The Revival of Pagan Philosophies
The Renaissance revival of Platonism, Epicureanism, and Stoicism; the Florentine Academy; Ficino and Pico della Mirandola; the humanist turn away from Scholastic method.
The Renaissance witnessed a deliberate revolt against Scholasticism in favour of classical philosophical alternatives. The Florentine Academy (under the patronage of Cosimo de' Medici) revived Platonism and Neoplatonism: Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499) translated the complete Platonic corpus into Latin for the first time and developed a Platonic theology of the soul's immortality and ascent to God. Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494) attempted a grandiose synthesis of all philosophical and religious traditions ('the dignity of man' as the capacity to ascend any level of being). Epicureanism was revived as a philosophy of natural pleasure and humanistic dignity (Lorenzo Valla). Stoicism was revived as a model of rational self-mastery (Justus Lipsius). The common character of these revivals is the rejection of scholastic technicality in favour of a more literary, humanistic, and spiritually flexible ideal of wisdom.
Article 2. The Revival of Pagan Philosophies
a) Platonists; b) Aristoteleans.
a) Pl at onist s. The genuine works of Plato, newly known in Western Europe in the late Middle Ages, found many admirers among the Humanists for their elegant and polished style, and also for their poetic doctrines. Aristotle, too, came to be known in the original, and had many followers. Many who had no flair for Plato or Aristotle followed Averroes and Aphrodisias as a sort of fad; and some tried to revive Stoicism, and even Epicureanism. The more important Platonists of the 15 century were: i. George Gemistus Pletho (1355-1450), of Constantinople, who opened an “Academy of Plato” at Florence in 1440, and taught what he believed to be Platonism, but what was, in reality, mostly Neoplatonism borrowed from Plotinus. ii. Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499), of Florence, who was a pupil of Pletho, and his successor as principal of the “Academy of Florence.” Ficino made a real effort to know pure Platonic doctrine. iii. Cardinal Bessarion (1403-1472), a disciple of Pletho, but much more moderate in doctrine than his master. iv. Giovanni della Mirándola (1463-1494), a pupil of Ficino, and a man of wide and profound learning. The first two (Pletho and Ficino) are the most important Platonists of the late Middle Ages. Pletho taught that God, an absolutely single substance, gave origin to spiritual beings or Ideas by emanation, and that the Ideas gave off human souls. The souls contemplated the Ideas and so gained their intellectual knowledge. God created matter from nothing. The Ideas infused forms into matter and so constituted the bodily uni-verse. Ficino rejected the emanation theory of Pletho. He taught that God created all things from nothing. First He created the world of subsistent spiritual beings, then the world of souls (world-soul, star-souls, human souls). Finally, He created the bodily universe. Ficino professes Ontologism, saying that the soul (though not pre-existent in time to the body) directly perceives God, not in His Essence, but in the Divine Ideas, which are the exemplars of all things made; and thus the soul comes to intellectual knowledge or understanding of things.
b) Ar ist ot el eans. The chief Aristoteleans of the 15 and 16 centuries were: i. Theodore of Gaza (died 1478), a native of Salónica, who translated many books of Aristotle into Latin. He was a spirited opponent of contemporary Platonism. ii. Alexander Achillini (1463-1518), who followed the Averroistic interpretation of Aristotle. iii. Pietro Pomponazzi (1462-1525), of Mantua, who interpreted Aristotle in a manner concordant with the theories of Aphrodisias. iv. Andreas Caesalpinus (1519-1603), physician to Clement VIII. With the Aristoteleans may be mentioned the Neo-Stoic, Justus Lipsius (Joest Lips; 1547-1606) and the Neo-Epi-curean, Peter Gassendi (1592-1655). These Medieval Aristoteleans were materialists. Most of them denied the immortality and spirituality of the individual soul. Some affirmed a universal soul, spiritual and immortal. Most of this School are Averroistic in their description of the nature and future lot of the human soul. Since this doctrine is flatly opposed to the Catholic Faith, some, not wishing to break with the Church, took refuge in the “Twofold Truth” theory, and professed to be undisturbed by the fact that their philoso-phy and theology did not agree : both were asserted as true, notwithstanding their disagreement.