15th/16th Century Philosophy, Misc

Die Sebastian Franck-Forschung hat sich bisher recht ausführlich mit den Themen "Sebastian Franck als Historiker" oder "Sebastian Franck als Kritiker der Theologie" beschäftigt. Weniger Aufmerksamkeit bekam bisher der Gnostizismus im Denken des radikalen Reformers. Seit der Jahrtausendwende ist allerdings ein stärkeres Interesse an einer bestimmten Strömung des Gnostizismus zu erkennen, nämlich der Hermetik. Es gab einige Arbeiten, die den Einfluss von Hermes Trismegistos bzw. der hermetischen Schriften auf Franck aufzeigen konnten. Dieser Aufsatz geht der Frage des Einflusses des christlichen Gnostizismus (...) auf die Metaphysik von Franck nach. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass speziell Basilides und Valentinus einen starken Einfluss auf Franck hatten, der bisher nicht gesehen wurde. Eine große Bedeutung kommt dabei der gnostischen Soteriologie zu. Genauso wie Basilides und Valentinus nimmt Franck die platonische Dreiteilung der Seele in Geist, Seele und Körper an. Der Geist ist göttlich und ist weder entstanden noch kann er vergehen. Diesen Geist oder Christus findet man im Inneren von allen Kreaturen. Durch die Erkenntnis des Geistes oder Christus im Menschen, (=Gnosis) kann sich der Mensch von der Welt befreien. Ebenfalls christlich-gnostisch inspiriert ist der Gottesbegriff und die Lehre von Christus. Franck´s Christologie ist stark von der Nous-Christologie von Basilides beeinflußt, wobei er nicht exakt dem gleichen Doketismus folgt wie Basilides. Dass die Welt vom Demiurgen und nicht von Gott erschaffen wurde, wie Valentinus glaubt, sagt Franck nicht explizit. Franck glaubt aber der Teufel (Demiurg oder böser Engel) habe den Tod und damit die Seele erschaffen, während der unsterbliche Geist des Menschen nicht erschaffen wurde. (shrink)

Dieser Aufsatz beschäftigt sich mit der These von Frances Yates, dass Denker wie Giordano Bruno und Agrippa von Nettesheim angenommen haben, dass die Schriften des Hermes Trismegistos von dem Ägypter Thoth (Hermes) stammten. Es soll in diesem Aufsatz demonstriert werden, dass die Annahme von Yates sehr spekulativ war und zumindest nicht auf Agrippa zutrifft, da aus keiner seiner Schriften hervorgeht, dass er das Corpus Hermeticum für Texte des Ägypters Hermes selbst hielt. Er glaubte zwar an die Legende des Hermes, aber (...) in dieser Abhandlung wird die Hypothese überprüft, dass Agrippa dem Neuplatoniker Jamblichus folgte, dass griechische Philosophen, die ungefähr in der Zeit von Jamblichus lebten, diese Schriften verfasst haben. Damit wäre die Hypothese von Frances Yates widerlegt, nach der Agrippa glaubte, das Corpus Hermeticum würde direkt vom Ägypter Thoth herrühren. Aus der „Occulta philosophia“ geht hervor, dass Agrippa die Werke Jamblichus hervorragend kannte, doch Yates hielt es scheinbar für nicht relevant, dass Jamblichus darauf hingewiesen hatte, dass das Corpus Hermeticum von ägyptischen Priestern geschrieben wurden. Es war damit nicht Casaubon, der als Erster erkannt hat, dass das Corpus Hermeticum unmöglich auf eine ägyptische Legende mit dem Namen Hermes zurückgehen konnte. Casaubon dachte selbst nicht, dass er der Erste war, der den Irrtum aufdeckte, denn er berichtete ebenfalls von der Aussage von Jamblichus. (shrink)

SAMPLE DRAFT - Not for citation or quotation. Chapter in Nicholas of Cusa in Early Modern Reform, Joshua Hollmann, Eric Parker and Simon Burton, eds. Brill. Forthcoming.

Il contributo si concentra sull'aenigma del gioco della palla, presentato da Cusano come un'esperienza mistica che si sviluppa nell'arco dell'esistenza vissuta. Nel De ludo globi, difatti, il moto dell'anima verso la conoscenza di Dio è paragonato al movimento della palla, che nel gioco viene lanciata da mano umana verso il centro del cerchio. Ugualmente nell'uomo l'intelligenza si muove tanto più la palla-anima diviene rotonda, ossia, tanto più viene levigata e così purificata dalle sue imperfezioni: in tal modo essa può correre (...) libera dagli impedimenti delle passioni. Il saggio mette dunque in evidenza le tematiche tipiche della tradizione platonica e della filosofia negativa: in effetti Cusano sottolinea che per esercitare l'anima intellettiva bisogna rimuovere i legami con il corpo e liberarsi dalle passioni (apháiresis), affinché l'anima resti sola con se stessa; nel suo intimo, nel fondo (Grund) essa diviene davvero libera e si apre così la visione della pianura della verità. Il movimento di conoscenza non è isolato dal contesto mondano, ma – al contrario – è da situare entro un uni-verso teoreticamente direzionato, dove al centro è situato «il regno della vita» e che, a cascata, si struttura in cerchi concentrici, tanto più lontani dal centro quanto meno illuminati dalla luce della Verità inattingibile: è “la mistica dei circoli”, che l'anima umana deve risalire fino all'unione nel centro. Per questa ragione le tappe del cammino di visione-ascesi-distacco divengono visibili nella coelesti Hierarchia mutuata da Dionigi Areopagita; a presidiare ogni livello di visione-ascesi-distacco, una differente figura angelica, che realizza la conoscenza a modo proprio, secondo le proprie possibilità. I nove cori, raggruppati in tre ordini sono perciò i livelli di distacco cui l'anima deve attraversare per intuire la Verità inattingibile realizzando la mistica unione di soggetto e oggetto della conoscenza. (shrink)

_ Source: _Page Count 31 This paper analyzes the theories of three representatives of Second Scholasticism, namely Francisco Suárez, SJ, John Poinsot, OP, and Francisco de Oviedo, SJ, on the issue of the intuitive and abstractive cognition of the external senses. Based on a comparison of their theories, linked to the historical starting point of the debate in the first decades of the fourteenth century, the paper argues that the doctrinal and argumentative matrix of these authors’ texts is significantly ‘present’ (...) in the Second Scholastics as well. 1) As far as naturally produced sensation is concerned, all these authors, including Poinsot, follow the Scotistic justification of the natural infallibility of the external senses; 2) regarding the possibility of supernaturally caused objectless perception, Poinsot’s position can be labelled, surprisingly, Scotistic; 3) Suárez’s theory, although partly similar to the doctrine of the late Ockham, is an idiosyncratic stance; 4) Oviedo’s conception, even more distant from that of Ockham, can be characterized as ‘Auriolian’ and ‘Chattonian’. (shrink)

Storey, Lyndon Humanism is often presented as a reaction against religion. But it is best understood as an answer to a question, the question being: what is the meaning of life?

Edition of the opuscules by D. Báñez on De auxiliis controversy. There is the critical edition of three manuscripts and the first Spanish annotated translation of the opuscules. The Latin text is disposed together with the translation. An introduction situates the opuscules in its systematic and historical context.

Michael Apostolis (c. 1422–1478),¹ the Greek scholar and prolific author of the fifteenth century, studied in Constantinople under John Argyropoulos (1395/1405–1487)² and taught at Katholikon Museion (Xenon). After the fall of Constantinople, Apostolis shared his time between Crete, Constantinople and Venice, where he improved his Latin. He became Bessarion’s (1408–1472) protégé only briefly, because the latter did not like the polemic overtone of his treatises and came quickly to dismiss his views on the preponderance of Platonic over Aristotelian philosophy. After (...) losing Bessarion’s favor Apostolis returned to Crete, where he worked as a copyist. In addition he established a school.³ In several letters sent to his friends and colleagues he complained about his poverty and the difficulties he faced.⁴ Apostolis appreciated the Platonic philosophical tradition, particularly the philosophy of Georgios Gemistos Pletho (c. 1360–1454). Apostolis’ religious views seemed to be influenced by Pletho’s polytheism, despite his claim that he was nothing but Christian, namely a supporter of the Union of Orthodox and Catholic Church.⁵ Apostolis took part in the dispute between Platonists and Aristotelians that embroiled also the Greek speaking philosophical community throughout the fifteenth century.⁶ Apostolis wrote in favor of Plato with enthusiasm and in a polemic tone. Specifically, he confronted Theodoros Gaza⁷ (1398–1475), a well-known scholar, translator and author of the treatise Adversus Plethonem pro Aristotele,⁸ who was also Bessarion’s protégé. In his Ad Theodori Gazae pro Aristotele de substantia adversus Plethonem obiectiones⁹, Apostolis turned to Bessarion in order to gain his favor and support. (shrink)

This article exposes the concept of "second" Salamanca's School, i.e. the followers of Vitoria in a second generation that teach in Salamanca during the last years of the sixteenth century and the first years of the seventeenth. The author shows that there is an important continuity among the first and the second School and revisits the aspects which have been seen as negative for the School: the developing of metaphysics and the De Auxiliis controversy. The metaphysics as such cannot be (...) considered as a negative aspect and the De Auxiliis controversy has also some positive aspects, although it supposed a fatal tendency which determined the end of the School. (shrink)

Profonda magia è un percorso a ritroso nella filosofia naturale e politica di Giordano Bruno, che ricostruisce la nozione di vincolo dagli ultimi scritti magici ai dialoghi italiani e alle prime opere latine. L’esigenza che muove la ricerca è quella di rintracciare nell’esperienza intellettuale e biografica del Nolano quale sia e come si costituisca la relazione tra filosofia naturale e politica. L’autore indaga se la riflessione politica possa essere slegata dallo studio della natura, o se trovi piuttosto la sua origine (...) e il suo sviluppo nel cuore stesso della physis. Per compiere quest’operazione egli isola e analizza quale sia la funzione che la nozione di vincolo assume tra la riflessione filosofico naturalistica e politico-antropologica. Ne risulta una ridefinizione della magia che è profonda non perché tesa verso il prodigioso, l’occulto e il soprannaturale, ma perché è la natura stessa, forza vincolante che lega e riconduce i suoi molteplici volti alla sua infinita unità. (shrink)

Agrippa von Nettesheim gilt in der Literatur als Philosoph, der versucht hat, viele verschiedene philosophische Richtungen zu synthetisieren. Sehr interessant ist dabei seine Position zur Transmigration, die bisher in der Literatur nicht intensiver untersucht worden ist. Dieser Aufsatz geht der Frage nach der Position von Agrippa in Bezug auf die Transmigration nach. Durch die sehr verstreuten und widersprüchlichen Zitate von Agrippa zu diesem Thema gibt es bisher keine eindeutigen Aussagen in der Sekundärliteratur dazu, ob Agrippa die Lehre der Transmigration vertreten (...) hat oder nicht. Die These dieses Aufsatzes ist, dass Agrippa an Transmigration glaubte und am Ende steht diese Erkenntnis in Verbindung mit einer etwas eigenen Christologie, die man bis dahin so nicht findet. Agrippa glaubte, dass Christus die Lehre der Wiedervergeltung gelehrt hat, doch im Gegensatz zu den Gnostikern war Jesus für ihn nicht Mensch, sondern Sohn Gottes. Agrippa hat selbst darauf hingewiesen, dass nur der „einsichtige Leser“ seine verdeckte Methode entschlüsseln kann. Gerade bei der Transmigration hat Agrippa absichtlich diese verdeckte Methode eingesetzt, um sich vor der Verfolgung durch kirchliche Autoritäten zu schützen. (shrink)

Scotus’s account of the two affections of the will has received extensive attention from recent scholars, in part because this is often seen as one of Scotus’s key departures from Aquinas and from the eudaimonist tradition more generally. Curiously, however, the early modern followers of Scotus seem largely to ignore the two affections doctrine. This paper surveys the reception of the doctrine in Francisco Lychetus, Francisco Macedo, Juan de Rada, Sebastian Dupasquier, and Claude Frassen.

This unpublished manuscript of the Spanish Dominican Domingo Báñez reflects his personal account of the proceedings held during July 1602 in Valladolid in defense of his own doctrine against suspicious theses formulated by some Jesuits from Alcalá de Henares the previous March. The Jesuits denied that the adhesion of faith to the Roman Pontiff included him as a specific man, e.g. Pope Clement VIII. In support of their thesis, they provided the authority of Báñez. The Dominican theologian clarified in Valladolid (...) that the fact that Clement VIII was Pope did belong to the faith indeed but not in a primary and immediate sense, although this was later supported by other Jesuits in a third session held a few days later, again in Valladolid. (shrink)

The paper presents the theological and philosophical category of Deus absconditus and shows it in the perspective of Nicholas of Cusa’s ideas contained in his dialogue De Deo Abscondito. The hidden God is the totally transcendent God that is beyond creation both ontologically and logically. Deus absconditus is God that cannot be the object of rational cognition and positive knowledge, hence the only way to acquire any knowledge of him is the method of negative theology. Therefore, the hidden God is (...) the subject of mystical epistemology. Cusanus’s Deus absconditus is also called Truth and as such he is not only incomprehensible, but also incommunicable. God’s transcendence, rational unintelligibility and inexpressibility are the aspects which the considerations presented in this paper build on. (shrink)

У статті проаналізовано значення розуміння власної освіти для побудови ідентичності на прикладі італійських гуманістів першої половини XV ст., які позиціонували себе як автодидакти (самоучки). Автор вважає, що саме в цей час унаслідок дії цілого комплексу причин формуються передумови для виникнення явища автодидактів, яке остаточно виокремилося вже у Новому часі. Гуманісти у такий спосіб ставали в опозицію до тогочасних знання, освіти, пізнання, реалізовуючи самопрезентацію. Гуманістів приваблювали певні особливості статусу автодидакта, які давали їм змогу почуватися незалежними від усталених на той час норм, (...) поглядів, інтелектуальних традицій, водночас використовуючи як підстави для консолідації гуманістів як окремої соціальної групи. (shrink)

Bessarion’s major philosophical treatise In Calumniatorem Platonis is a systematic approach to Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy written in response to George of Trebizond’s Comparatio Philosophorum Aristotelis et Platonis, which attacked Plato’s authority and proclaimed Aristotle’s superiority. A striking example of this is Bessarion’s attempt to defend Plato against George of Trebizond’s accusation that Plato did not offer sound arguments in favor of the immortality of the soul. In this article, I focus on Plato’s proof of the immortality of the soul (...) in the Phaedrus (245c5-246a2), as presented by Bessarion in the eighth chapter of the second book of the In Calumniatorem Platonis. The Phaedrusʼ proof is based on soul’s definition as a self-mover: since the soul always moves itself, it is the source of motion and is, therefore, ungenerated, imperishable and immortal. Bessarion’s interpretation of the Platonic proof gives the impression that Bessarion cites the text where Plato argues that the soul is immortal (245c5-9), and he summarises the text where Plato argues that the soul is ungenerated and imperishable (245d1-246a2). I argue, however, that Bessarion does not offer an original reading of the Phaedrus’ proof, and I also propose that Bessarion’s interpretation reflects his attempt to harmonize the Platonic and the Aristotelian views. (shrink)

Spanish translation of Cajetan’s commentary on quaestiones 22 and 116 of the first part of the 'Summa'. The translator precedes the text of Cajetan with a broad introduction in which he compares the views of the author with the interpretation of the same problems by Báñez in the context of the 'De Auxiliis' controversy. According to the translator, Báñez would have been more faithful to the thought of Saint Thomas than Cajetan. However, the core of the contribution of this great (...) commentator will also be assumed by Báñez; it was so important for him that he implicitly quoted it in his last words. (shrink)

This paper is a review of the book "Philosophie des Humanismus und der Renaissance (1350–1600)" by Thomas Leinkauf.

It is necessarily true that water is H2O, but it is a contingent fact that there is any water at all. Water therefore seems ill suited to ground the necessary truth that water is H2O. One view traditionally attributed to Scotus and Henry of Ghent was that while water is contingent, the essence of water is necessary; hence, the essence of water can ground the so-called eternal truth that water is H2O. Francisco Suárez rejects this view on the grounds that (...) it contradicts the Christian doctrine of creation, according to which everything other than God was contingently created in time. Suárez’s own view of the eternal truths has proven elusive to commentators, but I argue that Suárez ultimately endorses a version of the view he rejects: essences ground the eternal truths. But this raises several puzzles: how is Suárez’s view distinct from the views traditionally ascribed to Scotus and Henry? How does Suárez’s view escape the argument from creation, which Suárez raises against his opponents? I argue that Suárez distinguishes between his view and his opponents’ view by saying that essences have “extrinsic being,” whereas his opponents claim that essences have “intrinsic being.” The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic being has not received much attention, but I argue that it marks an important fault line in scholastic thinking about the ontological status of non-existents. I argue that the notion of extrinsic being can be explicated in terms of ontological pluralism and grounding. The notion of extrinsic being helps differentiate Suárez’s view from his Scotistic and Henrician opponents, and it allows Suárez to respond to the creation argument he raises against his opponents. On my reading, Suárez’s solution to the problem of eternal truths turns out to be both highly original and philosophically satisfying. (shrink)

This article discusses the reception of Plato's Timaeus in De docta ignorantia of Nicolas of Cusa (1401-1464), particularly about the philosophical concepts of being, time and the production of the cosmos. In this context, it is argued that the School of Chartres had played a significant role in the replacement of philosophical categories of Plato in the Christianity. But the contribution of Nicolas of Cusa to the history of the reception of the Timaeus in the Middle Ages it seems original (...) because Nicolas, more than others, use this text in order to show that the world is a being-in-relation, as God is the relationship of three persons. (shrink)

_ Source: _Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 307 - 339 This article puts forward an analysis of the theory of signs contained in the _Prodidagmata ad logicam Aristotelis_, a compendium on logic written by the Flemish philosopher and Louvain professor Laurentius Ghiffene. Focusing on Ghiffene’s definition and division of a sign and his account of the problem of self-reference, the author argues that Ghiffene positioned himself in the tradition of the Conimbricenses and relied extensively on their influential commentary on Aristotle’s (...) _Organon_, published in 1606. The aim of the present contribution is to shed new light on the teaching of logic at Louvain during the years immediately preceding the rise of modern philosophy, an episode in the university’s history which remains almost entirely unstudied. (shrink)

_ Source: _Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 273 - 306 Jan Dullaert was a direct student of John Mair and a teacher of Gaspar Lax, Juan de Celaya, and Juan Luis Vives. His commentary on Aristotle’s _Peri Hermeneias_ addresses the foundations of propositional logic, including a detailed analysis of conditionals and the semantics of logical connectives. Dullaert’s propositional logic is limited to the immediate implications of the semantics of these connectives, i.e., their introduction and elimination rules. In the same context, (...) he discusses several alternative treatments of semantic paradoxes, paying most attention to the approaches derived from Martin Le Maistre and John Mair. (shrink)

…sit necessaria sciencia mathematice ad bona anime procuranda.Scientific humanism in the 15th and 16th century witnessed the spread of Greek and Arabic mathematics, whose reading was disciplined by philological research, enriched by the practical sense of abacus masters and diffused by the press. This doesn't mean that before this time many of these works were totally unknown. Around the 13th century mathematics scholars were already familiar with the work of Theodosius, Archimedes, Vitruvius, the Banū Mūsā brothers and so on; however, (...) these works were confined to small intellectual circles, and turned into an object for philosophical speculation.This was the case of... (shrink)

Although the two worlds, Arabic and Byzantine, were in proximity for many centuries, the influence of Arabic philosophy on the Byzantine intellectual tradition has not been studied thoroughly. Recent studies have substantiated the influence of the Arabic and Persian thought over Byzantine science. However, in the field of philosophy, research is still at an early stage and the impact of Arabic thought on Byzantine and vice versa has not been examined widely and in depth. Direct references to philosophers in the (...) Islamic world are rare and, apart from occasional studies, there is not an organised, in-depth account of the influence the Arabic philosophy exercised on Byzantine scholars. The present study is a wider, complete, and renewed presentation of the initial conclusions of my research, which aims to bring out and evaluate the perception of Arabic philosophy by the Byzantine intelligentsia during the 14th and 15th centuries. As exemplary cases Ι have chosen Georgios Gemistos Pletho (c.1360-1454) and Georgios Scholarios (c.1400-1472), whose rivalry defined Byzantine philosophy of the 15th century to a considerable degree. (shrink)

Pico’s view on emanationism is ambiguous. Moreover, his position viz. emanation seems to change at times. He made his emanationism more elaborate and complex by incorporating in it Neoplatonic ideas and the Kabbalistic hierarchy. He attempted a reconciliation of emanatio and creatio ex nihilo, as certain Christian Neoplatonists like Augustine did before, but Pico’s main intention was not the defense of the Christian dogma. To illustrate this point, I note that he did not hesitate to interpret even the book of (...) Genesis through Neoplatonism and Kabbalah, despite the resistance of the Roman Church. Philosophical accuracy and integrity was not always Pico’s main concern since he intended to prove the concordia of all the major previous philosophies and theologies. Furthermore, he disagreed with Aquinas’ solution for the problem of emanatio and creatio ex nihilo. He went on defending emanationism by relying on scholastics like Albertus Magnus. The aim of this paper is to explore Pico’s dependence on Proclus concerning the relation of emanatio and creatio ex nihilo. (shrink)

Katelis Viglas’ book: Jeremiah II Tranos. Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch (1536-1595) is a historical-theological description and analysis of the most important data and facts concerning the life and works of Jeremiah II Tranos, Patriarch of Constantinople in the 16th century. The book consists of a Prologue, which refers to the aim of the treatise and the method followed. In the Introduction there is a general outline of the era of Jeremiah II and its origins, as well (...) as a brief presentation of his contribution to the Greek Genus. The First Chapter is divided into three subchapters. The first subchapter provides a brief overview of the history of the birthplace of Jeremiah II, Anchialos, a city on the shores of the Black Sea, and describes patriarch’s character and education, along with an extensive reference to his teachers. In this subchapter information is included relative to Jeremiah’s life until his ordination as Metropolitan of Larissa. The second subchapter briefly narrates the glorious ordination of Jeremiah II to Patriarch of Constantinople. In the third subchapter of the First Chapter, the three breaks during Jeremiah II’ patriarchate –caused by the selfish ambitions of his competitors, who coveted the patriarchal throne– are recounted. The Second Chapter consists of four subchapters. In the first subchapter there are a brief reference to the life and religious beliefs of the founder of the Reformation, Martin Luther, and the interest and curiosity of the Lutherans in the situation of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The second subchapter of the Second Chapter contains biographical details of the Protestant scholar and philhellene Philip Melanchthon, and a reference to the first contact attempt of Lutherans with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The third subchapter of the Second Chapter is divided into six other subsections. The first section of the third subchapter describes the way the relationships of the Lutheran theologians of Tubingen with Patriarch Jeremiah II developed and to the starting point of their correspondence. Yet, the Philhellenism of the German Hellenist Martin Crusius and the role he played in the correspondence are highlighted. The second section outlines Jeremiah II’ responses to each article of the Augsburg Confession send to him by the Tubingen theologians. The third section highlights the key points of the reply of the Tubingen theologians to the First Answer from Jeremiah II. The third section refers to the Second Answer from Jeremiah II. In the short fifth section there is a reference to the reply of the Tubingen theologians to the Second and the Third Answer from Jeremiah II. The sixth section provides information related to the publication of that correspondence. In the fourth subchapter of the Second Chapter there are general and evaluative judgments on the correspondence between Jeremiah II and the Tubingen theologians. The Third Chapter is divided into five subchapters. The first subchapter explains the ancient Roman calendars of Numa and Julius Caesar and their shortcomings. The second subchapter presents the findings of these imperfections by various scholars. The third subchapter describes the Gregorian Reform of the calendar. The fourth subchapter analyses the social situation within the Orthodox Church during the Gregorian Reform. The fifth subchapter aims to show the orthodox reaction of Jeremiah II to the Gregorian calendar and its causes. The Fourth Chapter is divided into two subchapters, of which the first is related to Jeremiah’s travels in Poland and the regulation by him of Church life in this country, while the second gives an overview of the circumstances, under which the foundation of the Russian Patriarchate took place. The Fifth Chapter is divided into three subchapters. The first subchapter examines Jeremiah II’s concern on various issues. The second subchapter deals with Jeremiah II’ concern on the education of the Greek Genus. The third subchapter explains the attitude of Jeremiah II towards the Pontifical Greek College in Rome. At the end of the treatise there is an Epilogue, with concluding remarks on the evaluation of the historical figure of Jeremiah II, his spiritual identity and the status of the Orthodox East under his leadership. An extensive Bibliography, a Chronology, an Index of Names, 21 Illustrations and 2 Maps, complete the book. (shrink)

Scripture is replete with narratives that challenge a variety of philosophical concepts; including morality, divine benevolence, and human freedom. Free choice, a significant and much debated concept in medieval philosophy, continues to be of great interest to contemporary philosophers and others. However, scholarship in biblical studies has primarily focused on compositional history, philology, and literary analysis, not on the examination of the philosophy implied in biblical texts. In this book, Shira Weiss focuses on the Hebrew Bible's encounter with the philosophical (...) notion of free choice, as interpreted by the fifteenth-century Spanish Jewish philosopher Joseph Albo in one of the most popular Hebrew works in the corpus of medieval Jewish philosophy: Albo's Examining narratives commonly interpreted as challenging human freedom--the Binding of Isaac, the Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart, the Book of Job, and God's Choice of Israel--Albo puts forward innovative arguments that preserve the concept of free choice in these texts. Despite the popularity of The Book of Principles, Albo has been commonly dismissed as an unoriginal thinker. As a result, argues Weiss, the major original contribution of his philosophy-his theory of free choice as explained in unique exegetical interpretations-has been overlooked. This book casts new light on Albo by demonstrating both the central importance of his views on free choice in his philosophy and the creative ways in which they are presented. (shrink)