Introduction

The Middle Ages occupies a long period of European history from the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 5th century to the Renaissance (XIV-XV centuries).

The slave-owning system in the countries of Western Europe is being replaced by the feudal system. With the collapse of the Roman Empire, such states as England, France, Germany, Italy, etc., were formed on the territory of Europe.

The collapse of the Roman Empire led to a decline in the general level of education, not only in Rome itself, but in all newly formed states.

The philosophy that took shape during this period had two main sources of its formation. The first of these is ancient Greek philosophy, primarily in its Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. The second source is Holy Scripture, which turned this philosophy into the mainstream of Christianity.

The idealistic orientation of most of the philosophical systems of the Middle Ages was dictated by the main dogmas of Christianity, among which the most important were such as the dogma of the personal form of the creator god, and the dogma of the creation of the world by God "out of nothing". Under the conditions of such a cruel religious dictate, supported by state power, philosophy was declared a "servant of religion", in which all philosophical issues were resolved from the position of theocentrism, creationism, providentialism.

Monasteries became centers of culture and writing. In these monasteries, philosophical schools are born, in which such a philosophical trend as scholasticism is formed.

The center of scholasticism in the 12th century was the monastery of Saint Victor, located not far from Paris.

The major scholastics were the Parisian professors: Abelard (1079 - 1142), who played a big role in the founding of the University of Paris and brought sharp condemnation from the ruling circles of the church with his "free-thinking"; Albert the Great (1193-1280), a zealous admirer of Aristotle and his logical method, the author of many works, partly theological, partly scientific in nature; Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274), known for his Summa Theologiae, which was, as it were, an encyclopedia of the medieval worldview, covering all questions of the knowledge of nature and society in the church spirit. Of the scholastics who paid the most attention to questions of natural science, was the English scientist monk Roger Bacon (1214 - 1292), one of the first to insist on the need for an experimental study of nature.

In the framework of this work, I will try to briefly talk about one of the largest scholastic philosophers of the Middle Ages - Thomas Aquinas, about some of the specific provisions of the theocentric worldview developed by him about the general provisions of medieval scholasticism and its stages.

The relevance of this topic is determined by the following points. Scholasticism, as is known, is a classical form of religious philosophy of the Western European Middle Ages. Its initial principles, main content and final conclusions constitute the dogmas of the Christian religion. The interest directly in Thomas Aquinas is due to the fact that from 1879 to the present, his philosophy has been the official philosophy of the Catholic Church.

General characteristics and specifics of scholasticism

Medieval Western civilization is a spiritual and cultural world of enormous richness in content and forms, marked by unique achievements and extending over several centuries. The richness of the culture of the medieval West is not limited to the works of scholastic theology. However, the Middle Ages are not only unthinkable without scholasticism, but are largely determined by it. Scholastic theology left a deep imprint on the entire culture of the Western Middle Ages. A comparison of a medieval Gothic temple with theological and philosophical writings is known. The Gothic temple is an analogue of the "Sum of Theology" (this is how the works of theologians were called): the same majestic harmony, proportionality of parts and inclusiveness. The Council, with no less completeness than a theological treatise, expressed the totality of the ideas of its time. All Christian teaching was visually unfolded before the eyes of the believer. It was transmitted through external and internal architecture, through the organization of space, rushing the human soul upwards, through a huge number of details that play a strictly defined role, through sculptural images. Gothic temple - scholastic theology in stone. This analogy cannot but testify to the significance of the role of scholastic theology in the Middle Ages.

Scholasticism is medieval learning. It is closely connected with the emerging from the VIII-IX centuries. education system in the West. At the same time, this is also a new stage in the development of the spiritual culture of Europe, which replaced patristics. It was based on patristic literature, being at the same time a completely original and specific cultural formation.

The following periodization of scholasticism was adopted. The first stage - from the VI to the IX century. - preliminary. The second stage - from the 9th to the 12th centuries. - a period of intensive formation. The third stage - XIII century. - "golden age of scholasticism". The fourth stage - XIV-XV centuries. - the extinction of scholasticism.

Each of the stages can be associated with the personalities of the thinkers who most vividly express its features. The first period is vividly represented by I.S. Eriugena (d. c. 877); the second - Anselm of Canterbury (d. 1109) and Pierre Abelard (d. 1142); third - Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) and Bonaventure (1221-1274); the fourth is W. Occam (c. 1285-1349).

Scholastic learning in practice was a series of steps, climbing which the student could reach the highest. The "seven liberal arts" were taught in monastic and church schools. The latter were divided into "trivium" (from the number "three") and "quadrivium" (from the number "four"). The student had to first master the trivium, i.e. grammar (Latin), dialectics, rhetoric. The quadrivium, as a higher level, included arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy. Universities provided an even higher level of training.

The first universities arose in the 12th century. in Paris and Bologna. In the XIII-XV centuries. Europe is covered with a whole network of universities. The need for them was determined primarily by the needs and tasks of the church.

In most cases, universities directly relied on the support of church authorities. The main goal of university science was the study and interpretation of Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition (ie, the works of the Holy Fathers of the Church). The interpretation of sacred texts was the exclusive prerogative of the church and associated university scholars in order to prevent the spread of ignorant judgments about the Christian faith. Scientists not lower than a master's degree were allowed to interpret. In accordance with the main task, most universities included two faculties - the faculty of liberal arts and the faculty of theology (theology). The first was a necessary preparatory step for the second.

The Faculty of Theology aimed at the accurate study of the Bible through its interpretation and the systematic exposition of Christian doctrine. The result of this work was the so-called "Sums of theology". Only those who had previously studied at the faculty of liberal arts became masters of theology. The terms of study were impressive: at the faculty of liberal arts - six years, at the faculty of theology - at least eight years. Thus, to become a master of theology, one had to spend at least fourteen years on training. However, the teaching could not but be fascinating, since it involved active participation in discussions and disputes. Lectures alternated with seminars, where students practiced the ability to independently apply the acquired knowledge. The logical discipline of the mind, critical thinking, sharp insight were highly valued.

Universities thus solved several interrelated tasks. First of all, they trained a cadre of well trained and trained ideological defenders of Christianity. They also produced theological and philosophical products - treatises for various purposes, with a sophisticated and logical presentation of Christian teaching. Over the centuries, a huge literature has been created (the writings of Bonaventure alone number 50 volumes, despite the fact that not all of them have been published). The totality of doctrines (a kind of "doctrinal body") created during the Middle Ages is commonly called scholasticism in the proper sense.

In addition to the direct results of the activities of scientists, the development of universities has led to a number of effects that can be called side effects. However, they were of great importance for medieval and subsequent European culture. First, universities contributed to smoothing out social contradictions, since access to them was open to people of all estates and classes. In addition, students from poor families could count on material support for the entire period of study. Many of them subsequently reached great heights both in learning and in social status. Secondly, university students and professors in their totality constituted a special estate - a corporation of people of different origins. Origin within this corporation ceased to play the decisive role that it played in medieval society as a whole. Knowledge and intellect came to the fore. In this environment, a new understanding of nobility arose - nobility not by blood and wealth, but by mind. Such nobility was associated with the refinement of the mind and behavior, the subtlety of the psyche and the refinement of taste. Finally, university scholarship and knowledge did not in any way set up opposition and rebelliousness. On the contrary, the medieval student and professor are precisely those who are most interested in the stability of the existing order and in its gradual moral improvement. The university class was not split off from society, but represented one of its fundamental pillars. The respect for knowledge and culture formed by medieval universities played a role in subsequent history.

Medieval philosophy entered the history of thought under the name of scholasticism, which has long been used in a common sense as a symbol of empty verbiage divorced from reality. And there are certainly reasons for this.

The main distinguishing feature of scholasticism is that it consciously considers itself as a science placed at the service of theology, as a "servant of theology."

Starting around the 11th century, interest in the problems of logic grew in medieval universities, which in that era was called dialectics and the subject of which was the work on concepts. The philosophers of the 11th-14th centuries were greatly influenced by the logical writings of Boethius, who commented on the "Categories" of Aristotle and created a system of subtle distinctions and definitions of concepts, with the help of which theologians tried to comprehend the "truths of faith". The desire for a rationalistic justification of Christian dogma led to the fact that dialectics turned into one of the main philosophical disciplines, and the division and subtlest distinction of concepts, the establishment of definitions and definitions, which occupied many minds, sometimes degenerated into heavy multi-volume constructions. The fascination with dialectics thus understood found its expression in disputes characteristic of medieval universities, which sometimes lasted 10-12 hours with a short break for lunch. These word disputes and intricacies of scholastic learning gave rise to opposition. Scholastic dialectics was opposed by various mystical currents, and in the XV-XVI centuries this opposition takes shape in the form of a humanistic secular culture, on the one hand, and Neoplatonic natural philosophy, on the other.

In the Middle Ages, a new view of nature was formed. A new view of nature deprives it of independence, as it was in antiquity, since God not only creates nature, but can also act contrary to the natural course of things (perform miracles).

In Christian doctrine, the dogma of creation, belief in a miracle, and the conviction that nature “is insufficient for itself” (Augustine’s expression) are internally interconnected and that man is called to be her master, “to command the elements.”

Because of all this, in the Middle Ages, the attitude towards nature changed. Firstly, it ceases to be the most important subject of knowledge, as it was in antiquity (with the exception of some teachings, such as the sophists, Socrates and others); the main attention is now focused on the knowledge of God and the human soul.

This situation changes somewhat only in the period of the late Middle Ages - in the XIII and especially in the XIY centuries. Secondly, even if there is an interest in natural phenomena, they act mainly as symbols pointing to another, higher reality and referring to it; and this is a religious and moral reality.

Not a single phenomenon, not a single natural thing reveals itself here, each points to an otherworldly empirical given meaning, each is a symbol (and a lesson). The world was given to medieval man not only for the good, but also for teaching.

The symbolism and allegorism of medieval thinking, brought up primarily on the Holy Scripture and its interpretations, was extremely sophisticated and elaborated to the subtleties. It is clear that this kind of symbolic interpretation of nature contributed little to its scientific knowledge, and only in the late Middle Ages did interest in nature as such increase, which gives impetus to the development of such sciences as astronomy, physics, and biology.

Scholasticism is a type of philosophizing in which the means of the human mind are trying to substantiate ideas and formulas taken on faith.

In medieval philosophy, there was an acute dispute between spirit and matter, which led to a dispute between realists and nominalists. The dispute was about the nature of universals, that is, about the nature of general concepts, whether general concepts are secondary, that is, the product of the activity of thinking, or whether they are primary, real, exist independently.

Nominalism represented the beginnings of the materialistic direction. The nominalist doctrine of the objective existence of objects and natural phenomena led to the undermining of the church dogma about the primacy of the spiritual and the secondary nature of the material, to weakening the authority of the church and Holy Scripture.

The realists showed that general concepts in relation to the individual things of nature are primary and exist really, by themselves. They attributed to general concepts an independent existence, independent of individual things and man. The objects of nature, in their opinion, are only forms of manifestation of general concepts.

Medieval philosophy made a significant contribution to the further development of epistemology, to form the foundations of natural science and philosophical knowledge. XIII century - a characteristic feature of this century - a slow but steady increase in the bosom of feudalism, its decomposition, the formation of the beginnings of a new, capitalist system. The development of a commodity-money economy in Western Europe caused a significant economic recovery. Changes in industrial relations inevitably caused certain transformations in the ideological superstructure. As a result, at the end of the XII century. and the first half of the thirteenth century. feudal cities begin to strive to create their own intellectual and cultural atmosphere. The urban bourgeoisie strives for the development of urban schools, the emergence of universities.

The philosophical expression of the awakening of this life and the expansion of scientific knowledge was the accepted Aristotelianism. In the philosophy of Aristotle, they tried to find not so much practical recommendations that could be used in economic and socio-political life. This philosophy was the impetus for the scientists of that time, who were forced to admit that Augustinism had already ceased to correspond to the current intellectual situation. After all, Augustinism, based on Platonic traditions, was directed against natural science research. Augustine argued that the knowledge of the material world does not bring any benefit, because it not only does not increase human happiness, but absorbs the time needed to contemplate much more important and sublime objects. The motto of Augustine's philosophy: “I want to understand God and the soul. And nothing more? Absolutely nothing! Of course, philosophy understood in this way could not inspire new spiritual currents. Intellectual inquiries demanded a new philosophy.

The intellectual movement that developed at the end of the 12th and 13th centuries in the countries of Western Europe led to the growth of tendencies to separate science from theology, reason from faith. As a result of long disputes between individual thinkers and the church, several points of view have crystallized on how to solve the problem of the relationship between faith and reason:

rationalistic point of view. Its supporters demanded that the dogmas of faith be subjected to the evaluation of reason as the highest criterion of truth or error;

The point of view of dual truth, put forward by the defenders of the theory of two truths - theological and scientific;

The point of view of subject differentiation. Its proponents distinguished between theology and science according to their subjects and aims;

The point of view of the complete denial of the value of science.

In conditions when interest in science and philosophy was awakening more and more widely, it was still impossible to maintain a complete denial of the value of rational knowledge, it was necessary to look for other, more subtle ways of resolving the issue of the relationship between theology and science. This was not an easy task, for it was a question of working out a method which, without preaching complete disregard for knowledge, would at the same time be able to subordinate rational thinking to the dogmas of revelation, i.e. maintain the primacy of faith over reason. This task is carried out by Thomas, relying on the Catholic interpretation of the Aristotelian concept of science.

Man in medieval scholasticism

To the question of what a person is, medieval thinkers gave no less numerous and varied answers than the philosophers of antiquity or modern times. However, two premises of these responses tended to remain common.

The first is the biblical definition of the essence of man as "the image and likeness of God" - a revelation beyond doubt. The second is the understanding of man as a "reasonable animal" developed by Plato, Aristotle and their followers.

Based on this understanding, medieval philosophers posed the following questions: what is more in a person - the rational principle or the animal principle? Which of them is his essential property, and which one can he do without, remaining a man? What is mind and what is life (animal)? The main definition of man as “the image and likeness of God” also gave rise to the question: what exactly are the properties of God that make up the essence of human nature - it is clear that neither infinity, nor beginninglessness, nor omnipotence can be attributed to man.

The first thing that distinguishes the anthropology of the early Christian philosophers themselves from the ancient, pagan one is an extremely ambivalent assessment of man.

From now on, man not only occupies the first place in all nature as its king - in this sense, some Greek philosophers also highly placed man - but also as the image and likeness of God, he goes beyond nature in general, becomes, as it were, above it (after all, God is transcendent , beyond the world he created). And this is a significant difference from ancient anthropology, the two main trends of which - Platonism and Aristotelianism - do not take a person out of the system of other beings, in fact, do not even give him absolute primacy in any system.

For Platonists, who recognize only his rational soul as the true essence in a person, he is the lowest rung in the longest ladder - the hierarchy of rational beings - souls, demons, gods, various minds of varying degrees of "purity", etc. For Aristotle, a person is primarily an animal, that is, a living body endowed with a soul - only in humans, unlike animals and insects, the soul is also rational.

For medieval philosophers, beginning with the earliest ones, there is an impassable abyss between man and the entire universe. A person is an alien from another world (which can be called the "heavenly kingdom", the spiritual world, "paradise", "heaven") and must return there again. Although, according to the Bible, he himself is made of earth and water, although he grows and eats like plants, feels and moves like an animal, he is akin not only to them, but also to God. It was within the framework of the Christian tradition that ideas were formed that later became clichés: man is the king of nature, the crown of creation, and so on.

But how to understand the thesis that man is the image and likeness of God? Which of the divine properties make up the essence of man?

Here is how one of the fathers of the church, Gregory of Nyssa, answers this question. God is first and foremost the king and master of all things. Deciding to create man, he had to make him king over all animals. And the king needs two things: firstly, it is freedom (if the king is deprived of freedom, then what kind of king is he?), secondly, to have someone to reign over. And God endows man with reason and free will, that is, the ability to reason and distinguish between good and evil: this is the essence of man, the image of God in him. And in order for him to become a king in the world, consisting of bodily things and beings, God gives him a body and an animal soul - as a link with nature, over which he is called to reign.

According to Christian doctrine, the Son of God Jesus Christ incarnated into a man in order to atone for human sins and give people salvation by his painful death on the cross.

The idea of ​​the incarnation of God contradicted not only the ancient pagan culture, but also other monotheistic religions - Judaism and Islam. Before Christianity, the idea of ​​a fundamental difference, the incompatibility of the divine and the human, dominated, therefore, the thought of the possibility of a merger of these two principles could not arise. And in Christianity itself, where God is presented as elevated above the whole world by virtue of his transcendence, and therefore separated from nature much more radically than the Greek gods, the indwelling of God into the human body is an extremely paradoxical thing. It is no coincidence that in the religion of revelation, which is Christianity, faith is placed above knowledge: paradoxes, incomprehensible to the mind, must be accepted on faith.

The dogma of the resurrection in the flesh subsequently determined Christian anthropology. Unlike pagan beliefs in the immortality of the human soul, which, after the death of the body, moves to other bodies, medieval thought is convinced that a person, when the time comes, will rise entirely in his bodily form, because, according to Christian teaching, the soul cannot exist outside body. It was these dogmas that formed the basis of the medieval understanding of the problem of soul and body.

Origen (3rd century) was the first of the philosophers who tried to bring Christian dogmas into a system and create a doctrine of man on their basis. Origen believed that man is composed of spirit, soul and body.

The spirit does not belong to the person himself, it is, as it were, given to him by God and is always striving towards goodness and truth. The soul, on the other hand, constitutes, as it were, our own “I”, it is the beginning of individuality, and since free will is the most important definition of human essence, it is the soul, according to Origen, that chooses between good and evil. By nature, the soul must obey the spirit, and the body must obey the soul. But due to the duality of the soul, very often its lower part takes precedence over the higher, prompting a person to follow inclinations and passions. To the extent that this becomes a habit, a person turns out to be a sinful being, overturning the natural order created by the creator: he subordinates the higher to the lower, and in this way evil comes into the world. Thus, evil does not come from God and not from nature itself, but from man, or rather from the abuse of freedom.

But indeed it is! A very well-known thing: in countries (or some areas), where the freedom of action is least restricted, as a rule, there are the most unrest. It is not a pity to realize it, but a person really abuses his freedom, and it must (!) be limited.

In medieval philosophy, the question arises: if the body itself is the beginning of evil, then where does medieval asceticism come from, especially characteristic of monasticism? The asceticism of the Middle Ages does not renounce the flesh as such (it is no coincidence that murder in the Middle Ages was considered a mortal sin, which, by the way, distinguished Christian ethics from, for example, Stoic), but the upbringing of the flesh in order to subordinate it to a higher, spiritual principle.

Thomas Aquinas - as the largest representative of scholasticism

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) is a thinker and the largest representative of scholasticism during its heyday.

He was born in the castle of Roccasecca near Naples and was the seventh son of Count Aquinas. He studied at the University of Naples, where he studied Aristotle and the seven liberal arts: logic, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, grammar, music, astronomy. In 1252, Thomas went to the University of Paris to lecture and receive the title of professor, which he achieved at the age of 30.

Thomas distinguished 5 forms of government, the best of which he recognized the monarchy. However, if the monarch became a tyrant, then the people, according to Aquinas, have every right to oppose him and overthrow him, despite the fact that power is of divine origin. At the same time, Thomas recognizes the right of the people to oppose the state only if its (the state's) activities are contrary to the interests of not only the people, but also the church.

This is what Thomas's doctrine of the state looks like, it contains only the appearance of democratic elements, but in essence it expresses the interests of the church.

Aquinas develops the following theoretical principles that determine the general line of the church on the issue of the relationship between theology and science:

1. Philosophy and particular sciences perform auxiliary functions in relation to theology. The expression of this principle is the well-known position of Thomas that theology "does not follow other sciences as higher in relation to it, but resorts to them as to its subordinate servants." Their use, in his opinion, is not evidence of the lack of self-sufficiency or weakness of theology, but, on the contrary, follows from the wretchedness of the human mind. Rational knowledge in a secondary way facilitates the understanding of the well-known dogmas of faith, brings closer to the knowledge of the "first cause" of the universe, that is, God;

2. The truths of theology have their source in revelation, the truths of science - sensory experience and reason. Thomas claims that from the point of view of the method of obtaining the truth, knowledge can be divided into 2 types: knowledge discovered by the natural light of reason, such as arithmetic, and knowledge that draws its foundations from revelation;

3. There is an area of ​​some objects common to theology and science. Foma believes that the same problem can serve as the subject of study of various sciences. But there are certain truths which cannot be proven by reason, and therefore they belong exclusively to the realm of theology. To these truths, Aquinas referred the following dogmas of faith: the dogma of the resurrection, the history of the incarnation, the holy trinity, the creation of the world in time, and so on;

4. The provisions of science cannot contradict the dogmas of faith. Science must indirectly serve theology, must convince people of the justice of its principles. The desire to know God is true wisdom. And knowledge is only the servant of theology. Philosophy, for example, relying on physics, must construct evidence for the existence of God, the task of paleontology is to confirm the Book of Genesis, and so on.

In this regard, Aquinas writes: "I think about the body in order to think about the soul, and I think about it in order to think about a separate substance, I think about it in order to think about God."

If rational knowledge does not fulfill this task, it becomes useless, moreover, it degenerates into dangerous reasoning. In case of conflict, the decisive criterion is the truths of revelation, which surpass in their truth and value any rational evidence.

Thus, Thomas did not separate science from theology, but, on the contrary, completely subordinated it to theology.

Aquinas, expressing the interests of the church and the feudal strata, assigned science a secondary role. Foma completely paralyzes the scientific life of his day.

During the Renaissance and at a later time, the theological concept of science created by Thomas becomes a doctrinal and ideological brake on scientific progress.

Thomas Aquinas reproduced the four traditional Greek virtues - wisdom, courage, moderation and justice, but added faith, hope and love to them. The philosopher saw the meaning of life in happiness, which he understood as love for God and the contemplation of God.

Thomas stood on the following philosophical positions:

1. The world surrounding a person has a beginning and an end of its existence;

2. The world is not material;

3. A person cannot fully understand the world around him.

The writings of Thomas Aquinas include two extensive treatises covering a wide range of topics - "The Sum of Theology" and "The Sum Against the Gentiles" ("The Sum of Philosophy"), discussions on theological and philosophical problems ("Controversial Questions" and "Questions on Various Subjects") , detailed commentaries on several books of the Bible, on 12 treatises of Aristotle, on the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard, on the treatises of Boethius, Pseudo-Dionysius and on the anonymous "Book of Causes", as well as a number of short essays on philosophical and religious topics and poetic texts for liturgy, such as the work "Ethics". "Debatable Questions" and "Comments" were largely the fruit of his teaching activities, which included, according to the tradition of that time, disputes and reading authoritative texts, accompanied by comments.

Conclusion

From the difference in forms, which are the likeness of God in things, Thomas derives a system of order in the material world. The forms of things, regardless of the degree of their perfection, are involved in the creator, due to which they occupy a certain place in the universal hierarchy of being. This applies to all areas of the material world and society. According to Thomas, it is necessary that some should be engaged in agriculture, others should be shepherds, and still others should be builders. For the divine harmony of the social world, it is also necessary that there be people engaged in spiritual work and working physically. Each person performs a certain function in the life of society, and everyone creates a certain good.

Thus, according to the teachings of Thomas, the differences in the functions performed by people are the result not of the social division of labor, but of the purposeful activity of God. Social and class inequality is not a consequence of antagonistic production relations, but a reflection of the hierarchy of forms in things. All this essentially served Aquinas to justify the feudal social ladder.

The philosophy of Thomas Aquinas did not immediately receive universal recognition among the scholastic currents of the Middle Ages. Thomas Aquinas had opponents in the Dominican order, among some members of the clergy, the Latin Averroists. However, despite the initial attacks, from the XIV century. Thomas becomes the highest authority of the church, which has recognized his doctrine as its official philosophy. Since that time, the church has used his teachings in the fight against all sorts of movements directed against its interests.

From that time on, for several centuries, the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas was cultivated.

In the history of the entire philosophical thought of the Middle Ages, the entire epoch was designated by scholasticism. This doctrine developed not only within the church, but also under its dictates. Scholasticism dealt exclusively with the interpretation and justification of all elements of the Church's worldview. All the answers referred to the fact that "it says so in the Bible", "and such and such a psalm interprets it like this." And since Scripture is generally contradictory, the scholastics explained it by the speeches of some saint or church father: "This is the truth, because such and such a father understood it like that." And the fact that this father could be mistaken was not discussed.

The scholastics began to move away from life - to close themselves within four walls from true interests and vehemently discuss such burning topics bordering on the absurd: “What does Satan eat?”, “How many angels can dance at the end of a needle?” These questions are interesting ... to a child. And for adults to deal with such ridiculous questions is stupid and unprofitable for religion itself.

The preachers contradicted themselves: deepening the knowledge of Christianity, they demanded ignorance and illiteracy. And Pope Gregory the Dialogist, by the way, canonized as a saint, argued: "Ignorance is the real mother of Christian piety."

In the heyday of scholasticism, at first, light stood on a par with the church. The Church, as was evident from the previous example, has ceased to be the absolute bearer of education. Under these conditions, freedom of thought was born. This ideology created the "theory of two truths". She transferred the problem of the relationship between faith and reason in the area of ​​the relationship between theology and philosophy. Its essence boiled down to the doctrine of the separation of philosophical and theological truths, according to which what is true in philosophy can be false in theology. And vice versa. It was an attempt to affirm the independence of philosophy from theology, to recognize equality.

From the final fall in the hearts of people, the church was saved by Thomas Aquinas. He took the vows as a monk, renouncing money and title. He left behind a huge library. He created the doctrine of the harmony of faith and reason, in which he pointed out that they are in eternal confrontation. Both are directed towards the light, only in different ways. Drawing a line between the natural and the supernatural, Thomas recognized their independence. At least external. But if there were conflicts, the truth remained on the side of God's revelations. And no natural evidence can be trusted. Since the truth of revelations is above all, that is, philosophy seems to have become independent, but at the same time there was strict control over any inclination to contradict anything. By the efforts of the church leaders, autocracy was inseparably established. Those who disagreed with the churchmen were destroyed spiritually and physically.

Scholasticism, as a philosophical direction, is far from solving those vital problems that arise in society. However, her role is that she paved the way for the emergence of Renaissance philosophy.

How did general ignorance cause the development of science? What was taught in medieval schools? Why were there so few universities in Byzantium? And where does zeal lead in logic? By Viktor Petrovich Lega.

After Augustine, the so-called “dark ages” come in philosophy: for almost 500 years in the West there has not been a single more or less interesting philosopher, except, perhaps, Severinus Boethius (c. 480 - 524) and John Scotus Eriugena (815-877) . Boethius is called one of the last Romans, and John Scotus Eriugena, although he lived in the ninth century, is often attributed to the forerunners of scholasticism.

This period is the time of the migration of peoples, the time of the destruction of the western part of the Roman Empire, the time of the formation of the Roman Catholic Church in its modern form. And the time of the decline of philosophy, although theology, of course, developed: there were interesting thinkers, interesting Western theologians. Philosophical thought awakened at the beginning of the 2nd millennium. And she received a well-known name - scholasticism.

But before talking about scholasticism as a phenomenon, let's consider what this word itself means.

School of Latin

The word "scholasticism" comes from the Latin "schola" - "school", and originally it denoted the school system adopted in the countries of Western Europe at that time.

Why suddenly in Western Europe there is such a need for schools? This is not only and not so much an interest in education, it is, first of all, an urgent church task. The fact is that since the end of the 1st millennium, Western Europe has been speaking completely different languages ​​- Latin has become a dead language. The countries of Western Europe, which is divided into states close to modern ones, are inhabited by new peoples who speak almost modern languages: French, German, Italian, English - of course, in their ancient version. Nobody knows Latin. But the Church is conservative, and for her Latin remains the only language in which worship can and should be conducted. After all, the great fathers of the Western Church wrote in Latin: Blessed Augustine, St. Leo the Great, St. Gregory the Great (Devoslov), St. Ambrose of Milan... The Bible, consecrated by church authority, was translated into Latin - the so-called Vulgata, the translation of St. Jerome of Stridon.

The school system arose as a solution to an important problem for the Church - the training of literate priests

Nobody knows Latin anymore, but a priest must know Latin, and know it excellently, know it like his native language, in order to read and understand the Bible; to read and understand theological works, for example, the most complex writings of Blessed Augustine; to lead worship and understand it. And therefore there is a need for mass training of priests who know the Latin language well. This is a very important task.

In Byzantium, the situation is completely different: everyone there speaks the Greek language - and the apostles also spoke it, the Gospel was written in it, the fathers of the Church wrote in it. And the service is conducted in their native language, it is understandable to everyone. And if someone wants to read the Holy Scriptures, the works of the Fathers of the Church, then it is enough to learn the letters, which you can do on your own, without going to school for this. Therefore, the level of general literacy in Byzantium is much higher than in Western Europe.

Schools also appear in Byzantium, educated people also appear, but higher education is not as widespread as in the West. Why? For the reason that in the West, in fact, the training of intellectuals, that is, people who will be engaged only in intellectual work, is being put on stream. After all, learning Latin in order to speak this language as a native language is not a matter of one or two years, but of a much longer time - decades.

Many outstanding minds, remarkable theologians of the West, such as Isidore of Seville, Bede the Venerable, thought over what the system of education should be. But the system proposed by Alcuin in the 9th century took hold. It was distinguished by its simplicity, persuasiveness, and it actually works to this day.

Road of seven paths

In this system, education began, of course, with the study of Latin and the Holy Scriptures. At this first stage, the most general education necessary for the future priest was given. The most intelligent could move on to the next step, where, at the suggestion of Alcuin, the so-called "seven liberal arts" were studied, which were usually divided into trivium and quadrivium - literally translating, "three-way" and "four-way".

The quadrivium included exact sciences: arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music, understood as harmony. And in the trivium - the humanities: grammar, rhetoric and dialectics - or logic. But dialectics is somewhat broader than logic: it is the art of argumentation, the art of thinking is the most philosophical discipline. And therefore, of all the "seven free arts", dialectics receives the greatest importance. At its core, it is a philosophy. Although it cannot be compared with ancient philosophy.

They were practically not familiar with ancient philosophy in Europe, they knew well only the logic of Aristotle

And the problem of Western education was that in Europe they were extremely poorly acquainted with ancient philosophy: no one knew the Greek language. Greek literature, philosophy, science - this is Byzantium. In Byzantium, they study Plato, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Ptolemy... The level of education and science in Byzantium is such that it allows them to worthily continue the traditions of Ancient Greece. In the West, from Greek thought, they only know what Cicero retold, or Augustine explained, or Boethius translated a little. And Boethius, before his tragic death - an unjust execution (he was accused as a participant in a palace conspiracy) - managed to translate only the logical works of Aristotle. And according to these logical works of Aristotle, the whole philosophy of Ancient Greece was judged. Therefore, philosophy was reduced to logic, to the art of argumentation.

This is really the most important thing - the ability to think.

Subsequently, the stage of the "seven liberal arts" became the first, initial faculty of future universities, which began to be called the "faculty of the seven liberal arts" or simply the Faculty of Philosophy - precisely because of the superiority of dialectics among the "seven liberal arts".

"The pinnacle of knowledge, thoughts color"

Having studied the "seven liberal arts", the most intelligent could move on to the third level - to the university. Universities appear as a logical continuation of schools. And the first one appears in 1088 in the Italian city of Bologna, and after it - literally like mushrooms after the rain - in Oxford, Paris, Cambridge, Cologne and other cities, so that all of Europe will soon be covered with a network of these educational institutions - and this is also very important.

Firstly, despite the linguistic fragmentation, the intellectuals of different nations speak the same language - Latin. They understand each other, whether you are Italian or English. Secondly, professionals work in universities - those who are really capable of intellectual work, who are ready to devote their lives to this. This fact is very important for understanding why science later - in the 17th century - will arise precisely in Western Europe. Not in Byzantium, not in the Slavic countries, where the general level of education, I emphasize, is higher. But there is no caste - the "intellectual elite" - and there is no that vast network of universities that is necessary for the emergence of science. And the fact that science does not contradict Orthodox canons is evidenced by a simple fact: having arisen in the West, science will immediately spread to Eastern European countries.

Universities are built according to a single model. Three faculties: medical, legal and theological.

At the medical school, they are engaged not only in medicine proper, healing, but also in the knowledge of the material world. We agree with this: health is the most important thing. By the way, Galileo graduated from the medical faculty, although he was not a doctor.

At the Faculty of Law, they study everything that relates to the social structure. Let's agree with this: the main thing is that there should be peace and order in society, therefore the law is necessary.

Who is a good thinker? - He who divides well and defines

And the top is, of course, the knowledge of God. This is done at the theological faculty. But those who have just studied the “seven liberal arts”, including dialectics, enter the theological faculty. They are good at thinking, defining, sharing. As they said in those days, "he who thinks well, he expounds well." Who is a good thinker? - One who shares well. To be able to divide - to clearly define a concept, to distinguish it from another concept, to show the connection between them - this is the main task. And it pursues a very specific educational goal, because you need to be able to teach theology at the theological faculty - we also agree with this. After all, if you give an unprepared student to read Blessed Augustine or St. Basil the Great, then the student is unlikely to understand anything: he must first put everything on the shelves - “here is the doctrine of the Trinity, this is the doctrine of Christ, this is the doctrine of the Church, this is the doctrine of salvation within the Church”, that is, there must be a clear system for which that same dialectic is used.

Logic trap

So, now is the time to move on to another, which has become the main meaning of the word "scholasticism", which is often expressed in a simple phrase: "philosophy is the servant of theology." Yes, philosophy fulfills this very role – so far only at the level of teaching. It should help to train students - future priests, theologians, so that they clearly understand the truths of the Christian faith. Incidentally, a great example of scholastic thought was given by the great Eastern Orthodox theologian, St. John of Damascus: his Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith is an example of amazing scholasticism in the best sense of the word. Based on Aristotelian philosophy and logic, having previously written the “Philosophical Chapters”, where he gives his understanding of Aristotle and shows how to define and prove, St. John of Damascus clearly and accurately expounds the Orthodox faith - chapter by chapter, paragraph by paragraph. So there was already a pattern. According to the model of the Exact Statement of the Orthodox Faith, the first textbook of theology was written - "Sentences" by Peter Lombard. So scholasticism arises precisely as a desire to present the truths of Christian theology clearly, logically, and conclusively. And I personally do not see anything wrong with this, on the contrary: this is a wonderful school innovation.

But later, after two or three centuries, having become accustomed to this method of presentation, many Western theologians will consider that there can be no other theology: theology must be clear, logical, and demonstrative. And this will become the main difference between scholasticism and patristics, where thought is alive, often reaching such heights that you cannot express it in logical syllogisms.

And therefore, starting from the XIV century, many Western Christians will be irritated by scholasticism - they will dream of returning again to patristics, to living Christian thought.

The time of scholasticism, its clear understanding as a philosophical, logical presentation of the truths of theology, is the 11th-14th centuries. Having arisen from simple school needs, scholasticism will crush everything - as they say: "kill the living" - in Christian thought. And it will end with the beginning of the Renaissance, and this, first of all, the revival of patristic thought - not antiquity, but, I repeat, precisely patristic thought, early Christianity, not distorted by scholasticism. And who are the early Church Fathers in the West? This is Augustine, first of all, and he is a Platonist. And therefore, through Augustine, interest in Plato, who is so opposite to the already bored Aristotle with his logical schemes, will be revived.

So when was science born?

The names of many scholastics are well known: Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), Bonaventure (1218-1274), Albert the Great (1206-1280), Roger Bacon (1214-1292), John Duns Scotus (1265-1308), William of Ockham (1285 –1347). Many remarkable scholastics of the late 13th-early 14th century will develop not only theological, but also anticipate modern scientific thought. Because - and many historians of science write about this - science did not actually arise immediately in the 17th century, but originated earlier - in the 13th century. And the system of universities and the methodology for training intellectual personnel will create fertile ground for its development. Already in the XIII century, this system will reach its perfect status, and not only the truth about God, but also other truths will be learned within the walls of the university.

Starting from the 13th century, interesting thinkers appear, less famous than those listed above, but they will make a huge contribution to the knowledge of the material world: Raymond Lull (1232–1315), Nicholas Orem (1320–1382), Jean Buridan (1295–1358), Richard from Mediavilla (1249-1308)... I am outraged when they say that in the Middle Ages they did not engage in science, that the Church allegedly forbade the pursuit of science and persecuted scientists. Many modern scientific ideas arise precisely at this time. For the first time, the idea of ​​mechanical thinking, which we now call cybernetics, arose from Raymond Lull; the idea of ​​coordinates, which we call Cartesian coordinates, was first presented by Nikolai Orem, who also proposed the idea of ​​the Earth's rotation around its axis; Roger Bacon wrote about the need to study physics for the improvement of our world, the concept of impetus, close to the modern concept of momentum, was introduced by Jean Buridan to explain the movement, and Richard from Mediavilla first expressed the idea of ​​an expanding universe ... So even then, in the XIII-XIV centuries, there is not only an environment for the development of science - there are also scientific problems, slowly thinkers are approaching the scientific method. Therefore, both Galileo and Descartes, the creators of modern science, are to some extent the heirs of medieval Western European scholarship.

Hello dear readers! Welcome to the blog!

Medieval philosophy - the most important thing briefly. This is another topic from a series of articles on philosophy in brief.

From previous articles you have learned:

Medieval philosophy - the most important briefly

The Middle Ages is a period of European history lasting almost a millennium. It starts from the 5th century (the collapse of the Roman Empire), includes the era of feudalism and ends at the beginning of the 15th century with the onset of the Renaissance.

Medieval philosophy - main features

The philosophy of the Middle Ages is characterized by the idea of ​​uniting all people of different classes, professions, nationalities with the help of the Christian faith

Philosophers of the Middle Ages said that all people, having received baptism, in the future life will acquire those blessings that they are deprived of in this life. The idea of ​​the immortality of the soul equalized everyone: the beggar and the king, the artisan and the publican, the woman and the man.

The philosophy of the Middle Ages, in brief, is a Christian worldview, embedded in the consciousness of the public, often in a light favorable to the feudal lords.

The main problems of medieval philosophy

The main problems considered by the philosophers of the Middle Ages were the following:

Attitude towards nature. In the Middle Ages, a new perception of nature was formed, different from the ancient one. Nature, as a subject of Divine creation, was no longer considered an independent subject for study, as was customary in antiquity. Man was placed above nature, they called it the lord and king of nature. This attitude towards nature contributed little to its scientific study.

Man is the likeness of God, the image of God. Man was considered in two ways, on the one hand, as the likeness and image of God, on the other - as in the ancient Greek philosophers - as a "reasonable animal". The question was, what kind of nature is more in a person? Philosophers of antiquity also highly extolled man, but now he, as the likeness of God, completely goes beyond nature and rises above it.

The problem of soul and body. Jesus Christ is God incarnated in man and atoned for all the sins of mankind on the cross for his salvation. The idea of ​​uniting the divine and the human was completely new, both from the point of view of the pagan philosophy of Ancient Greece, and from the standpoint of Judaism and Islam.

The problem of self-consciousness. God gave man free will. If in the philosophy of antiquity mind was in the first place, then in the philosophy of the Middle Ages the will is brought to the fore. Augustine said that all people are wills. They know good, but the will does not obey them and they do evil. The philosophy of the Middle Ages taught that man cannot overcome evil without the help of God.

History and memory. The sacredness of the history of life. In the early Middle Ages, there was a keen interest in history. Although in antiquity the history of being was more associated with the cosmos and nature than with the history of mankind itself.

Universals- these are general concepts (for example, a living being), and not specific objects. The problem of universals arose in the days of Plato. The question was, do universals (general concepts) really exist in themselves, or do they manifest themselves only in specific things? The question of universals gave rise in medieval philosophy to the direction realism, nominalism and conceptualism.

The main task of the philosophers of the Middle Ages is God-seeking

The philosophy of the Middle Ages is, first of all, God-seeking and confirmation that God exists. Medieval philosophers rejected the atomism of ancient philosophers and the consubstantiality of God in the interpretation of Aristotle. Platonism was accepted in the aspect of the trinity of God.

3 stages of the philosophy of the Middle Ages

Conventionally, such 3 stages of the philosophy of the Middle Ages are distinguished, briefly their essence is as follows.

• Stage 1 Apologetics- the statement about the trinity of God, the proof of His existence, the revision of early Christian symbols and rituals of service to new conditions.
• 2nd stage Patristika- the establishment of the dominance of the Catholic Christian Church in all spheres of life in European states.
• 3rd stage of Scholasticism- rethinking the dogmas legitimized in previous periods.

Apologetics in philosophy?

The main representatives of apologetics - the 1st stage in the philosophy of the Middle Ages - Clement of Alexandria and Quintus Septimius Florent Tertullian.

Apologetics in philosophy, briefly, is the main branch of theology, which proves the truth of the existence of God and the main provisions of the Christian faith using rational means.

Patristics in philosophy?

During the period of the 2nd stage of medieval philosophy, it was no longer necessary to prove the existence of God. The stage of spreading the Christian faith began.

Patristika (from the Greek " pater" - father) in philosophy in short - this is the theology and philosophy of the Fathers of the Church who continued the work of the Apostles. John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa and others worked out the doctrine that formed the basis of the Histian worldview.

Is it scholasticism in philosophy?

The third stage of medieval philosophy is scholasticism. During the time of Scholasticism, schools arise, universities with a theological orientation, and philosophy begins to turn into theology.

Scholasticism(from the Greek "school") in philosophy is a medieval European philosophy, which was a synthesis of the philosophy of Aristotle and Christian theology. Scholasticism combines theology with a rationalistic approach to questions and problems of philosophy.

Christian Thinkers and Philosophical Searches

The outstanding thinkers of the 1st stage of medieval philosophy include apologetics Tatian and Origen. Tatian collected four Gospels (from Mark, Matthew, Luke, John) into one. They became known as the New Testament. Origen became the author of a branch of philology that was based on biblical stories. He introduced the concept of the God-Man.

Outstanding thinker in the period of patristics was Boethius. He generalized the philosophy of the Middle Ages for teaching in universities. Universals are the brainchild of Boethius. He divided 7 areas of knowledge into 2 types of disciplines - humanitarian (grammar, dialectics, rhetoric) and natural science (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music). He translated and made an interpretation of the main works of Euclid, Aristotle and Nicomachus.

To the outstanding thinkers of scholasticism carry the monk Thomas Aquinas. He systematized the postulates of the church, indicated 5 indestructible proofs of the existence of God. He combined the philosophical ideas of Aristotle with Christian teaching. He proved that there is always a sequence of completing reason with faith, nature with grace, philosophy with revelation.

Philosophers of the Catholic Church

Many philosophers of the Middle Ages were canonized by the Catholic Church. These are Blessed Augustine, Irenaeus of Lyon, Clement of Alexandria, Albert the Great, John Chrysostom, Thomas Aquinas, Maximus the Confessor, John of Damascus, Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius the Areopagite, Basil the Great, Boethius, canonized as Saint Severin and others.

The Crusades - Causes and Consequences

You can often hear the question, why were the Crusades so cruel in the Middle Ages, if the reason for their organization was the preaching of faith in God? But God is love. This question often confuses both believers and non-believers.

If you are also interested in getting a deep and historically proven answer to this question, watch this video. The well-known missionary, theologian, Doctor of Historical Sciences Andrey Kuraev gives the answer:

Books on the philosophy of the Middle Ages

• Anthology of philosophy of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Perevezentsev Sergey.
• Richard Southern. Scholastic humanism and the unification of Europe.
• D. Reale, D. Antiseri. Western philosophy from its origins to the present day: the Middle Ages. .

VIDEO Philosophy of the Middle Ages briefly

I hope that the article Medieval Philosophy briefly most importantly turned out to be useful to you. In the next article, you can get acquainted with.

I wish you all an unquenchable thirst for knowledge of yourself and the world around you, inspiration in all your affairs!

σχολή ) or, closer, from the derivative "Scholasticus" - school, educational. This name usually refers to the philosophy taught in the schools of the Middle Ages. The word "Scholasticus", used as a noun, was first applied to teachers of one or more sciences taught in the monastic schools founded by Charlemagne, as well as to teachers of theology; subsequently it was transferred to all those who were engaged in the sciences, especially philosophy.

For the first time, the expression σχολαστικός ” is found, as far as is known, in Theophrastus in his letter to his student Phania (Diog. L. V, 2, 37). The word "scholasticism" (and also "scholastic") did not initially have such a reproachful meaning with which it began to be used in modern times, when scholastic or medieval philosophy began to be attacked by representatives of a new mental movement. So, for example, many Romans called Cicero a scholastic after he began to study Greek philosophy, but they wanted to designate this name only as a theoretician who forgets the importance of practice and practical education. Now the word "Scholasticism" is applied not only to medieval philosophy, but to everything that in modern education and in scientific reasoning at least partially resembles scholasticism in content and form - and is usually used as a negative epithet.

general characteristics

In its general character, scholasticism represents religious philosophy not in the sense of free speculation in the field of questions of a religious and moral nature, as we see in the systems of the last period of Greek philosophy, but in the sense of applying philosophical concepts and methods of thinking to Christian church doctrine, the first experience of which represents the patristic philosophy that preceded scholasticism. Having in mind, by such an application, to make the content of faith accessible to reason, scholasticism and patristics differed from each other in that for the latter this content was Holy Scripture and for the dogmatic formulation of its own revealed teaching, it used philosophy - while for scholasticism the content of faith consisted in established the fathers of dogmas and philosophy applied mainly to the clarification, substantiation and systematization of the latter. However, there is no absolute opposition between scholasticism and patristics, because even in patristic times, along with the gradual formulation of dogmas, they were substantiated and brought into a system, and on the other hand, it cannot be said that even during the period of scholasticism the system of dogmas was a on all points a complete whole: in the field of theological-philosophical speculation, the dogmatic doctrine has undergone some further development.

The relationship between scholasticism and patristic philosophy can be more precisely defined as follows: the former realizes and develops that which has not yet reached realization and development in the latter, although it was in it as an embryo.

The philosophizing of the Scholastics was built on the basis of the established teachings of the Church and those teachings of ancient philosophy that survived until the Middle Ages. In this dual theological-philosophical tradition, the highest place, of course, belonged to church teaching. However, philosophical tradition also enjoyed considerable respect: it was natural to expect from new peoples who were just beginning scientific enlightenment that they would accept the science they had inherited from antiquity with childish trust and reverence. The task was to harmonize both legends and combine them into something whole. In carrying out this task, they proceeded from the principle that reason and revelation come from one source of light - from God, and that therefore there can be no contradiction between theology and true philosophy, and in the agreement of their teachings - proof of the truth of both.

During the heyday of the scholastic systems, philosophy and theology actually passed one into the other. However, the difference in their nature had to show itself - and by the end of the Middle Ages, theology and philosophy are already sharply separated from each other.

Medieval thought clearly understood the difference between these areas. Philosophy was based on natural-reasonable principles and evidence, or, as they said then, on "natural light", while theology was based on divine revelation, which was supernatural. Truth is inherent in philosophical teachings, in comparison with revelation, to an insignificant extent; showing to what limits of knowledge a person can reach with his natural powers, philosophy at the same time gives proof that it cannot satisfy the desire of our mind for the contemplation of God and eternal bliss, and that the help of supernatural revelation is needed here.

The Scholastics honored the ancient philosophers as people who had reached the pinnacle of natural knowledge, but this does not mean that the philosophers have exhausted all the truth possible for man: the advantage of theology over philosophy lies both in the fact that it has the highest principle of knowledge, and in the fact that it possesses higher truths, which the mind cannot reach by itself. These revealed truths among the scholastics actually constituted the essential content of their systems, while philosophy served only as an auxiliary means for the tasks of theology. That is why they said that philosophy is the servant of theology (lat. ancilla theologiae). She was such a servant in two respects: firstly, she gave theology a scientific form; secondly, from it theology extracted those truths of reason on the basis of which it could rise to the speculative understanding of Christian mysteries, as far as it is generally accessible to the human spirit. At the beginning of the scholastic period, philosophical thought was not yet in slavish subordination to church teaching. So, although Eriugena claims that all our research should begin with faith in revealed truth, in the interpretation of which we must completely submit ourselves to the guidance of the fathers, he does not agree to understand true religion simply as a teaching sanctioned by authority and in the event of a conflict between authority and by reason prefers the latter; opponents reproached him for disrespect for church authority. And after Eriugena, the agreement of reason with the teachings of the church was achieved only gradually. Since the middle of the 13th century, this agreement has been firmly substantiated, with the limitation, however, that specifically Christian dogmas (trinity, incarnation, etc.) are excluded from the field of provable reason. Gradually (mainly by the time of the resumption of nominalism in the 14th century), the circle of theological propositions provable by reason narrows more and more, until finally the place of the scholastic assumption of the conformity of church teaching with reason is replaced by the complete separation of school philosophy (Aristotelian) from the Christian faith.

The view of philosophy as the servant of theology, although not strictly carried out by all scholastics, nevertheless expressed, one might say, the dominant trend of the times. The tone and direction of all spiritual life in the Middle Ages was given by the church. It is natural that philosophy at this time also takes a theological direction and its fate is associated with the fate of the hierarchy: with the rise of the latter, it reaches its highest flowering, with its fall, it falls. From this historians deduce some other features of scholastic philosophy.

Institutions of a practical character must be a strictly organized system: this is one of the conditions for their prosperity. Therefore, the Catholic hierarchy, during its gradual rise, was concerned about assembling into a system of canonical rules, which should underlie its structure. Such a systematic striving is also reflected in the philosophy of the Middle Ages, which also strives for a system and, in place of the experiments of fragmented, more or less random patristic philosophizing, gives a number of more or less integral systems. This is especially evident in the flourishing time of scholasticism, when the theological and philosophical systems of Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus appear.

The attention of the scholastics, therefore, should already have been directed in this direction, because from the previous time, material was provided at their disposal that required not critical discussion and not apologetic-polemical work, but only systematization: these were generally established provisions of the church faith, which had to be subjected to formal processing. using available philosophical methods. This also explains another feature of scholastic philosophy: its attraction to form, to the formal processing of concepts, to the construction of formal conclusions. Scholasticism is often reproached for excessive, empty formalism. These accusations are not without foundation; but it must be borne in mind that such a formalism was inevitable. In other times, thought faced the richness and variety of experimental content; on the contrary, the material on which scholastic philosophy operated was limited, and the fresh mental strength of the new peoples had to find its outlet in intensified formal work.

The general task was to assimilate the monuments of philosophical thought received from the ancient world and apply them to the needs of the time. The philosophical teachings of antiquity gradually became the property of the Middle Ages; at first, only meager passages were known of them. At first, therefore, the task was to fill in the gaps in philosophical tradition, and then it was necessary to agree on the philosophical authorities of antiquity, which did not always agree with each other. It was necessary, moreover, to apply philosophy to theology, to determine and substantiate the relation of reason to faith, to find a reasonable explanation for the truths of faith, and in the end to create a philosophical and theological system. All this prompted medieval thought mainly to formal work, although, of course, it also led it to new material conclusions, why in the philosophizing of the scholastics it is unfair to see only one repetition in different ways of what was said by Augustine and Aristotle.

The spiritual and secular estates during the Middle Ages differed from each other in life, and in views, and in interests, and even in language: the spiritual used the Latin language, the laity spoke the language of the people. Of course, the Church has always been animated by the desire to introduce its principles and views to the masses of the people; but until this desire was realized - and it is completely impossible to realize it - the discord between the secular and the spiritual continued to exist. Everything worldly seemed to the spiritual, if not hostile, then lower, alien. Therefore, the content of scholastic philosophy almost did not include problems of a natural philosophical nature; for her, a general, metaphysical consideration of questions about the world seemed sufficient; her attention was directed to the Divine and the mysteries of salvation, as well as to the moral being of man; her ethics, which proceeded from the opposition of earthly and heavenly life, the heavenly and earthly worlds, also harmonized with the general detachment from the worldly and the earthly and the attraction to the heavenly.

The same discord between the secular and the spiritual is also found in the language. If science, almost exclusively taught in Latin, was the property of the clergy, then poetry - precisely in that which was most vital in it - belonged to the laity. Just as the influence of scientific thinking does not reflect on the poetic art of the Middle Ages, which is why it is too fantastical, so the scientific presentation during this time is devoid of any sensually visual imagery: it has no taste, no fantasy, no artistry of form; artificiality and dryness prevail, along with the corruption of classical Latin.

Scholastic view of science

In an effort to make theology a science, the scholastics raised the question not only of how science could be, but also of why it should be? In cognition it is necessary to distinguish between its content and activity. Among the scholastics, this distinction stood firm because they found an analogy to it in faith, where the objective side differs (Lat. fides quae creditur) and subjective (lat. fides qua creditur). The content of the Christian faith is unchanging, while the act of believing and the ways of perceiving its content change according to the diversity of believers. Scripture calls the content of faith the substance ( ὑπόστασις , Heb. XI, 1), and this definition proved fruitful for the scholastic doctrine of science.

“Substance,” says Thomas, “means the first principle of every thing, especially in the case where the latter is potentially contained in the first principle and from it completely proceeds; we say, for example, that the first unprovable principles form the substance of science, because they are in we are the very first element of this science, and they potentially contain all science.In this sense, faith also means the substance of "things that are trusted."

The similarity between science and faith lies, therefore, in the organic structure of both, in the growth of both of them from the germs of thought. The known and the knowing spirit are mutually subordinate to each other. In the latter lie the germs that develop in contact with the content of knowledge. Science receives its realization if the spirit is likened to the content of knowledge, or, what is the same, if the seal of the spirit is imprinted on the latter ( scientia est assimilatio scientis ad rem scitam, scientia est sigillatio scibilis in intellectu scientis). The Scholastics see the last foundation of such agreement between thinking and the conceivable in the ideas that are in the mind of God: ideas in God are the last foundation of everything cognizable; universalia ante rem - the assumption of universalia in re; the highest view of the fundamental sciences is given in the sunshine of divine truth.

Therefore, the subject matter of science is not things as separate, sensuous, changeable things, but the general and necessary in things. Knowledge of the individual, as given by sense perception, has its significance not in itself, but only for the sake of practical needs. Another conclusion from this concept of science is that although science is directed towards the general, its object is not general concepts in themselves, but things that are thought through them: only logic is an exception here. Such definitions provide science with its real content. However, this can only be said about that direction of medieval thought, which is called realism: scholastic realism precisely understands the general as really existing in things, while another, opposite to it direction - nominalism - puts only concepts, words and names as the content of knowledge.

The third consequence is that there are many sciences, since there are many things that can be their subject. Scholastics attached moral significance not only to knowledge of the individual as a condition of private actions, but also to science as a whole, and thus thought to give an answer to the question why science should exist. Here the guiding thread was given first of all by the idea of ​​wisdom: he who knows must become wise; the habitus scientiae which he has acquired must rise into the habitus sapientiae; ratio inferior, which is formed by science, must go into ratio superior. He who knows via inquisitionis goes from below upwards; it embraces the various genera scibilum and touches only on the much and the conventional. The sage, possessing the highest principles, via judicii goes from top to bottom, embracing everything with a whole look from the point of view of the unconditional. The specific object of science is human things, the object of wisdom is divine things.

Science is content to set its subject firmly; wisdom goes further - to judging and distributing everything else according to its subject. Insofar as the intellect seeks the understanding of things attained in the habitus sapientiae for the sake of this understanding in itself, it is intellectus speculativus; inasmuch as it gives knowledge a further purpose in relation to certain acts performed by the will, it is called the intellectus practicus. The aim of the first is truth; the purpose of the latter is good. The first has a norm - the law of contradiction: nothing can be both true and false; the norm of the second is to follow the good and avoid evil.

As there is a double light of knowledge, natural and supernatural, so there is a double habitus of the intellect - science and wisdom. The first state is virtue and is achieved by self-activity, the second is a God-given state of grace. Three virtues - reason, science and wisdom - correspond to the same number of gifts of grace. Wisdom as a virtue leads to a right understanding of divine things, as far as this is achieved by research; wisdom as a gift of the Holy Spirit gives us the highest understanding of the same things that then not only become objects of understanding for the sage, but so capture him by virtue of inner affinity that divina discere - to study the divine - rises to divina pati - to experience the divine. The knowledge that science has would be incomplete without an elevation to divine things, but it would also not be complete without contact with active life. Knowledge must be ordering and governing in life, in order to finally return again to its own element - to contemplation.

This ideal of wisdom, remarks Willman (Geschichte des Idealismus, vol. II, 407), did not stand among the scholastics in an unattainable height above scientific activity; rather, the latter had in itself something of wisdom. Respect for church tradition, which dominates the teaching of piety, the connection of the school with the church, which ruled and ordered as much as it indulged in contemplation, always seemed to be an ideal for the teacher and researcher and encouraged him to always do business as wisdom requires, that is, to keep in mind whole and supreme and to maintain the connection of truth with good. Both knowledge and its content are ethical in nature.

Known is true, true is good. The sciences are arts in the broadest sense, and all art is directed to the good; the content of science is bonum intellectus. The sciences are good; possession of them obliges to share them. Virtue is to give bread to the hungry, and to teach the ignorant with the word of wisdom. Teaching and learning is a moral activity. You can learn on the basis of already existing knowledge; hence the requirement from the teacher - to go from easy to more difficult. The art of learning must adhere to nature, like all art; the sciences must be studied according to the method by which they are invented, that is, according to the method of nature. The attitude towards wisdom gives science among the scholastics a unity, which at the same time is dissected in itself. The system of sciences has a hierarchical structure; the higher determines and illuminates the lower, the members are together and steps. This system was most clearly presented by Bonaventure in his short but thoughtful work "De reductione artium ad theologiam". It comes from the words of St. James: “every gift is good and every gift is perfect from above come from the Father of Lights” (James I, 17) - and develops the idea of ​​a multitude of lights, sources of light or ways of enlightenment.

Already in the sensible world there are two such sources of light that illuminate our life: one produces its beneficial effect if we act on things, exercise our artistic abilities on them - from which come the mechanical arts, to which Bonaventura, adjoining Hugh S. - Victor, refers to the art of weaving, blacksmithing, agriculture, hunting, navigation, eloquence (including poetry). The second source of light of the sensible world is formed by things insofar as they act on us, produce sensible knowledge and show us the forms realized in nature.

These sources of light are the outer light and the lower light; what they deliver has only a preparatory value; a purer light comes to us from within, an inner light in which we see through reason the truth of things; it is the light of science in the narrow sense, the light of philosophical knowledge. But above the light of reason is the truth of salvation; above the inner light stands the upper light, the light of grace and Holy Scripture, enlightening by the contemplation of salvific truth. In it, we learn the meaning and purpose of enlightenment flowing from other sources of light. Scripture provides us with a triple kind of enlightenment: first of all, faith - faith in the eternal birth of the Word and its incarnation in time; then - behavior or way of life; finally, the goal of both is eternal bliss, growing out of faith and works. Faith is the realm of the teachers, Augustine and Anselm; behavior and morals are the work of preachers, Gregory the Great and Bernard; the last target with its mysteries is the work of the contemplatives, Dionysius and Richard S. Victor.

Scripture speaks to us in three ways: through its speech (sermo), through its teaching (doctrina), and through its commandments that govern our lives (vita). "The manifold wisdom of God, as it is clearly communicated to us in Scripture, lies secretly at the basis of all knowledge and nature." The trinity of speech, teaching and commandment gives the division of science or philosophy; the truth of the mind is threefold - the truth of speeches, the truth of things and the truth of morals. Three branches of philosophy are directed to these three areas of truth: philosophia rationalis, philosophia naturalis and philosophia moralis: the first explores the cause of knowledge (causa intelligendi), the second - the reason for existence (causa subsistendi), the third - the order of life (ordo vitae). Rational philosophy is directed to the truth of speeches. But every speech serves a threefold purpose: to express a thought, to promote its assimilation by others and to persuade them to something: it means exprimere, docere, movere, and therefore it must be appropriate, true and effective - which determines the task of the three departments of rational philosophy : grammar, logic and rhetoric. If we characterize these three sciences with the words: word (verbum), order (ordo) and form (species), then they will reveal a trace of the threefold enlightenment of Scripture, since in the spoken word there is a spiritual birth and incarnation, in the strictness of the formation of thoughts something corresponding to moral education is given. and the beautiful form of true thought brings spiritual bliss.

Natural philosophy (naturalis) seeks the truth of things and finds it in the mental forms of things (rationes formales); it finds them in matter, as reason in the seed (rationes seminales) or as natural forces (virtutes naturales), in the spirit as rational foundations (rationes intellectuales), in God as ideal foundations (rationes ideales). Accordingly, it is divided into physics, which considers things in their origin and destruction, mathematics, which investigates abstract forms, and metaphysics, which considers the being in itself and reduces it to God as its Cause, ultimate Goal and Prototype. Here, too, Bonaventure finds an analogy with the Trinity of Scripture: the birth of a formative thought, the law of its action, and the striving for a satisfying final goal. Philosophy moral (philosophia moralis) treats the truth of life or the correctness of the will. It establishes this correctness for three areas: for the life of an individual, for family life and for social life, and is therefore divided into monastica, oeconomica and politica. A complete picture of moral philosophy is acquired if one pays attention to the three meanings of the word "rectum": it means partly the agreement of the middle with the ends (rectum, cujus medium non exit ab extremis), partly the norm to which the one who directs himself conforms ( rectum quod dirigenti se conformatur) and, finally, upward directed (rectum, cujus summitas est sursum erecta), are definitions in which we can see the harmonious nature of morality, the binding and restraining nature of the moral law and its elevation above the earthly.

Bonaventure in the rectitudo in the first sense sees an indication of that higher unanimity that is given to us in the mystery of the Trinity, the central point of faith, and finds in its normalizing nature the order of life, in its upward direction - an indication of transfiguration in bliss. And in the enlightenment that the sensory world provides us with, partly as a field of artistic creativity, partly as the basis of knowledge, Bonaventure finds an analogy with dogmatic, moral and mystical learning through Scripture. In art there is a birth from the spirit of the artist, mediated by his conception, and to this extent artistic creativity serves, albeit a weak, likeness of the birth of the Eternal Word; then, in art there is a norm that reveals its disciplinary effect on the generated work - similar to the regulation of behavior through the ordo vivendi, and this norm requires all the spiritual forces of the artist at its service; finally, here, too, pleasure and bliss are the last moment: the artist rejoices in his work, the work praises him, serves him, and if he had consciousness, he would feel happy. The same analogy is observed in sensory cognition.

Thus, from this point of view, the enlightenment of the soul by the divine wisdom of Scripture is not only the completion of cognition, but at the same time the archetype of all levels of cognition. Due to the habitation of the higher in the lower, what happens is that the Holy. Scripture borrows its expressions from all areas of knowledge, for God is present in all. Just as the Scholastics subordinated science to wisdom, philosophy to theology, so they subordinated individual sciences to philosophy as their head. Due to the hierarchical structure of S., philosophy, like that of the ancients, is turned into a guide for research aimed at individual areas of knowledge; it has the full capacity for this because of its attraction to wisdom, its strictly defined concept of truth, its ideal principles and its internal unity.

Scholastic metaphysics

Representing a religious philosophy, scholasticism had the driving nerve of its development in the needs of theological thought, for which philosophizing was a service tool. Naturally, the development of philosophy went along with the development of theology; and just as theological thought could succeed in its movement on the basis of what had already been achieved by the labors of previous centuries, so philosophical thought flourishes the more and the more versatile services it renders to theology, the more it becomes aware of the teachings of the great philosophers of antiquity - Plato and Aristotle, already in the patristic age. recognized as the bearers of all knowledge available to the natural human mind.

This is especially clearly revealed in the development of scholastic metaphysics. At first, it receives an original and at the same time one-sided direction. From the beginning of the Middle Ages until almost the middle of the 12th century, of all the writings of Plato, only Timaeus was known in the translation of Chalcidia; at other points the teaching of Plato was known only in a mediocre way, since it was included in the circle of thought of the fathers, especially Augustine; the third book of the work of Apuleius was also known: "De dogmate Platonis". From the writings of Aristotle, "Categoriae" and "De interpretatione" in the Latin translation of Boethius were known. In addition, they introduced Aristotle's logical teaching: Porphyry's introduction to these writings of Aristotle, also in translations by Boethius and Victorinus, then the works of Marcianus Capella, Augustine, Pseudo-Augustine, Cassiodorus and several interpretive treatises of Boethius to Aristotle and Porphyry. Of the logical works of Aristotle, both "Analyticae", "Topica" and "De sophisticis elenchis" were not known, and not a single one of the works relating to other areas of philosophy.

It is clear that with such a paucity of basic preliminary information, the development of philosophy in scholasticism begins in a peculiar way: almost until the 13th century, logic, or dialectics, plays the role of metaphysics. Before the beginning of scholasticism, dialectics occupied a secondary place among the seven subjects taught at school, as knowledge preparatory to others, dealing more with words than with things; since the advent of scholasticism, it has taken first place. Because of it, they began to neglect all other "free arts", in it they looked for principles for the latter. The reason for this was that, in the absence of any kind of metaphysics, the scientific solution of metaphysical questions began to be sought in the field of the seven school sciences known at that time, and here, naturally, they had to stop at logic, or dialectics, as a science of a philosophical nature; from it they began to extract metaphysical principles.

Thus the field of this science expanded, which at first dealt only with the definition of words, and then captured the solution of all metaphysical questions and became the science of sciences and the art of arts. Proceeding from the idea that every proposition constructed according to logical rules is true, during this transformation of dialectics into metaphysics, people usually acted in such a way that things were understood by words, and simple conjectures were raised to the level of unshakable truths. As a result, the name "logic" in the sense of "philosopher" extended until the end of the 12th century to all the followers of Plato and Aristotle. In the thirteenth century, when Aristotle's metaphysics became known, Albertus Magnus again restored the ancient distinction between dialectics and metaphysics: if dialectics still left the solution of ontological questions to be conjectured, it was nevertheless considered a science only preparatory to the knowledge of truth. Thomas Aquinas and his followers held the same view.

Duns Scotus, at the end of the thirteenth century, again rejected this distinction and restored to logic the rights that were not proper to it. Until the end of the 12th century, the matter of philosophizing was usually put in such a way that some questions were asked, which, apparently, logic should give a decisive answer - and immediately, without hesitation, they hurried to state all the points and all the details of their doctrine, on the basis of precisely logical speculations. . In the didactic types, the presentation was grouped around one main problem. Such a problem, if not containing all the others, then concerning them, was given to scholasticism in the form of the problem of universals, or general concepts. This difficult problem was presented to the mind of Aristotle.

The first scholastics found it in the introduction of Porphyry translated by Boethius, more precisely, in the preface to this introduction. Here Porfiry points out three difficult questions which he himself refuses to solve:

1. Do genera and species exist in reality or only in thought?
2. if we assume that they really exist, are they corporeal or incorporeal?
3. and do they exist apart from sensible things, or in the things themselves?

These three questions have troubled scholastics for nearly six centuries. They could not put aside their decision, as Porphyry did, because the problem of genera and species contained many other important problems. For the scholastics, this problem was of particular importance because, having no special subject for metaphysics, they filled this part of their philosophy with its solution. Representatives of this or that solution to the problem of general concepts bore different names among the scholastics: realists were those who attributed to these concepts real being, isolated and preceding things (universalia ante rem; however, this is extreme realism; moderate realism pursued the Aristotelian view that the general, although it has real being, but in individuals there is universalia in re); nominalists - those who taught that only individuals have a real being, and genera and species are only subjective generalizations of similar things, made through equal concepts (conceptus) and identical words.

Since nominalism strikes at the subjectivity of concepts, through which we think of homogeneous objects, it is called conceptualism, and inasmuch as it strikes at the sameness of words, with which, due to the lack of proper names, we designate a set of homogeneous objects, it is called extreme nominalism, or nominalism in the narrow sense. Its formula is universalia post rem. These main directions on the question of universals exist, partly in the bud, partly in some development, already in the 9th and 10th centuries, but their full disclosure, their dialectical substantiation, mutual controversy, as well as the appearance of various possible modifications of them belongs to the subsequent time. The question of universals, in addition to its general scientific significance, was important for scholasticism because its solution was in close connection with certain doctrinal provisions.

Thus, for example, the doctrine of the Trinity of persons in the one God, under the nominalistic theory, passed into the doctrine of tritheism. If there is only the individual, and not the general, the nominalist Roscellinus taught, then the three Persons in God must be recognized as three Gods and the reality of their unity should be rejected. Naturally, the church should have reacted negatively to the nominalistic view. “If the church in this dispute,” notes Erdmann (“Grundriss d. Geschichte d. Philosophie”, 1866, I, 265), “not only condemned dogmatic heresy, but at the same time spoke out against metaphysical principles, ... then this came out of a perfectly correct view: who gives more reality to things than to ideas, he is more attached to this world than to the ideal heavenly kingdom.

Such were the first steps of scholastic metaphysics. Its further development in the XIII century is already under the influence of acquaintance with all the writings of Aristotle; scholasticism at this time reaches its peak. However, even now the development of metaphysics is carried out not only on the basis of the newly discovered writings of Aristotle: the metaphysical views of Augustine, the ontological elements in the Areopagite writings and Platonic ideas also had significance as strongholds.

The ontology of the scholastics in their understanding of ideas is from the beginning independent in relation to Aristotle. Alexander Gales dismisses quite expressly Aristotle's objections to Plato's ideas. Alexander himself accepts the four principles of Aristotle, but calls the principle of form: causa exemplaris sive idealis. Albertus Magnus writes a treatise "De erroribus Aristotelis"; Thomas Aquinas condemns Aristotle's controversy against Plato's search for the inner meaning of words; Bonaventure speaks of the Egyptian darkness into which Aristotle plunged as a result of the rejection of ideas.

At this time, the metaphysics of the scholastics no less reveals its vitality by overcoming those tares with which the monistically directed Arab philosophy threatened to fill everything. Averroes reduces the activity of the highest principle - form - to a simple separation of forms lying in matter, so that for him creation is only evolution; at the same time, he understands the passive mind as one susceptibility found from eternity in individual human spirits, and the active one as the outflow of divine mind poured into the world, which enlightens the passive or receptive mind. Albert and Thomas persistently refute this doctrine, and they bring to the scene a correctly understood Aristotle in place of a falsely interpreted one and clearly indicate the metaphysical side of the issue raised. This creative epoch, which made theology a science, is at the same time the period of the domination of metaphysics. The latter is not taught in textbooks, but partly acts as an introductory part of the "Sums", partly forms the subject of short essays. Both "Sums" of Thomas - philosophical and theological - are arranged in such a way that the basic concepts of ontology go hand in hand with the content of rational theology. His Quaestiones disputatae also deals with metaphysical subjects. The treatise "De potentia" explains the ancient problem - how one can become many - which formed the nerve of Indian speculation and which Heraclitus, Parmenides and other Greek philosophers were also busy with. Thomas' teacher, Albert, also dealt with this problem, but with less scientific success than his great student.

General view of the movement of medieval thought

The history of scholastic philosophy is most conveniently divided into two periods: the first from the 9th to the beginning of the 13th century - the period of beginning scholasticism, or the application of Aristotelian logic and Neoplatonic philosophers to church teaching; the second, from the beginning of the XIII century. until the end of the Middle Ages - the period of full development and wide dissemination of scholasticism, or the application to church dogma of Aristotelian philosophy, which has since become known in its entirety. Usually, the beginning of scholastic philosophy is seen in that peculiar and bold reworking of ancient (closest of all, Neoplatonic) views, which he gave in the middle of the 9th century. John Scotus Eriugena.

Its first section, extending to the middle of the 12th century, is characterized by the predominance of Platonism; this is due to the influence of Augustine, which finds its completion in Bernard of Chartres. Along with this, through the medium of Arab and Jewish philosophers, Neo-Platonic influences come out, most clearly found in the monistic teachings of Amalrich of Bensky and David of Dinant. The turning point is the expansion of acquaintance with Aristotelian writings, for which scholasticism owes partly to the Arabs. John of Salisbury, about 1159, knows the entire Organon; about 1200 a translation of the Metaphysics arrives from Constantinople in the West, but the interpretation of the Aristotelian teaching in a monistic sense (in which some followed the Arabs) makes it suspicious in the eyes of the church. Pope Gregory IX in 1231 directs Aristotle's libri naturales to be excluded from school use until they have been examined and cleansed of all suspicion of error.

This causes a more cautious attitude towards the works of Aristotle, which had become famous not long before, but already about the middle of the 13th century. Aristotelianism finds a favorable reception among Christian philosophers; at the same time, a broader assimilation of ancient methods of thought takes place, and the flourishing period of scholasticism begins. The decline of speculative thought and scholasticism begins in the 14th century.

However, it should not be assumed that the very existence of scholasticism, its prosperity and decline depended only on a greater or lesser stock of works of ancient philosophy and that the Christian philosophy of the Middle Ages stood in slavish dependence on the ancients (especially on Aristotle), who, moreover, were insufficiently understood. Like the patrists, the scholastics looked to the ancient philosophers primarily for confirmation of Christian truth; like the patristics, the inner agreement of the ancient philosophers with Christian views forced them to adjoin one or another philosopher.

Plato, despite some views alien to faith, stood high among them because he taught about the existence of God, distinguished between eternity and time, ideas and matter, called the mind - the eye, truth - the light of the spirit, knowledge - vision and firmly established what is available to knowledge created mind. Aristotle attracted scholastics because of the similarity they noticed between his organic worldview and the Christian understanding of life and spirit; they found in his teaching on the existence of God and divine attributes closeness to the teaching of Scripture, in his view that the soul is the form of the body, a speculative expression of biblical anthropology. Everything that from Aristotelian philosophy penetrated into the ancient Christian way of thinking, therefore, also receives its development among the scholastics. At the same time, they appreciated in Aristotle a man of universal thought and a broad outlook, they saw in him a representative of that knowledge that is achieved by the natural efforts of the mind, but with all the greater clarity makes it clear the specific feature and height of faith.

John of Salisbury, noting the merits of both ancient philosophers, adds, however, that complete knowledge, true philosophy, is possible only with faith, without which the ancient thinkers fell into error. Thus, the relation of medieval speculation to ancient speculation, with all the significance that the latter had, cannot be given exclusive significance in the history of the development of scholasticism; other internal factors must also be taken into account. The teachers of the church in the eyes of the scholastics had to stand higher than the heads of the academy and lyceum. Therefore, not without reason, the beginning of scholasticism can be attributed not to the philosophy of the Western thinker of the 9th century. I. S. Erigena, and to the theology of the Greek monk of the VIII century. St. John of Damascus. His work "Πηγή γνώσεως" ("Source of Knowledge") provides a compendium of patristic theology, with an introductory philosophical chapter, and philosophy directly acts as a service tool of theology.

Actually, the leader of ancient scholasticism, when the need arose to give the content of faith a rational and systematic form, was Augustine. Scholastics were looking for theology as a science that would combine all the elements of religion: positive, speculative and mystical. The first step towards this goal is associated with the name of Anselm of Canterbury (d. 1109); his proofs of the existence of God lay the foundation for rational theology. The twelfth century brings with it, on the one hand, i.e. e. "Summae", compendiums of the positive content of dogma, on the other hand, mystical aspirations, which are especially found in Bernard of Clairvaux.

By the XIII century. refers in the proper sense to the foundation of theology as a science. Alexander Gales († 1245) also gives his “Summa” the form of a commentary on the Maxims of Peter Lombard, but at the same time raises general methodological questions: is the sacra disciplina necessary, is it one, does it have a practical or theoretical character, what is its subject, how to express it. Theology for him is wisdom aimed at improving the heart, and not at improving knowledge, like metaphysics or philosophia prima. Albertus Magnus goes further: he finds that it is wisdom that makes theology or sacra disciplina a science and makes it related to philosophy.

Thomas Aquinas, finally, proves the necessity of wisdom based on faith and completing all temporarily achievable knowledge; it is philosophia prima, a pre-perception, however imperfect, of eternal contemplation. Here the influence of Aristotelian concepts is felt, but the guiding thoughts go beyond the boundaries of ancient speculation. In order to maintain the height reached, not only scientific zeal was required, but also the constant agreement of the elements of religion, which constitute the preliminary condition for such a soaring thought. The scientific world failed to maintain this agreement and under the influence of the spirit of the times in the XIV and XV centuries. partly sank down, partly deviated to the side. Positive theology, mysticism, and dialectics became isolated from each other, the highest points of view were abandoned, the speculative force was so lulled into sleep that nominalism, which could easily have been defeated in the period of the beginning of scholasticism, now gained the upper hand.

Medieval scholasticism was divided into two lines of thought: one, without showing creativity, faithfully preserved the acquisitions of the flourishing period - the other showed signs of self-decomposition. In addition to the internal cause of the fall of scholasticism, there were other factors that contributed to it - the arousal of interest in the study of nature and the revival of the knowledge of antiquity. Both the one and the other should have been favored by the intensified from the 13th century. study of Aristotelian philosophy. The theological character of education still dominated the school; all institutions whose influence was reflected in the direction of the minds were under the jurisdiction of the church: only because scholasticism was disintegrating in itself, could another direction prevail. The disintegration of scholasticism was revealed in the 14th century, in the solution of the old philosophical question of universals. Until the XIV century. realism dominated; now the preponderance is shifting to the side of nominalism.

Arguing that in general concepts we cognize not the true being of things and not the true thoughts of God, but only subjective abstractions, words and signs, nominalism denied any meaning behind philosophy, which, from its point of view, is only the art of linking these signs into positions and conclusions. It cannot judge the correctness of the propositions themselves; knowledge of true things, individuals, it cannot deliver. This teaching, fundamentally skeptical, drew a gulf between theology and secular science. Every worldly thought is vanity; it deals with the sensible, but the sensible is only an appearance. Only the inspired mind of theology teaches true principles; only through him do we learn to know God, who is the individual and at the same time the common ground of all things and therefore exists in all things. This is contrary to the principle of secular science, according to which no thing can be simultaneously in many things; but we know it by revelation, we must believe it.

Thus, two truths, natural and supernatural, are placed in the sharpest contrast with one another: one knows only phenomena, the other knows their supernatural foundations. Theology is a practical science; it teaches us the commandments of God, opens the way to the salvation of the soul. And just as spiritual and worldly science differ deeply, so must worldly and spiritual life be separated. The most ardent nominalist, William of Ockham, belonged to the strictest Franciscans, who, having taken a vow of poverty, did not put up with the modus operandi of papal power. The truly spiritual must renounce all worldly possessions, because he regards the phenomena of sensual life as nothing. The hierarchy must therefore renounce temporal power: the worldly and spiritual kingdoms must be separated; their confusion leads to disasters. The spiritual realm has precedence over the worldly, just as truth has precedence over manifestation.

The doctrine of the spiritual and secular state is brought here to extreme limits, after which a turn had to follow, since the complete separation of spiritual and secular power is incompatible with the concept of hierarchy. Nominalism could not become a general view, but it achieved wide distribution, attracted mysticism, akin to it in its disgust for worldly fuss, and shook scholastic systems in a dispute with realism. He turned the systematic trend of medieval philosophy into a polemical one. The dispute between nominalists and realists was not carried out consistently and did not produce fruitful results: excommunications took the place of arguments. The nominalism of the Middle Ages had only a negative meaning for philosophy. He separated scientific research from theology, because he rejected the secular sciences of any significance for the spiritual life. Under his influence in the XIV table. the Faculty of Philosophy, in its search for truth, not only separated by name from the theological. Philosophical research has gained more freedom, but lost in content. The formalism with which scholasticism is reproached is now indeed the predominant one in a philosophy which is occupied almost exclusively with logical forms. Here lie the beginnings of religious indifference in the development of secular science; it rests on the principle of separating the spiritual and the secular realm.

History of scholastic philosophy

periodization

1. Early scholasticism (-XII century), which still stood on the basis of indivisibility, interpenetration of science, philosophy, and theology, is characterized by the formation of the scholastic method in connection with the understanding of the specific value and specific results of the activity of the mind and in connection with the dispute about universals. The main representatives of scholasticism: in Germany - Raban Moor, Notker German, Hugo Saint-Victorian; in England - Alcuin, John Scot Eriugena, Adelard from Bath; in France, John of Roscelin, Pierre Abelard, Gilbert of Porretan, John of Salisbury, Bernard of Chartres, Amalric of Ben; in Italy - Peter Damiani, Anselm of Canterbury, Bonaventure.
2. Middle scholasticism (XIII century) is characterized by the final separation of science and philosophy (especially natural philosophy) from theology, as well as the introduction into Western philosophical thinking of the teachings of Aristotle (see European Philosophy), which, however, was available only in Latin translation. The philosophy of the great orders is being formed, especially the Franciscan and Dominican, as well as the systems of Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus. This was followed by a dispute between the supporters of Augustine, Aristotle and Averroes, a dispute between Thomists and Scotists. It was the time of the great philosophical and theological encyclopedias. Other main representatives of scholasticism: in Germany - Witelo, Dietrich of Freiberg, Ulrich Engelbert; in France, Vincent of Beauvais, John of Zhandun; in England - Roger Bacon, Robert Grosseteste, Alexander of Gaels; in Italy, Aegidius of Rome; in Spain, Raymond Lull.
3. Late scholasticism (XIV and XV centuries) is characterized by rationalistic systematization (thanks to which scholasticism received a negative meaning), the further formation of natural-scientific and natural-philosophical thinking, the development of logic and metaphysics of the irrationalist direction, and finally, the final dissociation of mysticism from church theology, which became more and more intolerant. When at the beginning In the 14th century, the church had already finally given preference to Thomism, and scholasticism from the religious side became the history of Thomism. The main representatives of late scholasticism: in Germany - Albert of Saxony, Nicholas of Cusa; in France - Jean Buridan, Nicholas of Orezm, Peter d'Aily, Nicholas from Otrecourt; in England, William of Ockham; in Italy, Dante; in Spain, the School of Salamanca. During the period of humanism, the Renaissance, the Reformation, scholasticism ceased to be the only spiritual form of Western science and philosophy. Neoscholasticism defends the primacy of Christian philosophy. Scholastically and - corresponding to the method of scholasticism; in a negative sense - cunning, purely rational, speculative.

Start

The earliest philosopher of the scholastic time is John Scotus Eriugena, who lived in the 9th century and expounded his philosophy mainly in the essay "De divisione naturae". In his philosophical views, he adjoins Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, whose works he translated into Latin, as well as his commentator Maximus the Confessor, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa and other Greek teachers of the church, as well as to Latin ones, namely to Augustine. True philosophy, according to Erigene, is identical with true religion, and vice versa.

Eriugena's system, containing in itself the germs of both medieval mysticism and dialectical scholasticism, was rejected by church authorities as contrary to the true faith. The philosopher tries to understand the Christian idea of ​​creation, explaining it in the sense of the Neoplatonic doctrine of emanations. God is the highest unity; It is simple and yet versatile. Origin from Him is the multiplication of the divine good by descending from the general to the particular; after the most common essence of all things, the genera of the highest generality are formed, then the less general follows, up to species, and finally, through specific differences and properties, individuals.

This doctrine is based on the hypostasis of the general, as previously individuals, in the order of being of a really existing entity - traces, on the Platonic doctrine of ideas, as it was later expressed in the formula: universalia ante rem. However, Scott does not exclude the existence of the general in the separate, but refutes the view of the "dialectics", who, based on the works of Aristotle and Boethius, argued that the individual is a substance in the full sense, while the species and genus are substances in a secondary sense. The origin of finite beings from Deity Scott calls the process of disclosure (analysis, resolutio); it is opposed to a return to God or deification (reversio, deificatio), the reduction of an infinite multitude of individuals to genera and, finally, to the simplest unity of everything that is God; thus God is everything and everything is God. Scott adjoins Pseudodionysius in distinguishing between positive theology, which attributes positive predicates to God in a symbolic sense, and negative, which denies them from Him in the proper sense.

Realism and nominalism from the 9th to the end of the 11th century

The opinion of the “dialectics” refuted by Eriugena during and after Eriugena found numerous adherents among the Scholastics, some of whom directly defended it against the Neoplatonic theory of Eriugena, others recognized true substantiality behind the general. Some dialecticians have doubts whether the genus can be recognized as something real, material, since the general can be applied to individuals only as a predicate, and meanwhile it is impossible to allow a thing to be a predicate of another thing.

This doubt led to the assertion that genera should be recognized as words (voces) only. When solving the question of the reality of general concepts, as already mentioned above, two directions were formed: realism and nominalism. Both of these directions, partly in embryonic form, partly in some development, are found already in the 9th and 10th centuries. The school of Rabanus Maurus (d. 856 Archbishop of Mainz) holds the Aristotelian-Boethian point of view. Among its representatives, Geirik of Auxerre tended towards moderate realism. Geirik's student, Remigius of Auxerre (late 9th century), pursued a realistic trend: he taught, according to Plato, that the species and the individual exist through participation in the general; He did not abandon, however, the Boethian-Aristotelian point of view on immanence. Studies in dialectics, as well as in the liberal arts in general, continued further, in the Χ and XI centuries, but almost until the very end of the latter - without new scientific results. Among the scholastics of this time are known: Poppo (X century), Herbert (later Pope Sylvester II, † 1003), Fulbert (XI century), his student Berengar of Tours (999-1088), Hildebert (1057-1133), who were engaged in the main image. the question of the relationship of philosophy to church teaching.

In the 2nd sex. In the 11th century, some of the Scholastics began to attribute to Aristotle the view that logic deals and must deal with the correct usage of words, and that genera and species are only subjective combinations of individuals designated by the same names; the view that attributed real existence to universals began to be refuted. Thus, nominalism appeared as a direction opposite to realism. The most famous among the nominalists of this time is Roscellinus. A contemporary of Roscellinus was also his outstanding opponent - Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury. Anselm's motto (1033-1109): credo, ut intelligam (see Anselm).

Pierre Abelard (1079-1142) on the issue of universals pursued a direction alien to both the nominalistic extremes of Roscellinus and the realistic ones of Wilhelm Champeau (who considered the genus inherent in every individual in essence), but still standing closer to nominalism (see Abelard). The defenders of Christian-modified Platonism were Bernard of Chartres (born around 1070-1080), William de Comte and Adelar of Bath (both taught in the first half of the 12th century), who, however, held Aristotelian views on the knowledge of the sensory world. Among the logician defenders of realism, Walter de Mortan († 1174) and especially Gilbert Porretan, compiler of interpretations of the pseudo-Boethian "De trinitate" and "De duabus naturis in Christo" and the author of an essay on the last six categories, were important.

Abelard's pupil Peter Lombard († 1164), Magister sententiarum, compiled a textbook of theology, which for a long time served as the main source of theological teaching and dialectical clarification of theological problems. Mystical theologians such as Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153), Hugh (+ 1141) and Richard (+ 1173) S. Victor rebelled against the high reputation of dialectics and especially against its applicability to theology. The learned and elegant writer John of Salisbury († 1180), who maintained moderate realism, spoke out against one-sided dialectics and for the connection of classical education with school theology. Alan ab Insulis († 1203) wrote an exposition of theology based on the principles of reason; Amalrich of Bene († 1206) and David of Dinant († 1209) renewed the doctrines of Dionysius the Areopagite and John Erigena, making a pantheistic identification of God with the world. Alan de Insulis, David of Dinant and Amalrich of Bensk already knew some translated Arabic works.

Philosophy of Arabs and Jews

The development of scholastic philosophy from the end of the 12th century to its highest degree of flowering is due to the fact that scholastics, through the Arabs and Jews, and then the Greeks, get acquainted with the entire body of Aristotle's writings, as well as with the way of thinking of the philosophers who expounded the content of these works. . Since the decree of Justinian (529) began to persecute Neoplatonic philosophy as adversely influencing the orthodoxy of Christian theology, Aristotelian philosophy began to spread more and more. First and foremost, heretics, and then representatives of orthodoxy, used Aristotelian dialectics in theological disputes.

The Syrian Nestorian school at Edessa (later Nisibis) and the medical-philosophical school at Gandisapora were the main places of Aristotle's study; predominantly from there Aristotelian philosophy passed to the Arabs. The Syrian Monophysites also studied Aristotle. Monophysite and tritheist John Philopon and Orthodox monk St. John of Damascus were Aristotelian Christians. In the VIII and IX centuries. Philosophical pursuits are in decline, but the tradition still holds on. In the 11th century, Michael Pselus and John of Italy stood out as logicians. From the following centuries there are many comments on the writings of Aristotle, and partly of other philosophers. In the 15th century, especially after the fall of Constantinople (1453), an intensified acquaintance of the West with ancient literature began, and in the field of philosophy a struggle arose between Aristotelian scholasticism and the newly emerging Platonism.

The philosophy of the Arabs in general is Aristotelianism mixed with Neoplatonic views. Greek medical art, natural science and philosophy penetrated to the Arabs mainly in the era of the rule of the Abbasids (since 750 AD), due to the fact that Syrian Christians translated medical and then philosophical works into Syriac and Arabic from Greek. The preservation of the traditions of Greek philosophy was expressed in the fact that even now the connection of Platonism and Aristotelianism, which dominated among the last philosophers of antiquity, and the study of Aristotelian logic, which is common among Christian theologians, as a formal όργανον "a dogmatics, mattered; but due to the strict monotheism of Islam, Aristotelian metaphysics, especially its doctrine of God The most famous of the Arab philosophers in the East: Alkendi (1st half of the 9th century), even more famous as mathematician and astrologer; Alfarabi (X century), who mastered the Neoplatonic doctrine of emanations; Avicenna (XI century), who defended a purer Aristotelianism and was highly respected even by Christian scientists of the later Middle Ages as a philosopher and especially as a medical scientist; finally, Algazel (d. XII century), in the interests of the theological orthodoxy resorted to philosophical skepticism.

In the West: Avempats (XII century, Ibn Badja) and Abubazer (XII century, Ibn Tophail), who held the idea of ​​an independent gradual development of man; Averroes (Ibn Roschd, 1126-1198), famous commentator on Aristotle. Interpreting the latter's doctrine of passive and active reason, Averroes takes a pantheistic point of view, excluding individual immortality; he recognizes a single intellect common to all mankind, dismembered in individual people and again returning to itself each of its emanation, so that only in it do they become involved in immortality. The philosophy of the Jews in the Middle Ages is partly Kabbalah, partly a transformed Platonic-Aristotelian teaching. Separate Kabbalistic provisions can be attributed to the 1st century. or to the time preceding the beginning of the Christian era; they are probably connected with the secret teachings of the Essenes.

The further formation of this doctrine was significantly influenced by Greek, especially Platonic views through, perhaps, Judeo-Alexandrian religious philosophy, and later - Neoplatonic writings. Contact with alien civilizations, especially with the Persian, then with the Hellenic and Roman, later with Christianity and Mohammedanism, broadened the horizons of the Jewish people and gradually led to the destruction of national borders in the field of faith. Of the Jewish philosophers, the most significant are Saadia ben Joseph al-Fayumi (from 892 to 942), defender of the Talmud and opponent of the Karaites; a representative of the Neoplatonic trend, who lived around 1050 in Spain, Solomon Ibn-Gebirol, recognized by Christian scholastics as an Arab philosopher and cited by them under the name Avicebron; Bahia ben Joseph, author of a moral essay on the duties of the heart (end of the 11th century). A direct reaction in philosophy was produced around 1140 by the poet Judas Halevi in ​​his book Khosari, where Greek philosophy, Christian and Mohammedan theology are presented defeated by Jewish teaching.

In the middle of the twelfth century, Abraham ben David made an attempt to draw a comparison between Jewish and Aristotelian philosophy; Maimonides (Moses Maimonides, 1135-1204) undertook this task with greater success in his work: "The Guidance of the Doubters." He attributes to Aristotle unconditional authority in the knowledge of the sublunar world, while in the knowledge of the heavenly and divine he limits his views to a frank teaching. As a commentator on the Paraphrase and Commentaries of Averroes, as well as the author of his own works, Levi ben Gerson (first half of the 14th century) is known. Through the mediation of the Jews, Arabic translations of the works of Aristotle and the Aristotelians were translated into Latin, and in this way knowledge of the general Aristotelian philosophy reached the Christian scholastics, who themselves began to translate the works of Aristotle directly from Greek.

Development and distribution

Acquaintance with the writings of Aristotle, as well as with the works of Arab and Jewish philosophers based partly on Neoplatonism, partly on Aristotelianism, and with Byzantine logic, produced a significant expansion and transformation of philosophical studies among Christian scholastics. In some of these writings, especially in writings at first falsely attributed to Aristotle, but in reality owing their origin to Neoplatonism, an emanative theosophy develops. It contributed to the emergence of pantheistic doctrines adjacent to the teachings of John Scott Erigena, against which a strong ecclesiastical reaction soon arose, threatening at first to touch upon Aristotelian natural philosophy and metaphysics.

Later, when the theistic character of the actual writings of Aristotle was recognized, they began to be used against the Platonism borrowed by the early scholastics from Augustine and the Church Fathers. The first scholastic philosopher who studied the entire philosophy of Aristotle and part of the comments of the Arab philosophers and turned all this to the service of Christian theology was Alexander Gales (+ 1245); in his "Summa theologiae" he presents a syllogistic justification for church dogmas, for which he uses philosophical teachings. His creation is not the first with a similar title; there were earlier Summae, but their authors used only the logic of Aristotle, and not all of his philosophy.

William of Auvergne, Bishop Parisian († 1249), defended the Platonic doctrine of ideas and the substantiality of the human soul against Aristotle and the Arab Aristotelians; he identified the totality of ideas with the second person of the Holy Trinity. Robert, Bishop Lincoln († 1252), linked Plato's teaching with Aristotle's. Michael Scott is better known as a translator of Aristotelian writings than as an independent writer. Vincent of Beauvais († 1264) is more of an encyclopedist than a philosopher. The mystic Bonaventure († 1274), a student of Alexander Gales, preferred Plato's teaching to Aristotle's, and subordinated all human wisdom to divine enlightenment. Above popular morality, in his opinion, is the fulfillment of monastic vows and especially mystical contemplation, which gives a foretaste of future bliss. Albert Bolstaedt (1193-1280), nicknamed the Great (Albertus Magnus), or "doctor universalis" - the first scholastic who reproduced the entire Aristotelian philosophy in a systematic manner, constantly taking into account Arab commentators, and developed it in the sense of church dogma.

Introduction

aim control work is the consideration of the scholastic philosophical period that appeared in the Middle Ages.

This goal is realized in solving the following tasks:

• · Consideration of the issue of the emergence and flourishing of scholasticism, to define this term;
• · A detailed description of the main directions of scholasticism, as well as their clash, disputes about universals;
• Identification of significant personalities, followers and opponents of scholastic trends;
• · Consideration of the causes of the crisis of scholasticism.

The emergence of scholasticism and its main directions: nominalism and realism

Scholamstika (Greek uchplbufykt - scientist, Scholia - "school") is a systematic European medieval philosophy, centered around universities and representing a synthesis of Christian (Catholic) theology and Aristotle's logic.

Philosophy at the end of the 8th - beginning of the 9th century. was taught only in monastic schools, where it was studied by future priests and church ministers. The task of philosophy was not the study of reality, but the search for rational ways of proving the truth of everything that faith proclaimed. Hence the name - scholasticism.

The beginning of scholasticism falls on the 9th century, and its development continues until the end of the 15th century. It had only a religious character, the world, according to the ideas of the scholastics, does not even have an independent existence, everything exists only in relation to God.

The method of scholastic philosophy was already predetermined in its premises. This is not about finding the truth that has already been revealed, but about expounding and proving this truth through reason, i.e. philosophy. Three goals follow from this: first, with the help of reason, it is easier to penetrate into the truths of faith and thereby bring their content closer to the thinking spirit of man, the second is to give religious and theological truth a systematic form with the help of philosophical methods; the third - using philosophical arguments, to exclude criticism of holy truths. All this is nothing but the scholastic method in the broad sense of the word, in which formalism dominates.

In the narrow sense of the word, the scholastic method consists in a formally logical operation of inference from opposing theses, objections "for" and "against" by identifying differences, conclusions are drawn that serve to use this scholastic "dialectics" to confirm the speculative content of Christianity. In the same way, the study of reality is carried out in this formal-logical way and serves the needs of reproducing it in a religious way. The essence of scholastic "dialectics" is its formal reasoning about concepts, categories without consideration of their real content. Everything is subject to the authority of the Christian faith. In essence, this "dialectic" was reduced to a syllogistic judgment in which the living, concrete reality disappeared and deformed. The main purpose of scholastic philosophy was a direct merger with theology.

The founder of scholasticism is considered John Scotus Eriugena(c. 810-877), teacher at the royal court of Charles the Bald in Paris. He was a great scholar of his time, knew the Greek language (he wrote poetry in it), translated from Latin. Eriugena was from Ireland, where the texts of the Greek Church Fathers began to circulate in monastic schools.

He is one of the first to put forward the thesis that applies to all scholasticism: true religion is also true philosophy, and vice versa; the doubts raised against religion also refute philosophy. He vigorously defended the thesis that there is no contradiction between revelation and reason. The instrument of reason is dialectics, which he understands, like Plato, i.e. as the art of confronting opposing points of view in a conversation, and then overcoming the differences in order to bring out the truth. The decisive role in cognition, according to Eriugena, is played by general concepts. Singular concepts, on the contrary, exist only because they belong to species, and species to genus. This direction of philosophical reflection in the course of the further development of medieval philosophy was called realism.

Scholastic philosophical thinking focused, in essence, on two problems: on the one hand, on the dispute between nominalism and realism, on the other, on the proof of the existence of God. The philosophical basis of the dispute between realism and universalism was the question of the relationship between the general and the individual, the individual.

Realism ( from lat. realis - real, real). The extreme realists held to the Platonic doctrine of ideas; the general is the ideas that exist before and beyond individual things (ante res). Proponents of moderate realism proceeded from the Aristotelian doctrine of general gender, according to which the general really exists in things (in rebus), but in no case outside these things.

Nominalists ( from lat. nomen - name), on the contrary, did not allow the real existence of universals, the general exists only after things (post res). Adherents of the extreme wing of nominalism considered the general to be only empty, containing nothing, the "exhalation of the voice", the sound side of the word. The more moderate ones also denied the reality of the general in things, but recognized it as thoughts, concepts, names that play an important role in cognition (conceptualism).

Arguing that it is not the true being of things and not the true thoughts of God that is known in general concepts, but only subjective abstractions, words and signs, nominalism denied any meaning behind philosophy, which, from its point of view, is only the art of linking these signs into propositions and conclusions. . It cannot judge the correctness of the propositions themselves; knowledge of true things, individuals, it cannot deliver. This teaching, fundamentally skeptical, drew a gulf between theology and secular science. Every worldly thought is vanity; it deals with the sensible, but the sensible is only an appearance. Only the inspired mind of theology teaches true principles; only through him do we learn to know God, who is the individual and at the same time the common ground of all things and therefore exists in all things.

Supporters of realism were, in particular, Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas; supporters of nominalism - John Roscelinus, John Duns Scotus, William of Ockham. Pierre Abelard took a special position, arguing that universals exist in things. This position is called conceptualism.