contention that if we can think of something, it need to assume a “higher” reality beyond our senses. must be real. Because we can think of a perfect being Zeno of Citium (ca. 335–263 B.C.) Founder of (God), that perfect being must exist. Stoicism. Paul, St. (ca. 10–64) Founded the Christian church by Zoroastrianism The Persian religion that equated claiming that Jesus was the son of God. Paul placed the truth and wisdom with the brilliance of the sun and soul or spirit in the highest position among the human ignorance and evil with darkness. faculties, the body in the lowest, and the mind in a po- sition somewhere between.

4 ✵ The Beginnings of Modern Science and Philosophy he Renaissance is generally dated from approximately 1450 to 1600, al- T though many historians would date its beginning much earlier. Renaissance means “rebirth,” and during this period, the tendency was to go back to the more open-minded method of inquiry that had characterized early Greek philos- ophy. It was a time when Europe gradually switched from being God-centered to being human-centered. If God existed, he existed in nature; therefore, to study nature was to study God. Also, because God had given humans the ability to create works of art, why not exercise that ability to the fullest? The new view was that there was more to humans than their souls: They had reliable sensory systems, so why not use them? They had reasoning powers, so why not exercise them? And they had the capacity for enjoyment, so why not enjoy? After all, God, in his infinite wisdom, must have given humans these attributes for a rea- son. Attention was diverted from the heavens, where the Pythagoreans, Platonists, and early Christians had focused it, to humans living in the world. Nowhere is this spirit of the times better illustrated than in the work of the Renaissance humanists. RENAISSANCE HUMA NISM Major Themes The term humanism, as it applies to the Renaissance, does not mean “humanitarianism.” That is, it does not refer to a deep concern about the welfare of humans. Nor does it refer to humaneness—treating one’s fellow humans with 98

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 99 respect, sensitivity, and dignity. As it applies to the religions were rediscovered, stimulating great Renaissance, humanism denotes an intense inter- interest in the occult. est in human beings, as if we were discovering our- ■ Anti-Aristotelianism. Many of the humanists selves for the first time. During this time, interest believed that the church had embraced was focused on a wide range of human activities. Aristotle’s philosophy to too great an extent— How do we think, behave, and feel? Of what are to the point where Aristotle’s philosophy was we capable? These and related questions are re- as authoritative as the Bible. Passages from flected in the four major themes that characterized Aristotle commonly settled theological dis- Renaissance humanism. putes. To the humanists, this was ridiculous ■ Individualism. There was great concern with because Aristotle had been only human, and human potential and achievement. The belief like any human, he was capable of error. To in the power of the individual to make a pos- the regret of the humanists, Aristotle’s philos- itive difference in the world created a spirit of ophy, along with Christian theology, had been optimism. used to create a set of rules, regulations, and beliefs that one had to accept in order to be a ■ Personal religion. Although all Renaissance hu- Christian. Accepting church dogma became manists were devout Christians, they wanted more important than one’s personal relation- religion to be more personal and less formal ship with God; therefore, the humanists at- and ritualistic. They argued for a religion that tacked church dogma harshly. Although there could be personally experienced rather than were many interesting Renaissance humanists, one that the church hierarchy imposed on the space permits only a brief review of a few of people. them. ■ Intense interest in the past. The Renaissance hu- manists became enamored with the past. The works of the early Greek and Roman poets, Francesco Petrarch philosophers, and politicians were of special interest. Renaissance scholars wanted to read So influential was Francesco Petrarch (1304– what the ancients had really said, instead of 1374) that many historians argue that his writings someone’s interpretation. They sought to as- mark the beginning of the Renaissance. Clearly, all sign correct authorship to old manuscripts be- the themes discussed above are found in Petrarch’s cause the authorship of several manuscripts had work. Above all else, Petrarch was concerned with been assigned incorrectly, and they attempted freeing the human spirit from the confines of me- to expose forgeries. These activities introduced dieval traditions, and the main target of his attack Renaissance scholars to a wide range of view- was Scholasticism. He believed that the classics points from the past, and many of these views should be studied as the works of humans and not found considerable support among the huma- be interpreted or embellished by others. He had a nists. For example, much that was previously low opinion of those who used the classics to sup- unknown of Plato’s philosophy was discovered, port their own beliefs, saying of these interpreters, resulting in a wave of interest in Plato. In 1462, “Like those who have no notion of architecture, Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499) founded a they make it their profession to whitewash walls” Platonic academy in Florence. He sought to do (R. I. Watson, 1978, p. 138). An obvious example for Plato’s philosophy what the Scholastics had of this type of interpreter was the Scholastic. done for Aristotle’s. Among the humanists, al- As most Renaissance humanists did, Petrarch most every early Greek and Roman philosophy urged a return to a personal religion like that de- had its adherents, but Plato was especially in- scribed by St. Augustine—a religion based on the fluential. Even some extremely old Eastern Bible, personal faith, and personal feelings. He

100 CHAPTER 4 thought that Scholasticism, in its attempt to make heeded, perhaps the Inquisition could have been religion compatible with Aristotelian rationalism, averted. This was not to be, however, and only the had made it too intellectual. Petrarch also argued fact that Pico died so young spared him the sight of that a person’s life in this world is at least as impor- his books being burned. tant as life after death. God wanted humans to use their vast capabilities, not inhibit them, Petrarch Desiderius Erasmus argued. By actualizing the potential God has given to us, we can change the world for the better. By Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) was born at focusing on human potential, Petrarch helped stim- Rotterdam on October 27. He was the illegitimate ulate the explosion of artistic and literary endeavors son of a priest and a physician’s daughter, a fact that that characterized the Renaissance. depressed him all of his life (Winter, 2005, p. vi). Petrarch did not create anything new philosoph- He was eventually ordained a priest but had no taste ically, but his challenge of religious and philosophical for a monastic life, preferring instead a life of study, authority helped open the door for individuals such travel, and independence. While earning a living as as Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo. In other words, a tutor, his travels throughout Europe brought him Petrarch’s skepticism toward all forms of dogma into contact with Europe’s leading scholars. He helped pave the way for modern science. died at Basle at the age of 69. Erasmus was opposed to a fanatical belief in anything. He was fond of pointing out mistakes in Giovanni Pico the classics, claiming that anything created by hu- Giovanni Pico (1463–1494) argued that God had mans could not be perfect. He exposed exorcism granted humans a unique position in the universe. and alchemy as nonsense, attacking these and other Angels are perfect and thus have no need to change, forms of superstition. He begged people to take whereas nonhuman animals are bound by their in- their lessons from the simple life of Jesus instead stincts and cannot change. Humans alone, being of from the pomp and circumstance of the orga- between angels and animals, are capable of change. nized church. He believed that war was caused by We can choose to live sensual, instinctive lives, fanaticism and was nothing more than homicide, thereby becoming brutish, or to exercise our ratio- and he was especially disturbed by bishops who nality and intelligence, thereby becoming more an- became rich and famous because of war. Eclectic gelic and godlike. and practical, Erasmus was a keen observer of the Our freedom not only allows us to choose from a world and its problems. Concerning women, variety of lifestyles, but it also permits us to embrace Erasmus had both traditional and progressive views. almost any viewpoint. Pico insisted that all philoso- He commended women for their role as caregivers phies have common elements; for example, they re- but argued, contrary to the prevailing view, that flect human rationality and individuality. He argued they should have access to education. He also ar- further that, if properly understood, the major phil- gued against the idea that celibacy is superior to osophical viewpoints (for example, those of Plato and marriage (Rummel, 1996, p. 3). Aristotle) were essentially in agreement. All view- Erasmus completed his book The Praise of Folly points therefore should be studied objectively with (1512/1994) in 1512 while staying with his friend the aim of discovering what they have in common. Sir Thomas More in England. The book caused a Pico urged that all philosophical perspectives be stud- sensation and was reprinted 40 times in his lifetime. ied and assimilated into the Christian worldview. In it he attacked the church and the papacy, philo- Clearly, Pico sought peace among philosophical sophers, nobility, and superstitions of all kinds. He and religious rivals. All human works, he said, should made the case that fools are better off than so-called be respected. Had Pico’s plea for individuals with wise persons because fools live in accordance with different viewpoints to understand each other been their true feelings instead of religious or philosoph-

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 101 ical doctrines. Fools, he said, are also happier be- Aquinas. Human intentions are inspired either by cause they do not fear death; they are not tormen- God or by Satan: the former results in doing God’s ted by guilt; they do not fear ghosts, spirits, and work, the latter in sin. People should not be able to goblins; and they are not concerned about the fu- escape the consequences of sin through penance or ture. Also, like nonhuman animals, drunkards, and absolution; if they have sinned, they should suffer young children, fools are spontaneous and speak the the consequences, which could be eternal damna- truth. Clearly, Erasmus’s philosophy had much in tion. In the spirit of Augustinian theology, Luther common with ancient Cynicism. insisted on an intensely personal religion in which Erasmus was so critical of the excesses of each person is answerable only to God, a religion Catholicism that the adage developed that that deemphasized ritual and church hierarchy. “Erasmus laid the [Reformist] egg and Luther Traditionally, the Reformation is said to have hatched it” (J. Wilson, 1994, p. vii). Erasmus’s criti- begun in 1517 when Luther nailed his Ninety-five cisms of the Catholic church of his day closely par- Theses (challenges to church dogma and hierarchy) alleled those of Luther: to the door of the castle church in Wittenberg. Aside from the issues already mentioned, Luther The pope had far too much power; the was especially opposed to the Catholic church’s preaching of indulgences had degenerated sale of indulgences, which allowed sinners to re- into shameless money-making; the vener- duce the retribution for their sins by paying a fee ation of saints had been corrupted to su- to church officials. God alone, he preached, deter- perstition; church buildings were stuffed mined what was sinful and how sinfulness was to be full of images; the music in services was treated. In Luther’s eyes, the church had drifted far more fitting for a wedding or a drinking from the teachings of Jesus and the Bible. Jesus had party; the mass was served by priests who preached the glory of the simple life, devoid of lived godless lives and served it as a shoe- luxury and privilege, but the church had come to maker practices his trade; confession had value these things and to engage in too many for- become money-making and skirt-chasing; mal rituals. For Luther, a major reason for the priests and monks were shameless tyrants. downfall of Catholicism was its assimilation of (Augustijn, 1991, pp. 159–160) Aristotle’s philosophy. Perhaps in an effort to silence him, the Catholic church secretly offered to make Erasmus Luther on Marriage. Luther also disagreed with a cardinal (Augustijn, 1991, p. 173). This having the Catholic church over the compulsory celibacy failed, all of Erasmus’s works were eventually placed of nuns and priests. First he noted that many church on the Catholic church’s index of forbidden books. leaders “lived in open liaisons with mistresses and When the Reformation did occur (see “Martin fathered illegitimate children” and, like his contem- Luther” below), Erasmus was equally repelled by its porary Erasmus, he denounced “the lawless clergy excesses and was condemned by both the Catholics who went whoring or kept concubines” (Marty, and Protestants. 2004, p. 102). Second, Luther believed that married couples are as capable of doing God’s work as any nun or priest: “The mother suckling the baby and Martin Luther washing diapers, the farmer at work, the couple Martin Luther (1483–1546), an Augustinian priest having sex were as likely to be engaged in God- and biblical scholar, was disgusted by what pleasing activities as was any nun engaged in Christianity had become in his day. Like those of prayer” (Marty, 2004, p. 104). On June 13, 1525, the other humanists, his view of Christianity was at the age of 42, Luther married Katherina von much more in accordance with St. Paul’s and St. Bora, a former nun. By 1534 the Luthers had pro- Augustine’s views than with those of St. Thomas duced six children, four of whom survived.

102 CHAPTER 4 Luther celebrated sexual enjoyment within free will, humans cannot be held responsible for any marriage and even entertained some erotic thoughts of their actions: “Inasmuch as man can never be the (Marty, 2004, p. 107). But what if a wife persis- author of good works, he can also never be called tently denies her husband sexual satisfaction? In the author of evil ones” (Winter, 2005, p. 75). such a case, Luther said, perhaps surprisingly, Erasmus argued that even if, contrary to what he “The husband might then turn to the household believed, human actions are predestined rather than maid or someone else for sexual relations” (Marty, freely chosen, that “truth” should not be shared 2004, p. 108). Concerning a woman who wed an with the people. Doing so, he believed, would impotent man who, nonetheless, desires children, “worsen the already excessive laxness of humanity Luther gave this provocative advice: by impressing it on them that everything depended on God” (Augustijn, 1991, p. 131). In other words, [She] with the consent of the man (who is “it would be dangerous to reveal such a doctrine to not really her husband, but only a dweller the multitude, for morality is dependent on the under the same roof with her) should have consciousness of freedom” (Huizinga, 1924/2001, intercourse with another, for example her p. 163). Erasmus’s solution to the apparent contra- husband’s brother. They were to keep this diction between predestination and free will was to “marriage” secret and ascribe any children combine free will and God’s grace. That is, those to the “so-called putative father.” Such a who choose well in their lifetime are granted eter- woman would be in a saved state and nal salvation. would not be displeasing to God. (Marty, Contrarily, Luther said, “God … foresees, pur- 2004, p. 108) poses and does all things according to His immutable, eternal and infallible will. This thunderbolt throws Luther’s Denial of Free Will. Luther and free will flat and utterly dashes it to pieces” Erasmus had several disagreements, but perhaps (Winter, 2005, p. 93). Why then do humans perform the most intense was over free will. In 1524 evil deeds? Luther answered, “The human will is like Erasmus wrote The Free Will, and in 1525 Luther a beast of burden. If God rides it, it wills and goes responded with The Bondage of the Will (both rep- whence God wills.… If Satan rides, it wills and goes rinted, in part, in Winter, 2005). Erasmus defined where Satan wills. Nor may it choose to which rider free will as “the power of the human will whereby it will run, nor which it will seek. But the riders man can apply to or turn away from that themselves contend who shall have and hold it” which leads unto eternal salvation” (Winter, 2005, (Winter, 2005, p. 97). He continued, “In all things p. 17). Erasmus quoted numerous Biblical passages pertaining to salvation or damnation, man has no free where God indicates to humans what is good and will, but is captive, servant and bondslave, either to what is evil and encourages them to choose the for- the will of God, or to the will of Satan” (Winter, mer. This, he pointed out, was clearly true in the 2005. p. 98). Still, God is all knowing (omniscient), Garden of Eden, and “the entire Holy Scripture is all powerful (omnipotent), and present everywhere filled with such exhortations” (Winter, 2005, (omnipresent), so how can He allow evil to exist? p. 28). Erasmus asked, “Doesn’t the reader of such This, of course, raises interesting questions about passages ask: why do you [God] make conditional God, and Luther was well aware of them. promises, when it depends solely on your will? Why do you blame me, when all my works, Of course, this seems to give the greatest good or bad, are accomplished by you, and I am offense to common sense or natural reason, only your tool? … Why bless me, as if I had done that God, who is proclaimed as being so my duty, when everything is your achievement? full of mercy and goodness, should of His Why do you curse me, when I have merely sinned own mere will abandon, harden and damn through necessity?” (Winter, 2005, p. 29). Without men, as though delighted in the sins and

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 103 eternal torments of the miserable. It seems religious movement, Protestantism, and Luther iniquitous, cruel, intolerable to think thus was its leader. The new religion denied the author- of God. It has given offense to so many ity of the pope and insisted that every individual and many great men down the ages. And had the right to interpret the Bible for himself or who would not be offended? I myself have herself. To facilitate the latter, Luther translated the been offended at it more than once, even Bible into the German vernacular. The Catholic unto the deepest abyss of despair, so far church’s response to the criticisms of Luther and that I wished I had never been made a others was to make Aquinas’s Christianized version man. (Winter, 2005, pp. 113–114) of Aristotle’s philosophy official church dogma, which all Christians were expected to follow. The Even with these concerns, Luther insisted, “If dispute over which version of Christianity was cor- the foreknowledge and omnipotence of God are rect soon divided Europe. admitted, we must be under necessity” (Winter, Early Protestantism had at least two negative 2005, p. 114). According to Luther, in the final aspects. First, as a religion, it was grim, austere, analysis, why God allows evil to exist is unfathom- harsh, and unforgiving. In terms of individual hap- able to humans and, therefore, must remain a mys- piness, it is difficult to imagine its adherents being tery. In other words, God only knows. any better off than those embracing Catholicism. Luther both agreed and disagreed with Second, Protestantism insisted on accepting the ex- Augustine (see Chapter 3). Augustine attributed istence of God on faith alone; attempting to under- free will to humans but argued that salvation is stand him through reason or empirical observations granted only by God’s grace and independently of was foolish and to be avoided. Thus, if one believes human endeavors (predestination). Luther denied that the acceptance of reason and the observation of free will but agreed that salvation is attained by nature as ways of knowing God exemplified prog- God’s grace alone. ress, then Protestantism exemplified regression. On Throughout his debate with Luther, Erasmus the positive side, however, Protestantism was a lib- was, as was typical of him, respectful, kind, and con- erating influence in the sense that it challenged the ciliatory. For example, he conceded, “When one has authority of the pope and of Aristotle; replacing arrived at this view, others at that view, both reading them was the belief that individual feelings can pro- the same Scripture, it is due to the fact that each vide the only truth needed in living one’s life. looked for something else and interpreted that It is interesting to note that although the por- which he read for his own purpose” (Winter, 2005, trayal of Luther is often grim, he was known to p. 68). However, Luther was, with few exceptions, have an earthly sense of humor. For example, he mean, disrespectful, and dogmatic. He insisted, for once observed, “My enemies examine all that I do. example, that his interpretation of scripture was the If I break wind in Wittenberg they smell it in only correct one, and he ended the debate by praying Rome” (P. Smith, 1911, p. 355). that the Lord would enlighten Erasmus on the sub- For additional information concerning Luther’s ject of free will (Winter, 2005, p. 119). It should be colorful life, including his confrontations with noted that despite his reputation for tolerance, Erasmus, and his influential theology, see Cary, Erasmus, like Luther, was fiercely anti-Semitic 2004, and Marty, 2004. (Marty, 2004, p. 169–174). It is interesting to note that on the issue of free Michel de Montaigne will, subsequent Lutheranism developed more in accordance with Erasmus’s views than with With the recovery of classical knowledge, there ar- Luther’s (Augustijn, 1991, p. 145). ose a concern that had occupied the Greek and When Luther was excommunicated in 1521, Roman Skeptics: With so many claims of truth, is the protest that he represented grew into a new there any valid way of distinguishing among them?

104 CHAPTER 4 The Skeptics answered in the negative, and we see knowledge by creating philosophical systems they indications of Skepticism in the works of Petrarch, believed were impervious to such doubt. Pico, and especially Erasmus. Luther demonstrated There were many other Renaissance humanists. Skepticism, at least toward Aristotelian philosophy Some manifested the power of the individual in and the religious practices that developed since the art (Leonardo da Vinci, 1452–1519), some in time of Augustine. It is in the work of Michel de politics (Niccolò Machiavelli, 1469–1527), some Montaigne (1533–1592), however, that we find in education (Juan Luis Vives, 1492–1540), and the extreme Skepticism that had been represented some in literature (William Shakespeare, 1564– earlier by Pyrrho of Elis (see Chapter 3). In a series 1616). The emphasis was always the same—on the of influential essays, Montaigne questioned the very individual. Now people were seen as having the possibility of indisputable knowledge. Like power to change things for the better rather than Erasmus, he argued that both Catholic and simply accepting the world as it was or hoping that Protestant theologies were equally indefensible on it would become better. Although the Renaissance rational grounds and that the only justifiable basis humanists added nothing new to philosophy or psy- for a religious conviction was faith. chology, the belief that individuals could act upon In sharp contrast to most earlier Renaissance the world to improve it was conducive to the devel- humanists, Montaigne did not glorify human ratio- opment of science. During the Renaissance, art, lit- nality, nor did he believe humans to be superior to erature, and architecture benefited, but the age of other animals (in this he was in agreement with science was still in the future. Erasmus). In fact, he argued that it was human ra- To say the least, the Renaissance was a para- tionality that caused most human problems (such as doxical time. On one hand, there was an explosion the Holy Wars) and that because nonhuman ani- of interest in human potential coupled with great mals lack rational powers, they are superior to hu- human achievements. In this respect, the mans. He analyzed the most famous philosophical Renaissance resembled classical Greece and doctrines, pointed out the contradictions within Rome. On the other hand, it was a time of perse- and among them, and showed them to be open cution, superstition, witch hunting and execution, to multiple interpretations. This is similar to what fear, torture, and exorcism. Although astrologers the French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930– and alchemists were generally highly regarded and 2004) became famous for doing many years later. popular, abnormal individuals were treated with Montaigne rejected science as a means of attaining extreme harshness. Wars destroyed much of reliable knowledge because scientific “truth” is in France and Germany, the Black Death cut constant flux. He even went beyond the Greek and Europe’s population by about a third, major fam- Roman Skeptics by denying that simple sensations ines occurred, and syphilis was epidemic. Yet de- can act as reasonable guides for living. Sensations, spite all this trouble, there was almost unparalleled he said, are often illusory, and even if they were creativity. The Renaissance displayed the best and not, they are influenced by our bodily conditions worst of humanity—the stuff from which modern and personal histories. It should be clear that philosophy and science emerged. Montaigne did not share the optimism expressed by the earlier Renaissance humanists concerning the human potential to make a positive difference FURTHER CHALLENGES TO in the world. Montaigne’s Skepticism stimulated a number CHURCH AUTHORITY of attempts to disprove it. For example, Popkin (1967) argues that both Francis Bacon and René The Renaissance and the breakdown of church au- Descartes (both covered later in this chapter) re- thority went hand in hand. Church dogma con- sponded to Montaigne’s doubts concerning human sisted of fixed truths: there are exactly seven heav-

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 105 enly bodies in the solar system, the earth is the thus creating modern printing techniques. It center of the universe, and humans are created in was Gutenberg’s techniques that were used to God’s image, for example. Gradually, these “truths” print the vernacular Bibles that played a major were challenged, and each successful challenge fo- role in the Reformation. cused suspicion on other “truths.” Once begun, the ■ Discovery of the New World by Christopher questioning escalated rapidly, and the church tried Columbus (1492). desperately to discourage these challenges to its au- thority. Church scholars attempted to show that ■ Martin Luther’s challenge to Catholicism (1517). contradictions were only apparent. Failing in this, they attempted to impose censorship, but it was too ■ Circumnavigation of the globe by Ferdinand late; the challenging spirit was too widespread. The Magellan’s expedition (1519–1522). decline in the church’s authority was directly re- These and other events vastly expanded the lated to the rise of a new spirit of inquiry that known world. The discovery that the earth was took as its ultimate authority empirical observation filled with strange peoples with strange customs instead of the scriptures, faith, or revelation. created many problems for the church. For exam- Gradually, church dogma was replaced by the ple, a long debate occurred concerning whether very thing it had opposed the most—the direct ob- “savages” found in America had rational souls (it servation of nature without the intervention of was decided that they did). The printing press theological considerations. But the transition, al- made the widespread, accurate, and rapid exchange though steady, was slow and painful. Many of ideas possible. And, as we have seen, Luther’s Renaissance scholars were caught between theol- challenge to Catholicism resulted in the develop- ogy and science because of either personal beliefs ment of the Protestant movement, which argued or fear of retaliation by the church. They reported against centralized church authority and for in- their observations with extreme caution; in some creased individualism within the Christian cases, they requested that their observations be re- religion. ported only after their death. As influential as the above events were, how- There is no single reason for this reawakening ever, the work of a few astronomer-physicists was of the spirit of objective inquiry; several factors are most detrimental to church dogma and most influ- believed responsible. One was Aquinas’s acceptance ential in creating a new way of examining nature’s of reason and the examination of nature as ways of secrets. That new way was called science. knowing God. Once sanctioned by the church, the human capacity to reason was focused everywhere, including on church dogma. Another factor was the work of the humanists, which recaptured the spirit PTOLEMY, COPERNICUS, of open inquiry reflected in the classics. The huma- KEPLER, AND GALILEO nists also stressed the human potential to act upon the world and change it for the better. In addition, Ptolemy the following events are considered factors in the acceptance of the objective study of nature because In the second century A.D., Ptolemy, a Greco- they weakened the authority of the church: Egyptian, summarized the mathematical and obser- vational astronomy of his time and that of antiquity ■ The explorations of central Asia and China in his Almagest. The Ptolemaic system included from 1271 to 1295 by Marco Polo (ca. the beliefs that the heavenly bodies, including the 1254–1324). earth, were spherical in shape and that the sun, ■ Johannes Gutenberg’s (ca. 1397–1468) inven- moon, and planets travel around the earth in orbits tion of metal moveable type (ca. 1436–1440), that are circular and uniform. Although this system

106 CHAPTER 4 reflected the views of most astronomers, including “the most holy lord, Pope Paul III” and promised those of Aristotle, there were exceptions. A notable to solve a major problem with which the church exception was Aristarchus of Samos (ca. 310– had been struggling; namely, the creation of a more 230 B.C.), the brilliant astronomer of the accurate calendar. The book, then, did not appear to Alexandrian school. Aristarchus believed that the be unfriendly toward the church. Furthermore, earth rotated on its own axis and that the earth when De Revolutionibus was published, its contents and the other planets revolved around the sun. In could be understood only by the most sophisticated other words, Aristarchus arrived at the basic as- mathematicians and astronomers of the day. sumptions of the Copernican system about 1,700 Perhaps because of its apparent compatibility with years before Copernicus. Despite a few such dissen- church dogma and its esoteric nature, the book was ters, the view of the universe reflected in the not immediately viewed as a threat by the church Ptolemaic system prevailed until the 17th century. (although it was eventually condemned). In any The Ptolemaic system was resilient for at least three case, in De Revolutionibus Copernicus did argue suc- reasons: cessfully that, rather than the sun revolving around the earth (the geocentric theory), the earth re- ■ It accorded well with the testimony of the volved around the sun (the heliocentric theory). senses (the earth does appear to be the fixed This argument, of course, was a clear contradiction center of the universe). of church dogma. Only gradually was it realized that ■ It allowed reasonable astronomical predictions Copernicus’s heliocentric theory questioned the tra- ■ Later, it was congenial to Christian theology ditional place of humankind in the universe. Once because it gave humans a central place in the this realization occurred, a number of related ques- universe and thus was in agreement with the tions followed: Were we favored by God and there- biblical account of creation. fore placed in the center of the universe? If not, why not? If the church was wrong about this vital fact, was For a complete description of Ptolemy’s sys- it wrong about other things? Were there other solar tem, including its mystical components and ethical systems that contained life? If so, how were they re- implications, see Taub, 1993. lated to ours, and which did God favor? Because In medieval theology, many of the teachings of Copernicus’s heliocentric theory challenged a deeply Ptolemy, like those of Aristotle, became part of of- held worldview going back at least to Aristotle, it was ficial church dogma and were therefore unchal- considered revolutionary (Kuhn, 1957). Common lengeable. The worldview based on the Ptolemaic sense dictated the acceptance of the geocentric the- system became deeply entrenched in philosophy, ory, and those rejecting it were considered either mis- theology, science, and everyday life. informed or insane. Within the church, to challenge the geocentric theory was to challenge church dogma and was therefore heretical. Nicolaus Copernicus Giordano Bruno (1548–1600) was a former It was not until a devout canon of the Roman Dominican priest who converted to the ancient Catholic church named Nicolaus Copernicus philosophy of Hermetism. Among other things, (1473–1543), born on February 19, at Torun, Hermetism professed the divinity of humans, the Poland, published his book De Revolutionibus existence of magical forces that can be used to ben- Orbium Coelestium (The Revolutions of the Heavenly efit humankind, and a harmony among humans, Spheres) that the Ptolemaic system was seriously stars, and planets. The Hermetic tradition also challenged. Although reports on Copernicus’s he- held that in the universe there are innumerable in- liocentric theory had been circulating since about habited worlds (that is, solar systems) and in each of 1515, his De Revolutionibus was not published until these worlds, including our own, the sun is divine. 1543, the year he died. The book was dedicated to For Bruno, “The Copernican sun heralds the full

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 107 thus contradicting the scriptural description of it as a land of ‘milk and honey’” (Watson and Evans, 1991, p. 151). The fate of individuals like Bruno and Servetus helps explain the caution exhibited by scientists and philosophers during these times. Copernicus was aware that Aristarchus had proposed a theory very similar to his many centuries before and took some comfort in knowing this. Nonetheless, he realized that the heliocentric the- ory was nothing short of revolutionary, and he was justifiably worried. Furthermore, Copernicus knew that despite the theological and philosophical tur- moil caused by his theory, nothing in terms of scientific Bettman/CORBIS accuracy was gained by it. That is, the astrological pre- dictions made by his theory were no more accurate © than the ones made under the Ptolemaic system. Also, all known celestial phenomena could be ac- Nicolaus Copernicus counted for by the Ptolemaic system; there were no major mysteries that needed explanation. The only sunrise of the ancient and true philosophy after its justification for accepting Copernicus’s heliocentric agelong burial in dark caverns” (Yates, 1964, p. theory was that it cast the known astrological facts 238). Bruno, therefore, accepted Copernicus’s he- into a simpler, more harmonious mathematical liocentric theory not for scientific reasons but be- order. cause it restored the divine status given to the sun In the Ptolemaic system, it was necessary to by the ancients. For Bruno, the magical religion of make a number of complex assumptions concern- the ancients was the only true religion that both ing the paths of the planets around the earth. Once Judaism and Christianity had obscured and cor- these assumptions were made, however, predictions rupted (Yates, 1964, p. 11). All of this was too concerning the paths of the planets and eclipses of much for the church, and Bruno was brought be- the sun and moon could be made with considerable fore the Inquisition in Venice on May 26, 1592, accuracy. What Copernicus’s system did was to re- and charged with eight counts of heresy. At first duce the number of assumptions needed to make he recanted his beliefs and asked for mercy from those same predictions. As we have seen, a strong the judge, but later he changed his mind, arguing resurgence of interest in Platonic philosophy arose that he had never been a heretic. Eight years after in the 15th and 16th centuries, and the Pythagorean his imprisonment, Bruno was convicted as a re- aspect of Platonism was stressed during this revival. lapsed heretic and on February 17, 1600, was Working in favor of accepting the Copernican burned at the stake. It should not be concluded, viewpoint was the Pythagorean-Platonic view that however, that Bruno was a martyr for science. In the universe operated according to mathematical the charges brought against him, Copernicus was principles and that those principles are always the not even mentioned (M. B. Hall, 1994, p. 125). simplest and most harmonious possible. It is no ac- Often the reformers were as violent as those cident that the first to accept Copernicus’s theory they were attempting to reform. For example, were mathematicians who, like himself, embraced the Protestant John Calvin ordered the famous the Pythagorean-Platonic worldview. To those anatomist Michael Servetus (1511–1553) to be embracing nonmathematical Aristotelian philoso- burned at the stake because he “described the phy, the idea of contradicting observation in favor Holy Land as a barren wilderness (which it was), of mathematical simplicity was ridiculous.

108 CHAPTER 4 We have in the Ptolemaic-Copernican debate worshipper and, as such, he was attracted to the the first scientific revolution, to use Kuhn’s (1957, greater dignity given the sun in the Copernican 1996) terminology. The Ptolemaic system repre- system. Throughout his life, when he gave his rea- sented the accepted scientific paradigm of the day. sons for accepting Copernican theory, the en- Like any paradigm, it defined problems, specified hanced position given the sun by that theory was solutions, and provided those accepting it with a always cited, and it was usually cited first. In keep- worldview. The Copernican paradigm focused on ing with his Pythagorean-Platonic philosophy, different problems, different methods of solution, Kepler believed that true reality was the mathemat- and a distinctly different worldview. Because to fol- ical harmony that existed beyond the world of low Copernicus was to reject the prevailing view of appearance. The sensory world, the world of ap- the universe, the opposition to his view was wide- pearance, was an inferior reflection of the certain, spread and harsh. unchanging mathematical world. Converts to Copernicus’s heliocentric theory Armed with a mixture of Platonic philosophy, came slowly. Among the first was Johannes mysticism, and Copernican theory, Kepler not only Kepler, a Pythagorean-Platonic mathematician. made a living as an astrologer (he believed the heav- enly bodies affect human destiny) but also made sig- nificant contributions to astronomy. He worked out Johannes Kepler and proved many of the mathematical details of the Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) was born on Copernican system, thereby winning its further ac- December 27 at Weil, in the Duchy of ceptance. Through mathematical deduction and ob- Württemberg, in what is now Germany. He first servation, he found that the paths of the planets studied to become a Lutheran minister but, unable around the sun were elliptical rather than circular to accept the rigidity of Lutheran doctrine, (as Copernicus had believed). He observed that the switched to the study of mathematics and astron- velocities of the planets vary inversely with their dis- omy. Kepler was fortunate to have a teacher, tance from the sun, thus anticipating Newton’s con- Michael Maestlin, who encouraged a critical evalu- cept of gravitation. Finally, he demonstrated that ation of both Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomy all the different planetary motions could be described in spite of the fact that Luther had condemned the by a single mathematical statement. Perhaps Kepler’s heliocentric theory as a flagrant contradiction of most important contribution to science, however, biblical teachings. For example, Luther said, “The was his insistence that all mathematical deductions fool will turn the whole science of astronomy up- be verified by empirical observation. side down. But as Holy Writ declares, it was the Kepler also studied vision directly and found Sun and not the earth which Joshua commanded to that environmental objects project an inverted im- stand still” (M. B. Hall, 1994, p. 126). Other age onto the retina. This observation contrasted Protestant leaders joined in the rejection of with earlier theories that explained vision as the Copernicus. Calvin cited the opening verse of the result of the projection of exact copies of objects 93rd Psalm—“The earth is established, it shall never directly into the sense receptors. Kepler also ques- be moved,”—and asked, “Who will venture to tioned humans’ ability to perceive things correctly place the authority of Copernicus above that of when the image projected onto the retina is upside the Holy Spirit?” (Kuhn, 1957, p. 192). Thus, there down, but he left that problem for others to solve. was risk in embracing Copernican theory even for a Protestant, but embrace it is what Kepler did. There Galileo appear to be two reasons Kepler took the risk. First, he, like Copernicus, was a Platonist seeking the Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), known simply as simple mathematical harmony that describes the Galileo, was born at Pisa, Italy, on February 15 universe. Second, like Bruno, Kepler was a sun into a family of impoverished nobility. He was a

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 109 brilliant mathematician who, at the age of 25, was professor of philosophy, whom I have appointed professor of mathematics at the repeatedly and urgently requested to look University of Pisa. Like Copernicus and Kepler, at the moon and planets through my Galileo viewed the universe as a perfect machine glass, which he perniciously refuses to whose workings could be understood only in do. Why are you not here? What shouts mathematical terms: of laughter we should have at this glo- rious folly! And to hear the professor of Philosophy is written in that great book philosophy at Pisa laboring before the which ever lies before our eyes—I mean Grand Duke with logical arguments, as if the universe—but we cannot understand it with magical incantations, to charm the if we do not first learn the language and new planets out of the sky. (Burtt, 1932, grasp the symbols in which it is written. p. 77) This book is written in the mathematical language, and the symbols are triangles, Others refusing to look through Galileo’s tele- circles, and other geometric figures, with- scope asserted “that if God meant man to use such a out whose help it is impossible to com- contrivance in acquiring knowledge, He would prehend a single word of it; without which have endowed men with telescopic eyes” (Kuhn, one wanders in vain through a dark laby- 1957, p. 226). Others who did look through the rinth. (Burtt, 1932, p. 75) telescope acknowledged the phenomena observed “but claimed that the new objects were not in the Also like Copernicus and Kepler, Galileo saw his sky at all; they were apparitions caused by the tele- task as explaining the true mathematical reality that scope itself” (Kuhn, 1957, p. 226). existed beyond the world of appearances. Armed With his studies of the dynamics of projectiles, with these Pythagorean-Platonic beliefs, Galileo set Galileo demonstrated that the motions of all bodies out to correct a number of misconceptions about the under all circumstances are governed by a single set world and about heavenly bodies. He challenged of mathematical laws. His studies showed that no- Aristotle’s contention that heavy objects fall faster tions of “animation” were unnecessary for explain- than lighter ones because of their inherent tendency ing physical events. That is, because behavior of to do so by demonstrating that both fall at the same objects and events can be explained in terms of rate. He accepted the Copernican heliocentric the- external forces, there is no need to postulate “natu- ory and wrote a book in which he demolished all ral places,”“passions,”“ends,”“essences,” or any arguments against it. In 1609, Galileo used his modi- other inherent properties. fied version of the newly invented telescope to dis- Before Galileo’s time, much had been written cover the mountains of the moon, sunspots, and the on the subject of motion, but no one had actually fact that the Milky Way is made up of many stars not measured the motions of falling bodies: visible to the naked eye. He also discovered four When Galileo was born, two thousand moons of Jupiter, which meant that there were at years of physics had not resulted in even least 11 bodies in the solar system instead of 7, as rough measurements of actual motions. It claimed by the church. is a striking fact that the history of each Most people refused to look through Galileo’s science shows continuity back to its first telescope because they believed that to do so was an use of measurement, before which it act of heresy. Galileo shared one such experience exhibits no ancestry but metaphysics. That with his friend Kepler: explains why Galileo’s science was stoutly Oh, my dear Kepler, how I wish that opposed by nearly every philosopher of his we could have one hearty laugh to- time, he having made it as nearly free from gether! Here at Padua is the principal metaphysics as he could. That was

110 CHAPTER 4 ultimate explanation of reality must be in terms of the rational order of things; that is, the ultimate explanation must be mathematical. Objective and Subjective Reality. Galileo made a sharp distinction between objective and subjective reality. Objective reality exists indepen- dently of anyone’s perception of it, and its attributes are what later in history were called primary qual- Images ities. Primary qualities are absolute, objective, Pictures/Stringer/Getty description. They include quantity, shape, size, posi- immutable, and capable of precise mathematical tion, and motion or rest. Besides the primary qualities (which constitute physical reality), another type of Life reality is created by the sensing organism; this reality & consists of what came to be called secondary quali- Time ties. Secondary qualities (which constitute subjective © reality) are purely psychological experiences and Galileo have no counterparts in the physical world. Examples of secondary qualities include the experi- achieved by measurements, made as pre- ences of color, sound, temperature, smell, and taste. cisely as possible with the means available According to Galileo, secondary qualities are relative, to Galileo or that he managed to devise. subjective, and fluctuating. Of primary qualities (like (Drake, 1994, p. 233) Plato’s forms), we can have true knowledge; of sec- ondary qualities, there is only opinion and illusion. However, in his attitude toward experimenta- Although secondary qualities may seem as real as tion, we again see Galileo’s Pythagorean-Platonic primary qualities, they are not. Primary qualities are beliefs. For Galileo, discovering a physical law was real, but secondary qualities are merely names we use like discovering a Platonic form. Observation sug- to describe our subjective (psychological) experiences: gests that a lawful relationship may exist, and an experiment is performed to either confirm or dis- Hence I think that these tastes, odours, confirm the possibility. Once a law is discovered, colours, etc., on the side of the object in however, further experimentation is not necessary; which they seem to exist, are nothing else mathematical deduction is used to precisely describe than mere names, but hold their residence all possible manifestations of the law. Galileo be- solely in the sensitive body; so that if the lieved that, besides being useful in verifying the animal were removed, every such quality existence of laws, experiments could also function would be abolished and annihilated. as demonstrations that help convince those skeptical Nevertheless, as soon as we have imposed about the existence of certain laws. Galileo, then, names on them … we induce ourselves to relied much more on mathematical deduction than believe that they also exist just as truly and he did on experimentation. On the question of re- really as the [primary qualities]. (Burtt, alism versus nominalism, he was clearly on the side 1932, p. 85) of realism. Actual laws (forms) existed, and those laws acted on the physical world. Like a In studying the physical world, secondary qual- true Platonist, Galileo said that the senses can pro- ities are, at best, irrelevant. If one physical object vide only a hint about the nature of reality. The hits another, the color, smell, or taste of the objects

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 111 is irrelevant in determining their subsequent paths. Thus, Galileo excluded from science much of For Galileo, it was physical reality, not subjective what is now included in psychology, and many reality, that could be and should be studied modern natural scientists refuse to accept psychol- scientifically. ogy as a science for the same reason that Galileo did not accept it. There have been many efforts to The Impossibility of a Science of Conscious quantify cognitive experience since the time of Experience. Because so much of our conscious Galileo, and insofar as these efforts have been suc- experience consists of secondary qualities, and be- cessful, Galileo’s conclusions about the measure- cause such qualities can never be described and ment of secondary qualities were incorrect. How understood mathematically, Galileo believed that successful these efforts have been, however, has consciousness could never be studied by the ob- been and is widely disputed. jective methods of science. Galileo’s position As we have seen, Aristotle was Galileo’s prime marked a major philosophical shift concerning target. Using empirical observation and mathemati- man’s place in the world. Almost without excep- cal reasoning, Galileo discredited one Aristotelian tion, all philosophers and theologians prior to “truth” after another, thus attacking the very core Galileo gave humans a prominent position in of church dogma. At the age of 70, crippled by the world. If there were good things and bad rheumatism and almost blind, Galileo was brought things in the world and if there were changing before the Inquisition and made to recant his scien- and unchanging things in the world, those things tific conclusions. He lived his remaining years un- also existed in humans. Humans were viewed as a der house arrest and, although his works had been microcosm that reflected the vast macrocosm: condemned, he continued to write in secret. The “Till the time of Galileo it had always been taken work Galileo considered his best, Dialogues for granted that man and nature were both inte- Concerning Two New Sciences (1638), was completed gral parts of a larger whole, in which man’s place under these circumstances and was smuggled out of was the more fundamental” (Burtt, 1932, p. 89). Italy. Galileo died on January 9, 1642. It was not With Galileo, this view of humans changed. until October 31, 1992, that the Catholic church Those experiences that are most human—our officially absolved Galileo of his “transgressions” pleasures; our disappointments; our passions; our (Reston, 1994, p. 283). ambitions; our visual, auditory, and olfactory ex- With the work of Copernicus, Kepler, and periences—were now considered inferior to the Galileo, the old materialistic view of Democritus real world outside of human experience. was resurrected. The universe appeared to consist At best, humans can come to know the world of matter whose motion was determined by forces of astronomy and the world of resting and moving external to it. God had become minimally impor- terrestrial objects. However, this knowledge can tant in the scheme of things, and now even the never be attained by sensory experience alone. It place of man was seriously questioned. Are humans can be attained only by rationally grasping the part of the natural world? If so, they should be mathematical laws that exist beyond sensory expe- explicable in terms of natural science. Or is there rience. For the first time in history, we have a view something special about humans that sets them of human conscious experience as secondary, un- apart from the natural world? If so, how are humans real, and totally dependent on the senses, which are special, and what special laws govern human behav- deceitful. What is real, important, and dignified was ior? The new science favored the view of humans as the world outside of man: “Man begins to appear natural phenomena. Newton’s epic-making accom- for the first time in the history of thought as an plishments furthered the materialistic view of the irrelevant spectator and insignificant effect of the universe and encouraged the generalization of that great mathematical system which is the substance view to humans. Soon the universe and everything of reality” (Burtt, 1932, p. 90).

112 CHAPTER 4 in it would be viewed as materialistic and machine- Like Galileo, Newton conceived of the uni- like, including humans. verse as a complex, lawful machine created by God. Guided by these conceptions, Newton devel- oped differential and integral calculus (Leibniz ISAAC NEWTON made the same discovery independently), devel- oped the universal law of gravitation, and did pio- Isaac Newton (1642–1727) was born on neer work in optics. Newton created a conception December 25 the year Galileo died, in the village of the universe that was to prevail in physics and of Woolsthorpe, England. His father died before astronomy for more than two centuries, until Newton’s birth and, when his mother remarried, Einstein revised it. His methods of verification, he was sent to live with his maternal grandmother like those of Galileo, included observation, mathe- in a neighboring town. In school, Newton was a matical deduction, and experimentation. In mediocre student but showed great aptitude for Newton, who was deeply religious, we have a building mechanical contrivances such as windmills complete reversal of the earlier faith-oriented way and water clocks. When her second husband died, of knowing God: Because God made the universe, Newton’s mother removed him from school and studying it objectively was a way of understanding brought him back to Woolsthorpe hoping he God. In this he agreed with most of the Scholastics would become a farmer. Recognizing his potential, and with Copernicus and Kepler. one of Newton’s teachers prevailed upon his Although Newton believed in God as the cre- mother to prepare Newton for entrance into ator of the universe, Newton’s work greatly dimin- Cambridge University. Newton entered Trinity ished God’s influence. God created the universe College, Cambridge, in 1661 under the tutelage and set it in motion, but that exhausted his involve- of Isaac Barrow, professor of mathematics, and ob- ment. After Newton, it was but a short step to tained his degree four years later. Newton’s greatest removing God altogether. Soon deism, the belief work, The Mathematical Principles of Natural that God created the universe but then abandoned Philosophy (1687/1995) was written in 18 months it, became popular. For the deist, the design of the and was immediately hailed as a masterpiece. universe was God’s work, but revelation, religious Newton was well aware of the fact that he dogma, prayer, and all forms of supernatural com- benefited from the work of those who preceded merce with God were considered fruitless him and said, “If I have seen further it is by standing (Blackburn, 1994, p. 97). Similarly, it was only a on the shoulders of giants” (Blackburn, 1994, p. matter of time before humans, too, would be 260). In Newton’s case, those giants included viewed and analyzed as just another machine that Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo. operated in accordance with Newtonian principles. In 1703 Newton was elected the president of Perhaps Newton’s most significant contribu- the Royal Society, and in 1705 he was knighted by tion was his universal law of gravitation. This law Queen Anne. He was also twice a member of par- synthesized a number of previous findings, such as liament. It is interesting to note that with all his Kepler’s observation that planetary motion is ellip- accomplishments, Newton cited his lifelong celi- tical and Galileo’s measurements of the acceleration bacy as his greatest achievement (D. N. Robinson, of falling bodies. According to the law of gravita- 1997, lecture 27). Also, although we remember tion, all objects in the universe attract each other. Newton most for his scientific achievements, he The amount of attraction is directly proportional to wrote much more about theology and alchemy the product of the masses of the bodies and in- than about science (Honderich, 1995, p. 618). For versely proportional to the square of the distance Newton, however, the three topics were between them. This single law was able to explain inseparable. the motion of all physical bodies everywhere in the universe. Although the universe was a machine that

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 113 ■ Occam’s razor is to be accepted. Explanations must always be as simple as possible. In Book III of his Principles (1687/1995), Newton gives this advice: “We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances” (p. 320). This is the principle that led Copernicus and many of his fellow mathematicians to reject the geocentric system in favor of the heliocentric system. Because with God, the simplest is always the best, so too should it be with mathematicians and scientists. Newton’s conception of the uni- Bettman/CORBIS verse could not have been simpler. Everything that happens can be explained in terms of (1) © space, consisting of points; (2) time, consisting of moments; (3) matter, existing in space and pos- Isaac Newton sessing mass; and (4) force, that which provides change in the motion of matter. Newton and his God had created, it operated according to principles followers believed that the entire physical uni- that humans could discover, and Newton found verse could be explained in terms of these four that these principles could be expressed precisely constructs. In fact, an explanation of any natural in mathematical terms—thus his conclusion that event meant restating it mathematically in terms “God was a mathematician.” of space, time, matter, and force. ■ Natural laws are absolute, but at any given time Principles of Newtonian Science our understanding is imperfect. Therefore, scientists often need to settle for probabilities The powerful and highly influential principles of rather than certainty. This is because of human Newtonian science can be summarized as follows: ignorance, not because of any flexibility in ■ Although God is the creator of the world, he natural laws. does not actively intervene in the events of the ■ Classification is not explanation. To note that world (deism). It is therefore inappropriate to chasing cats seems to be a characteristic of dogs invoke his will as an explanation of any par- does not explain why dogs tend to chase cats. ticular thing or event in the material world. To understand why anything acts as it does, it is ■ The material world is governed by natural laws, necessary to know the physical attributes of the and there are no exceptions to these laws. object being acted on (such as its mass) and the nature of the forces acting on it. Again, no ■ There is no place for purpose in natural law, purpose of any type can be attributed to either and therefore Aristotle’s final causes must be the object or to the forces acting on it. rejected. In other words, natural events can never be explained by postulating properties The success of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, inherent in them. Bodies fall, for example, not and Newton with empirical observation and math- because of an inherent tendency to fall, as ematical deduction stimulated scholars in all fields Aristotle had assumed, but because of various and launched a spirit of curiosity and experimenta- forces acting on them. That is, as a Newtonian tion that has persisted until the present. Similarly, scientist, one must not invoke teleological the success that resulted from viewing the universe explanations. as a machine was to have profound implications for

114 CHAPTER 4 psychology. Science had become a proven way of Novum Organum (New Method) (1620/1994), he unlocking nature’s secrets, and it was embraced was impeached by parliament for accepting bribes. with intense enthusiasm. In many ways, science He was levied a heavy fine (which he never paid) was becoming the new religion: and served a brief prison sentence (four days) in the Tower of London. His forced retirement from legal For centuries the Church had been im- and legislative matters, at 60 years of age, allowed pressing on man the limitations of his own him to concentrate on science and philosophy, and wisdom. The mind of God is unfathom- a number of significant books soon followed. able. God works in a mysterious way his Bacon has traditionally been listed as the main wonders to perform. Man must be content spokesman for the new science in its revolt against with partial understanding; the rest he past authorities, especially Aristotle. His sharp wit must simply believe. For a Galileo or a and brilliant writing style have tempted some to Newton such a restriction of human curi- speculate that he was the true author of the osity was unacceptable. The scientist was Shakespearean plays. He was a contemporary of willing to concede that some things may Galileo, followed Copernicus by almost 100 years, be ultimately unintelligible except on the and was 35 years older than Descartes (whom we basis of faith; but as he stubbornly contin- will consider next). Bacon was a radical empiricist ued to observe, measure and experiment, who believed that nature could be understood only he discovered that more and more of the by studying it directly and objectively. Accounts of puzzles of nature were becoming clear. He how nature should be based on scripture, faith, or was actually explaining in natural terms any philosophical or theological authority would phenomena that had hitherto been unin- only hamper one’s efforts to learn how the world telligible. Small wonder, then, that the actually functions. Bacon authored the following new science began to generate a faith that satirical story, which clearly demonstrates his own ultimately science would displace theol- positivistic approach and his disdain for authority: ogy. There is little evidence that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries such a In the year of our Lord 1432, there arose a faith was more than a dim hope. grievous quarrel among the brethren over Nevertheless the seeds had been sown; the number of teeth in the mouth of a scientists were uncovering more and more horse. For 13 days the disputation raged of the secrets of nature; and more and without ceasing. All the ancient books and more explanations were now being given chronicles were fetched out, and a won- “without benefit of clergy.” (MacLeod, derful and ponderous erudition, such as 1975, p. 105) was never before heard of in this region, was made manifest. At the beginning of the 14th day, a youthful friar of goodly bearing asked his learned superiors for FR ANCIS BACON permission to add a word, and straightway, to the wonderment of the disputants, Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was born into a dis- whose deep wisdom he sore vexed, he tinguished political family on January 22 in beseeched them to unbend in a manner London. After studying three years at Cambridge, coarse and unheard-of, and to look in the he moved to France, where he worked for an am- open mouth of a horse and find answer to bassador. He returned to England to practice law, their questionings. At this, their dignity and in 1584 he was elected to parliament. Shortly being grievously hurt, they waxed ex- after publication of his most influential work, ceedingly wroth and joining in a mighty

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 115 uproar, they flew upon him and smote his about words, which each man interprets to suit him- hip and thigh, and cast him out forthwith. self” (Esper, 1964, p. 290). For, said they, surely Satan hath tempted Bacon distrusted rationalism because of its this bold neophyte to declare unholy and emphasis on words, and he distrusted mathematics unheard-of ways of finding truth contrary because of its emphasis on symbols: He said, “Words to all the teachings of the fathers. After are but the images of matter.… To fall in love with many days of grievous strife the dove of them is [like falling] in love with a picture” peace sat on the assembly, and they as one (1605/1878, p. 120). Bacon trusted only the direct man, declaring the problem to be an ever- observation and recording of nature. With his radical lasting mystery because of a grievous empiricism, Bacon made it clear that the ultimate dearth of historical and theological evi- authority in science was to be empirical observation. dence thereof, so ordered the same writ No authority, no theory, no words, no mathematical down. (Baars, 1986, p. 19) formulation, no belief, and no fantasy could displace empirical observation as the basis of factual knowl- edge. Later in history, Bacon’s approach to science Baconian Science would be called positivism. But Bacon did not avoid classifying empirical Although Bacon and Galileo were contemporaries, observations. He believed that after many observa- their approaches to science were very different. tions, generalizations could be made, and similari- Galileo sought general principles (laws) that could ties and differences among observations noted. be expressed mathematically and from which de- These generalizations could be used to describe ductions could be made, an approach that actually classes of events or experiences. In Baconian sci- required very little experimentation. For Galileo, ence, one proceeds from observation to generaliza- discovering the laws that governed the physical tion (induction); in Galilean science, and later in world was important. Once such laws had been Newtonian science, one proceeds from a general isolated and expressed mathematically, a large num- law to the prediction of specific, empirical events ber of manifestations of those laws could be de- (deduction). Bacon did not deny the importance of duced (deduction involves predicting a particular the rational powers of the mind, but he believed event from a general principle); Bacon, on the that those powers should be used to understand other hand, demanded science based on induction. the facts of nature rather than the figments of According to Bacon, science should include no the human imagination. What Bacon (1620/1994) theories, no hypotheses, no mathematics, and no proposed was a position intermediate between tra- deductions but should involve only the facts of ob- ditional empiricism (simply fact gathering) and ra- servation. He believed that anyone doing research tionalism (the creation of abstract principles): with preconceived notions would tend to see na- ture in light of those preconceptions. In other Empiricists, like ants, merely collect things words, Bacon thought that accepting a theory was and use them. The Rationalists, like spi- likely to bias one’s observations, and he offered ders, spin webs out of themselves. The Aristotle as an example of a biased researcher. middle way is that of the bee, which Bacon said that because Aristotle had assumed gathers its material from the flowers of the that the objects in nature were governed by final garden and field, but then transforms and causes, his research confirmed the existence of fi- digests it by a power of its own. And the nal causes: “[Bacon] declared that when we assume true business of philosophy is much the ‘final causes’ and apply them to science, we are same, for it does not rely only or chiefly on carrying into nature what exists only in our imagi- the powers of the mind, nor does it store nation. Instead of understanding things, we dispute the material supplied by natural history and

116 CHAPTER 4 to see events as they would like them to be rather than how they really are. Thus, to be human is to have the tendency to perceive selectively. ■ The idols of the marketplace are biases that result from being overly influenced by the meaning assigned to words. Verbal labels and Medicine descriptions can influence one’s understanding of the world and distort one’s observations of of it. Bacon believed that many philosophical Library disputes were over the definitions of words National rather than over the nature of reality. We see in the this latter observation similarity between of Bacon’s philosophy and contemporary post- Courtesy modernism (see Chapter 21). ■ The idols of the theater are biases that result Francis Bacon from blind allegiance to any viewpoint, whether it be philosophical or theological. practical experiments untouched in its memory, but lays it up in the understand- Science Should Provide Useful ing changed and refined. Thus from a closer and purer alliance of the two facul- Information ties—the experimental and the rational, Bacon also thought that science could and should such as has never yet been made—we have change the world for the better. Science would good reason for hope. (p. 105) furnish the knowledge that would improve tech- nology, and improved technology would improve According to Bacon, scientists should follow the world. As evidence for the power of technical two cardinal rules: “One, to lay aside received opi- knowledge, Bacon (1620/1994) offered the inven- nions and notions, and the other, to restrain the mind for a time from the highest generalizations” tions of printing, gunpowder, and the magnetic compass: (1620/1994, p. 132). Again, Bacon was not against generalization, only premature generalization. These three [inventions] have changed the Bacon (1620/1994) summarized the four whole face and condition of things sources of error that he believed could creep into throughout the world, in literature, in scientific investigation in his famous “idols”: warfare and in navigation. From them in- numerable changes followed, so much so, ■ The idols of the cave are personal biases that that no empire, no sect, no star has been arise from a person’s intellectual endowment, seen to exert more power and influence experiences, education, and feelings. Any of over the affairs of men than have these these things can influence how an individual mechanical discoveries. (p. 131) perceives and interprets the world. ■ The idols of the tribe are biases due to human The practical knowledge furnished by science nature. All humans have in common the abilities was so important for the betterment of society that to imagine, to will, and to hope, and these hu- Bacon believed that scientific activity should be man attributes can and usually do distort per- generously supported by public funds. With his in- ceptions. For example, it is common for people terest in practical knowledge, it is interesting that

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 117 Bacon died on April 9, 1629, from complications or even beliefs about how things are; what is bad is from a chill he experienced after stuffing a chicken not modifying those hunches or beliefs if the data with snow in order to test the effect of cold tem- require it. Popper noted that important scientific peratures on the preservation of meat (Bowen, discoveries never come from induction, as Bacon 1993, p. 225). had believed: “Bold ideas, unjustified anticipations, Although Bacon believed that science should and speculative thought, are our only means for always be judged by its practical consequences, he interpreting nature … our only instrument for also believed that “human knowledge and human grasping her.… [The] experiment is planned action power come to the same thing, for where the cause in which every step is guided by theory” (Popper, is not known the effect cannot be produced. We 1935/2002b, p. 280). can only command Nature by obeying her” Most scientists since the time of Bacon have (1620/1994, p. 43). Thus, Bacon reached his cele- rejected his extreme reliance on the method of in- brated conclusion, “Knowledge … is power” duction, but not all. In psychology, Skinner and his (Urbach, 1987, p. 59). For Bacon, then, under- followers (see Chapter 13) have adopted Bacon’s standing nature precedes any attempt to command atheoretical philosophy. In 1950 Skinner wrote an it. By “understanding nature,” Bacon meant know- article titled “Are Theories of Learning Necessary?” ing how things are causally related; once these re- and his answer was no. In 1956 Skinner described lationships are known, their practical implications his approach to experimentation. The approach in- could be explored. Bacon, then, proposed two dif- volved trying one thing and then another, pursuing ferent types of experiments: experimenta lucifera (ex- those things that showed promise, and abandoning periments of light) designed to discover causal those that did not. In the Skinnerian approach to relationships, and experimenta fructifera (experiments research, there is no theory, no hypotheses, no of fruit) designed to explore how the laws of nature mathematical analysis, and (supposedly) no precon- might be utilized. Whether it involved experiments ceptions. Also in the Baconian spirit, the of light or fruit, Bacon’s approach to science was in- Skinnerians believe that the main goal of science ductive; in both cases, one needed to guard against should be to improve the human condition. the idols. Experiments will yield nature’s secrets and Bacon is a pivotal figure because of his extreme provide practical information only if they are per- skepticism concerning all sources of knowledge ex- formed correctly. For Bacon, this meant in an unbi- cept the direct examination of nature. He urged that ased manner. nature itself be the only authority in settling episte- Bacon was ahead of his time in insisting that mological questions. We see in Bacon an insistence scientists purge their minds of their biases. He was that observations be made without any philosophi- observing that scientists are human too, and, as with cal, theological, or personal preconceptions. anyone else, their preconceptions can influence Skepticism concerning information from the past their observations. Kuhn (1996) points out the also characterized the first great philosopher of the same thing with his concept of paradigm; currently, new age, René Descartes, to whom we turn next. it is generally agreed that the observations of all scientists (or anyone else) are “theory-laden.” That is, one’s theory influences what one observes and how one interprets what one observes. RENÉ DESCARTES History has shown that Bacon’s inductive ap- proach to science was largely ignored and that the Born on March 31 of wealthy parents in La Haye, deductive approach of Galileo and Newton was France, René Descartes (1596–1650) was truly a highly influential. Contrary to what Bacon be- Renaissance man; at one time or another, he was a lieved, productive science required bold theory soldier, mathematician, philosopher, scientist, and and hypothesis testing. It is not bad to have hunches psychologist. In addition, he was a man of the

118 CHAPTER 4 world who enjoyed gambling, dancing, and adven- him that everything he had ever learned was useless, ture. But he was also an intensely private person especially philosophy. He noted that philosophers who preferred solitude and avoided emotional at- had been seeking truth for centuries but had been tachments with people. At a time when his fame unable to agree among themselves about anything; had begun to grow, he moved to Holland; while he he concluded that nothing in philosophy was be- was there, he moved 24 times without leaving a yond doubt. This realization thrust Descartes into forwarding address so that he would not be deep depression. He decided that he would be bet- bothered. ter off learning things for himself instead of from Descartes’s mother died when he was barely a the “experts”: “I resolved to seek no other knowl- year old while giving birth to another son, who edge than that which I might find within myself, or died three days later (Rodis-Lewis, 1998, p. 4). perhaps in the great book of nature” (1637/1956, Because his father, a wealthy lawyer, practiced law p. 6). Like Francis Bacon before him, Descartes sought some distance from the home, Descartes was reared an “intellectual fortress capable of withstanding the mainly by his grandmother, a nurse, and an older assaults of the skeptics” (Popkin, 1979, p. 173). brother and sister. As one might expect, Descartes Descartes’s method of self-exploration was pro- was a very bright child. He was enrolled in a Jesuit ductive almost immediately. Usually, Descartes ex- school at La Flèche when he was 10 years old and plored his many new ideas during intense meditation graduated when he was 16. While at La Flèche, he, while lying in bed; during one of these meditations, like other students at the time, studied the writings one of his greatest insights occurred. Descartes in- of Plato, Aristotle, and the early Christian philoso- vented analytic geometry after watching a fly in his phers. At that time, education consisted of logically room. He noted that he could precisely describe the demonstrating the validity of revealed truths fly’s position at any given instance with just three (Scholasticism). As a student, Descartes was espe- numbers: the fly’s perpendicular distances from two cially fond of mathematics, and by the time he walls and from the ceiling. Generalizing from this was 21, he knew essentially everything there was observation, Descartes showed how geometry and to be known on the subject. algebra could be integrated, making it possible to After his graduation from La Flèche, Descartes represent astronomical phenomena such as planetary roamed freely and sampled many of life’s pleasures, orbits with numbers. More generally, Descartes had finally taking up residence in St. Germain, a suburb discovered an exact correspondence between the of Paris. It was there that Descartes observed a realm of numbers and the realm of physics. group of mechanical statues, which the queen’s However complicated, all natural events were now fountaineers had constructed for her amusement. describable in mathematical terms. Like Copernicus, The statues contained a system of water pipes Kepler, and Galileo before him and like Newton af- that, when activated by a person stepping on a hid- ter him, Descartes reached the conclusion that ulti- den floor plate, caused a series of complex move- mate knowledge is always mathematical knowledge. ments and sounds. As we will see shortly, this idea With the invention of analytic geometry, it was now of complex movement being caused by a substance possible to precisely describe and measure essentially flowing through pipes was to have a profound in- all known physical phenomena. In this way, fluence on Descartes’s later philosophy. Descartes further substantiated the Pythagorean- Platonic conception of the universe that had been Descartes’s Search for accepted by Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo and that was about to be elaborated further by Newton. Philosophical Truth Next, Descartes sought other areas of human About the time Descartes moved to St. Germain, knowledge that could be understood with the he experienced an intellectual crisis. It occurred to same certainty as analytic geometry. Stimulated by

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 119 just as one would use axioms in mathematics. That is, that which was certain could be used to deduce other certainties. After a painful search, Descartes concluded that the only thing of which he could be certain was the fact that he was doubting; but doubting was thinking, and thinking necessitated a thinker. Thus, he arrived at his celebrated conclu- sion “Cogito, ergo sum” (I think, therefore I am). Bettman/CORBIS thought processes, a certainty that, for him, made Descartes established the certainty of his own the introspective search for knowledge valid. It may © be remembered that Augustine had used the same method of doubt to validate his subjective experi- René Descartes ences over a thousand years earlier (see Chapter 3). his success in mathematics, Descartes (1637/1956) summarized his four rules for attaining certainty in Innate Ideas any area: Descartes further analyzed the content of his The first rule was never to accept anything thought and found that some ideas were experi- as true unless I recognized it to be evi- enced with such clarity and distinctiveness that dently as such: that is, carefully to avoid all they needed to be accepted as true, and yet they precipitation and prejudgment, and to in- had no counterparts in his personal experience. clude nothing in my conclusions unless it Descartes thought that such ideas were innate; presented itself so clearly and distinctly to that is, they were natural components of the my mind that there was no reason or oc- mind. For example, he observed that even though casion to doubt it. he was imperfect, he still entertained ideas that were The second was to divide each of the perfect. Because something perfect could not come difficulties which I encountered into as from something imperfect, Descartes concluded many parts as possible, and as might be that he could not have been the author of such required for an easier solution. ideas: “The only hypothesis left was that this idea The third was to think in an orderly was put in my mind by a nature that was really fashion, beginning with the things which more perfect than I was, which had all the perfec- were simplest and easiest to understand, tions that I could imagine, and which was, in a and gradually and by degrees reaching to- word, God” (1637/1956, p. 22). Descartes included ward a more complex knowledge, even among the innate ideas those of unity, infinity, treating, as though ordered, materials perfection, the axioms of geometry, and God. which were not necessarily so. Because God exists and is perfect and will not The last was always to make enu- deceive humans, we can trust the information pro- merations so complete, and reviews so vided by our senses. However, even sensory infor- general, that I would be certain that mation must be clear and distinct before it can be nothing was omitted. (p. 12) accepted as valid. Clear means that the information is represented clearly in consciousness, and distinct Thus began Descartes’s search for philosophical means that the conscious experience cannot be truth. He resigned himself to doubt everything that doubted or divided for further analysis. Descartes could be doubted and to use whatever was certain, gave the example of seeing a stick partially

120 CHAPTER 4 submerged in water and concluding that it is bent. an entirely mechanistic conception of the physical Seeing the apparently bent stick provides a clear, world, of all animal behavior, and of much human cognitive experience, but further analysis, such as behavior. In his view, animals responded to the removing the stick from the water, would show world in a way that could be explained in terms that the experience was an illusion. Thus, of physical principles. To understand these princi- Descartes concluded (1) that rational processes ples, we must recall Descartes’s observation of the were valid and that knowledge of the physical statues in St. Germain. world gained through the senses could be accepted because God would not deceive us, but (2) that The Reflex even sensory information had to be analyzed ratio- nally in order to determine its validity. Descartes took the statues at St. Germain as his Descartes’s method, then, consisted of intuition model in explaining all animal behavior and much and deduction. Intuition is the process by which human behavior (that is, Descartes explained both an unbiased and attentive mind arrives at a clear and the behavior of the statues and the behavior of ani- distinct idea, an idea whose validity cannot be mals in terms of mechanical principles). The sense doubted. Once such an idea is discovered, one receptors of the body were like the pressure plates can deduce from it many other valid ideas. An ex- that started the water flowing through the tubes and ample would be first arriving at the idea that God activated the statues. Descartes thought of the exists and then deducing that we can trust our sen- nerves as hollow tubes containing “delicate threads” sory information because God would not deceive that connected the sense receptors to the brain. us. It is important to note that Descartes’s method These threads were connected to the cavities or restored the dignity to purely subjective experience, ventricles of the brain, which were filled with ani- which had been lost because of Galileo’s philoso- mal spirits. The concept of animal spirits was pop- phy. In fact, Descartes found that he could doubt ular among the early Greeks (such as Aristotle) and the existence of everything physical (including his was perpetuated by the highly influential physician own body) but could not doubt the existence of Galen (ca. 129–199). By believing that the presence himself as a thinking being. The first principles of of animal spirits distinguished the living from the Descartes’s philosophy were cognitive in nature and nonliving, these philosophers and physicians em- were arrived at by intuition. There is also no math- braced a form of vitalism (see Chapter 1). ematical concept any more certain than Cogito, ergo Descartes described animal spirits as a gentle wind sum; this being so, we can turn our attention inward or a subtle flame. The delicate threads in the nerves to the mind (self, soul, ego) and examine such sub- were ordinarily taut, but when an external event jective experiences as thinking, willing, perceiving, stimulated a sense organ, the threads were tightened feeling, and imagining. Thus, although Descartes further and opened a “pore” or “conduit” in the was a rationalist (he stressed the importance of logi- corresponding brain area; the pore then released cal thought processes) and a nativist (he stressed the animal spirits into the nerves. When the animal importance of innate ideas), he was also a phe- spirits flowed to the appropriate muscles, they nomenologist; he introspectively studied the na- caused the muscles to expand and thus caused be- ture of intact, conscious experience. Descartes’s havior. Descartes gave as an example a person’s foot method of intuition and deduction was believed coming near a flame. The heat causes a pull on the to be as valid when directed toward the world of threads connected to cavities of the brain contain- inner experience as when directed toward the phys- ing animal spirits. The pull opens one or more of ical world. these cavities, allowing animal spirits to travel down Although Descartes’s philosophy was anchored small, hollow tubes (nerves) to the foot muscles, in rational and phenomenological processes, he had which in turn expand and withdraw the foot

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 121 from the flame. This was the first description of some aspect of Descartes’s philosophy or what was later called a reflex. That is, an environ- methodology). mental event (heat) automatically causes a response (foot withdrawal) because of the way the organism is constructed (nerves, muscles, and animal spirits). Descartes’s Explanation of By saying that both animal and human interac- Sleep and Dreams tions with the environment were reflexive, Descartes made it legitimate to study nonhuman Descartes’s explanation of sleep begins by noting animals to learn more about the functioning of that while organisms are awake, the cavities of the the human body. He did a great deal of dissecting brain are so filled with animal spirits that the brain and concluded from his research that not only tissue engulfing a cavity expands, slightly increasing could interactions with the environment be ex- the tautness of the delicate threads and thus making plained through mechanical principles but so could them maximally responsive to sensory stimulation. digestion, respiration, nourishment and growth of Through the day, the amount of animal spirits in the body, circulation of the blood, and even sleep- the brain cavities diminishes, and the tissue sur- ing and dreaming. In 1628 the British physiologist rounding them becomes lax, whereupon the deli- William Harvey (1578–1657) demonstrated that cate threads become slack. Under these conditions, the heart was a large pump that forced blood into the organism is not very responsive to the environ- the arteries, then into the veins, then into the lungs, ment, and we say it is asleep. Animal spirits flow and then back into the arteries. In other words, randomly in the cavities, and every now and then Harvey discovered that the heart caused the circu- isolated cavities will be filled, their connecting lation of blood and that the heart’s function could threads becoming tight. This causes the random, be explained using the same mechanical and hy- disconnected experiences we refer to as dreams. draulic principles that apply to inorganic systems. Descartes took Harvey’s discovery as further evi- dence that many (if not all) bodily functions are The Mind-Body Interaction mechanical in nature. As mentioned, Descartes believed that all animal Even in Descartes’s lifetime, evidence showed behavior and internal processes could be explained that his analysis of reflexive behavior was incorrect. mechanically, as could much human behavior and There was fairly conclusive evidence that nerves many human internal processes. There was, how- were not hollow, and there was growing evidence ever, an important difference between humans and that there were two distinctly different types of other animals. Only humans possessed a mind that nerves: sensory nerves carrying information from provided consciousness, free choice, and rationality. the sense receptors to the brain and motor nerves Furthermore, the mind was nonphysical and the carrying information from the brain to the muscles. body physical; that is, the body occupied space It also had been commonly observed that several but the mind did not. In the process of arriving at animals continued to move and react to certain the first principle of his philosophy—“I think, types of stimulation even after they were decapi- therefore I am”—Descartes believed that he had tated, and it was common knowledge that animals discovered the fact that the mind was nonmaterial. could acquire new responses. Although all these Descartes (1637/1956) described what he next de- observations posed problems for Descartes’s analysis duced from this first principle: of reflexive behavior, he never modified his posi- tion. Before long, however, others would make the I then examined closely what I was, and necessary corrections in Cartesian theory (Cartesian saw that I could imagine that I had no and Cartesianism are terms used when referring to body, and that there was no world nor any

122 CHAPTER 4 place that I occupied, but that I could not body. He sought a structure in the brain because imagine for a moment that I did not exist. the brain stored the animal spirits. Also, the struc- On the contrary, from the very fact that I ture had to be unitary because our conscious expe- doubted the truth of other things, it fol- rience, although often resulting from stimulation lowed very evidently and very certainly coming from the two eyes or two ears, is unitary. that I existed. On the other hand, if I had Finally, the structure had to be uniquely human … ceased to think while all the rest of because humans alone possess a mind. Descartes what I had ever imagined remained true, I chose the pineal gland because it was surrounded would have had no reason to believe that I by animal spirits (what we now call cerebrospinal existed; therefore I concluded that I was a fluid), it was not duplicated like other brain struc- substance whose whole essence or nature tures, and (he erroneously believed) it was found was only to think, and which, to exist, has only in the human brain. It was through the pineal no need of space nor of any material thing. gland that the mind willed the body to act or in- Thus it follows that this ego, this soul, by hibited action. When the mind willed something to which I am what I am, is entirely distinct happen, it stimulated the pineal gland, which in from the body and is easier to know than turn stimulated appropriate brain areas, causing ani- the latter, and that even if the body were mal spirits to flow to various muscles and thus not, the soul would not cease to be all that bringing about the willed behavior. it now is. (p. 21) Because the mind is free, it can inhibit or mod- ify the reflexive behavior that the environment By saying that the nonphysical mind could would elicit mechanically. Emotions are related to influence the physical body, Descartes confronted the amount of animal spirits involved in a response; the ancient mind-body problem head on. What the more animal spirits, the stronger the emotion. had been implicit in many philosophies from the Emotions are experienced consciously as passions time of Pythagoras was explicit in Descartes’s phi- such as love, wonder, hate, desire, joy, anger, or losophy. He clearly stated that humans possess a sadness. According to Descartes, the will can and body that operates according to physical principles should control the passions so that virtuous conduct and a mind that does not and that the two interact results. If, for example, anger is experienced and (influence each other). So, on the mind-body angry behavior is appropriate, the mind will allow problem, Descartes was a dualist, and the type or even facilitate such behavior. If, however, such of dualism that he subscribed to was interaction- behavior is seen as inappropriate, the mind will at- ism (sometimes referred to as Cartesian dualism). tempt to inhibit it. In the case of an intense passion, The question, of course, is how this interaction the will may be unable to prevent the reflexive occurs. behavior, and the person will act irrationally. Because the mind was thought of as nonphysi- Descartes was well aware of the difficulties in cal, it could not be located anywhere. Descartes explaining how a nonphysical mind could interact believed that the mind permeated the entire body. with a physical body. After several attempts to ex- That the mind is not housed in the body as a cap- plain this interaction, he finally decided that it could tain is housed in a ship is demonstrated by the fact not be explained logically. Rather, he supported his that our sensory experiences embellish our cogni- argument for separate but interacting mind-body tive experiences—with color for example—and by entities with common sense. Everyone, he said, the fact that we consciously feel bodily states such as has both bodily and conscious experiences and hunger, thirst, and pain. None of these experiences senses the fact that the two influence each other. or feelings would be possible if the mind were not Thus, the supreme, rational philosopher supported closely related to the body. Still, Descartes sought a one of his most basic conceptions by appealing to place where the mind exerted its influence on the everyday experience (Tibbetts, 1975).

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 123 Descartes’s Contributions to However, Descartes was caught between his loyalty Psychology to the Catholic church and his objective search for truth. Between 1629 and 1633, Descartes worked Descartes attempted a completely mechanistic ex- on his book The World, which supported many of planation of many bodily functions and of much the conclusions that Galileo had reached in his behavior. His mechanistic analysis of reflexive be- Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems havior can be looked on as the beginning of both (1632). Although Descartes believed Galileo’s argu- stimulus-response and behavioristic psychology. He ments to be valid, he decided to suppress publica- focused attention on the brain as an important me- tion of The World when he learned of Galileo’s fate diator of behavior, and he specified the mind-body at the hands of the Inquisition. In a letter to his relationship with such clarity that it could be sup- friend Marin Mersenne, Descartes said that he ported or refuted by others. Reactions to his notion agreed with Galileo’s views but that “I would not of innate ideas were so intense that they launched wish, for anything in the world, to maintain them new philosophical and psychological positions against the authority of the church” (Kenny, 1970, (modern empiricism and modern sensationalism). p. 26). The World was published in 1664, 14 years By actually investigating the bodies of animals to after Descartes’s death. From all this, one might learn more about their functioning and thus about assume that Descartes was a devout believer. the functioning of human bodies, he gave birth However, to both modern physiological and comparative psychology. By making purely subjective experi- the opposite hypothesis, that Descartes was ence respectable again, Descartes paved the way essentially atheistic, may be argued with for the scientific study of consciousness. His work greater plausibility than the first assump- on conflict did not focus on sinful-versus-moral tion. According to this hypothesis, behavior but on animal-versus-human, rational- Descartes was a pure naturalist caught in a versus-irrational behavior; he was interested in social situation where nonconformity the type of conflict that Freud later studied. meant persecution and even death. He had Finally, because of his use of introspection to no taste for martyrdom, and consequently find clear and distinct ideas, Descartes can be disguised those of his views which might looked on as an early phenomenologist. get him into trouble, and embellished the After Descartes, some philosophers elaborated remainder with a show of piety that must on the mechanical side of his theory by saying be understood, quite literally, as life in- that humans were nothing but machines and that surance. (Lafleur, 1956, p. xviii) the concept of mind was unnecessary. Others stressed the cognitive side of his philosophy, saying that consciousness was the most important aspect of Descartes’s Fate humans. In any case, what followed Descartes was, in one way or another, a reaction to him; for that Despite efforts to appease the church, Descartes’s reason, he is often considered the father of modern books were placed on the Catholic index of for- philosophy in general and of modern psychology in bidden books in the belief that they led to atheism. particular. As a result, Descartes slowed his writing and instead Controversy concerning Descartes’s religious communicated personally with small groups or in- beliefs clearly reflects the transitional period in dividuals who sought his knowledge. One such in- which he lived. If one accepts at face value what dividual was Queen Christina of Sweden, who in Descartes said, he undoubtedly believed in the ex- 1649 invited Descartes to be her philosopher- istence of God and accepted the authority of the in-residence, and he accepted. Unfortunately, the church (see especially Descartes, 1642/1992). queen insisted on being tutored at five o’clock

124 CHAPTER 4 each morning, and one day Descartes had to travel body was too short. So the neck was sev- to the palace before sunrise during a severe Swedish ered and skull removed to be shipped winter. After only six months in Sweden, Descartes separately. The coffin returned safely to caught pneumonia and died on February 11, 1650. Paris and Descartes’s headless body was Descartes was first buried in Sweden in a cemetery reburied with great pomp. The skull had a for distinguished foreigners, but there is more to more sordid fate: it was stolen by an army this unfortunate story: captain, passed from one Swedish collector to another, and took 150 years to reach Sixteen years later, his body was exhumed, Paris, where it was awkwardly shelved in as it had been decided by various friends the Academie des Sciences and has appar- and disciples that it would be more fitting ently remained there ever since. (Boakes, for his bodily remains to rest in France; 1984, p. 88) perhaps they did not respect as seriously as he might have wished, Descartes’s belief in On a lighter note, D. N. Robinson (1997, lec- the possibility of a disembodied spirit and ture 26) relates a joke circulating among philoso- the existence of mental processes in the phers concerning Descartes’s proclamation “I think, absence of any brain. The French ambas- therefore I am”: Descartes was at a bar finishing a sador to Sweden took charge and first cut drink, and the bartender asked if he cared for an- off Descartes’s right forefinger as a personal other. “I think not,” said Descartes, and he souvenir. It was then found that the special disappeared. copper coffin provided for transporting the SUMMARY Renaissance humanism had four major themes: a telescope, he discovered four of Jupiter’s moons. belief in the potential of the individual, an insis- Galileo concluded that the universe was lawful tence that religion be more personal and less insti- and that the results of experiments could be sum- tutionalized, an intense interest in the classics, and a marized mathematically. He also concluded that a negative attitude toward Aristotle’s philosophy. science of psychology was impossible because of the The humanists did much to break the authority of subjective nature of human thought processes. the organized church and of Aristotle’s philosophy; Newton viewed the universe as a complex, this had to happen before a scientific attitude could lawful, knowable machine that had been created develop. Although the Renaissance was a troubled and set in motion by God. Newton’s science was time, it was a time of great curiosity and creativity. highly theoretical and stressed deduction. Newton’s As the power of the church deteriorated, inquiry success in explaining much of the physical uni- became increasingly objective because findings no verse in terms of a few basic laws had a profound longer needed to fit church dogma. Before influence on science, philosophy, and eventually Copernicus, the Ptolemaic system, which claimed psychology. In fact, Newtonian science was so suc- that the earth was the stationary center of the solar cessful that people began to believe science had the system (and the universe), essentially was universally potential to answer all questions. In a sense, science accepted. Copernicus demonstrated that the earth was becoming a new religion. was not the center of the solar system. Kepler found Bacon wanted science to be completely un- that the paths of the planets were not circular but tainted by past mistakes and therefore urged that elliptical. Galileo found, among other things, that scientific investigations be inductive and devoid of all material bodies fall at the same rate; and using a theories, hypotheses, and mathematical formula-

TH E BEGINN INGS OF MODERN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 125 tions. Bacon also wanted science to be aimed at the arate but interacting; that is, the body can influence solution of human problems. He described four the mind, and the mind can influence the sources of error that can creep into scientific inves- body. Descartes’s version of dualism is called inter- tigation: the idols of the cave, or biases resulting actionism. Descartes also believed that the mind from personal experience; the idols of the tribe, or contained several innate ideas and that emotional biases resulting from human nature; the idols of the behavior, experienced consciously as a passion, marketplace, or biases due to the traditional mean- was determined by the amount of animal spirits ings of words; and the idols of the theater, or blind involved in the behavior. Descartes brought much acceptance of authority or tradition. attention to the mind-body relationship, caused Like Bacon, Descartes wanted a method of in- great controversy over innate ideas, introspectively quiry that would yield knowledge that was beyond studied the phenomena of the mind, stimulated an- doubt. Descartes doubted everything except the imal research (and thus physiological and compara- fact that he doubted and thus concluded that intro- tive psychology), and was the first to describe the spection was a valid method for seeking truth. reflex—a concept that was to become extremely Descartes also decided that sensory information important in psychology. could be trusted because God had created our sen- The philosophers and scientists of the 16th and sory apparatus and would not deceive us. Taking 17th centuries reviewed in this chapter were transi- his inspiration from mechanical statues that he had tional figures. In their lives, we see a mixture of observed, Descartes concluded that all animal be- religious subjectivity and the need to be completely havior and much human behavior was mechanical. objective. These thinkers were not antireligion; He likened sense receptors to pressure plates that, they were antidogma. Most of them believed that when stimulated, pulled on tiny strings in the their work was revealing God’s secrets. What made nerves. When pulled, the strings opened pores in them different from those who had preceded them the brain that allowed animal spirits to move was their refusal to allow past beliefs or methods to down the nerves into the muscles, causing them influence their inquiries; and, in fact, their investi- to expand. The expanding muscles, in turn, caused gations were motivated by apparent errors in previ- behavior. Descartes saw the mind and body as sep- ously accepted dogma. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. Describe the four themes that characterized 5. Describe the Ptolemaic astronomical system Renaissance humanism and give an example of and explain why that system was embraced by each. Christian theologians. 2. Why is the Renaissance referred to as a para- 6. On what basis did Copernicus argue that his doxical period? heliocentric theory should replace Ptolemy’s 3. What arguments did Erasmus offer in support geocentric theory? of free will, and what arguments did Luther 7. On what philosophical conception of the uni- offer in opposition to it? verse was the work of Copernicus, Kepler, and 4. In what way did Montaigne’s Skepticism Galileo based? Explain. stimulate the philosophical systems developed 8. Summarize the theological implications of by Bacon and Descartes? Copernicus’s heliocentric theory.