Renaissance Interpretations of Life in Heaven and Earth
Annual Meeting of the Renaissance Society of America • San Diego • April 4, 2013
Session 2
Chair: Hiro Hirai (Early Science and Medicine)
Julius Caesar Scaliger on Plants, Species, and the Ordained Power of God
Andreas Blank (University of Paderborn)
Julius Caesar Scaliger (1484–1558) suggests that plants can come into being even if they belong to a plant species that did not previously exist. At the same time, he holds that God could not have created a more perfect world. Does the emergence of a new species not imply that the world was not the best possible world from the beginning? I will explore a set of metaphysical ideas that could provide Scaliger with a solution to this problem: (1) his notion of a plurality of substantial forms in every living being, and (2) his notion of ordained divine power. Scaliger explains the generation of new species in terms of a development of subordinate substantial forms into dominant substantial forms. Previously existing essences of plant parts become essences of plants. In this way, Scaliger avoids positing the appearance of new essences, thus preserving the best possible world thesis.
Julius Caesar Scaliger (1484–1558) suggests that plants can come into being even if they belong to a plant species that did not previously exist. At the same time, he holds that God could not have created a more perfect world. Does the emergence of a new species not imply that the world was not the best possible world from the beginning? I will explore a set of metaphysical ideas that could provide Scaliger with a solution to this problem: (1) his notion of a plurality of substantial forms in every living being, and (2) his notion of ordained divine power. Scaliger explains the generation of new species in terms of a development of subordinate substantial forms into dominant substantial forms. Previously existing essences of plant parts become essences of plants. In this way, Scaliger avoids positing the appearance of new essences, thus preserving the best possible world thesis.
Cardano vs. Scaliger on the World-Soul
Kuni Sakamoto (University of Tokyo)
In his Timaeus, Plato presented a doctrine that posits the world as a living organism with its own soul. This idea of the World-Soul became a popular philosophical topic in the latter half of the fifteenth century, mainly due to the revival of Platonism by Marsilio Ficino (1433–99). The sixteenth century also saw many supporters of this idea. Among them was the Milanese physician Girolamo Cardano (1501–76), who assigned to the soul a pivotal place in his world-system. His idea, however, was immediately subject to criticism by another Italian physician. Julius Caesar Scaliger (1484–1558) accused him of conceiving the World-Soul in a philosophically untenable manner. Distilling the focal point of their conflict, I will illustrate the two philosophers’ contrasting viewpoints, which revolved around the question as to how many active principles should be recognized in nature.
In his Timaeus, Plato presented a doctrine that posits the world as a living organism with its own soul. This idea of the World-Soul became a popular philosophical topic in the latter half of the fifteenth century, mainly due to the revival of Platonism by Marsilio Ficino (1433–99). The sixteenth century also saw many supporters of this idea. Among them was the Milanese physician Girolamo Cardano (1501–76), who assigned to the soul a pivotal place in his world-system. His idea, however, was immediately subject to criticism by another Italian physician. Julius Caesar Scaliger (1484–1558) accused him of conceiving the World-Soul in a philosophically untenable manner. Distilling the focal point of their conflict, I will illustrate the two philosophers’ contrasting viewpoints, which revolved around the question as to how many active principles should be recognized in nature.
Chymistry, Generation, and Blasphemy: The Extended Controversy Between Daniel Sennert and Johann Freitag
Joel Klein (Indiana University)
Daniel Sennert’s (1572-1637) 1636 Hypomnemata Physica was written largely as a response to the sundry criticisms leveled by Johann Freitag (1581-1641), professor of medicine at Helmstedt and later at Groningen. The acrimonious dispute between these two professors, however, extends beyond theHypomnemata, for as I show, by as early as 1619 Sennert and Freitag clashed over the issue of alchemical palingenesis. This early conflict set the stage for later quarrels over atomism and the generation of forms, souls, and qualities, wherein Freitag accused Sennert of blasphemy, heresy, and founding a new Paracelsian sect. The religious dimension of this controversy has received little attention even though Sennert appealed directly to Lutheran theology throughout the Hypomnemata. From a study of this work, Sennert’s largely neglected correspondence, and early ephemeral dissertations, I explore some of the interactions among religion, chymistry, and natural philosophy in this controversy.
Daniel Sennert’s (1572-1637) 1636 Hypomnemata Physica was written largely as a response to the sundry criticisms leveled by Johann Freitag (1581-1641), professor of medicine at Helmstedt and later at Groningen. The acrimonious dispute between these two professors, however, extends beyond theHypomnemata, for as I show, by as early as 1619 Sennert and Freitag clashed over the issue of alchemical palingenesis. This early conflict set the stage for later quarrels over atomism and the generation of forms, souls, and qualities, wherein Freitag accused Sennert of blasphemy, heresy, and founding a new Paracelsian sect. The religious dimension of this controversy has received little attention even though Sennert appealed directly to Lutheran theology throughout the Hypomnemata. From a study of this work, Sennert’s largely neglected correspondence, and early ephemeral dissertations, I explore some of the interactions among religion, chymistry, and natural philosophy in this controversy.