An Aristotelian response to Renaissance humanism: Jacopo Zabarella on the nature of arts and sciences

199 Pages·1992·4.26 MB·English

by  Heikki Mikkeli

Heikki Makkeli
AN ARISTOTELIAN RESPONSE
TO RENAISSANCE
HUMANISM
Jacopo Zabarella
on the Nature of Arts and Sciences

Heikki Mikkeli
An Aristotelian Response to
Renaissance Humanism:
Jacopo Zabarella on the Nature
of Arts and Sciences
Societas Historica Finlandiae
Suomen Historiallinen Seura
Finska Historiska Samfundet
Studia Historica 41
Heikki Mikkeli
An Aristotelian Response
to Renaissance Humanism:
J
acopo Zabarella on the Nature
of Arts and Sciences
- - - - - - - SHS/Helsinki/1992
Cover: Rauno Enden
Painting: Main entrance of the University of Padua (Palazzo del Bo).
Engraving from the 17th century. Published in "I secoll d'oro
della Medicina" 1986.
The Finnish Historical Society has published this study with the
permission, granted on 24 March 1992, of Helsinki University, Faculty of
Arts.
Keywords: History of Science - Renaissance Aristotelianism - Jacopo
Zabarella
ISSN 0081-6493
ISBN 951-8915-58-X
Gummerus Ki:japaino Oy
Jyvaskyla 1992
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................ ..................... 7
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................... 9
1.1. Humanism and science ................................................. 9
1.2. Aristotelianism at Padua............................................... 12
1.3. The nature of arts and sciences .................................... 14
1.4. Jacopo Zabarella: his life and works............................. 18
2. ARTS AND SCIENCES IN ZABARELLA'S THOUGHT ....... 21
2.1. Aristotle on arts and sciences....................................... 21
2.2. Contemplative sciences and productive arts............... 25
2.3. The primacy of theoretical sciences ............................. 30
2.4. Putting sciences 4J. order............................................... 35
2.5. The perfection of natural philosophy........................... 40
3. LOGIC AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SCIENCE ........................ 45
3.1. The nature of logic ........................................................ 45
3.2. The use of logic ............................................................. 50
3.3. Rhetoric and poetry as logical disciplines................... 59
3.4. Poetry and moral instruction........................................ 67
4. THE METHODOLOGY 8F ARTS AND SCIENCES.............. 80
4.1. Orders of presentation................................................... 80
4.2. Methods of demonstration............................................ 85
4.3. Induction and the regress-method................................ 92
4.4. Sense-perception and reasoning ................................... 101
5
5. ART AND NATURE IN THE ARISTOTELIAN
TRADITION ............................................................................ 107
5.1. Aristotelian tradition: art imitates nature ............... ~ .... 107
5.2. A Renaissance dilemma: can an art compete with
nature? ........................................................................... 111
5.3. Mechanics: a mediator between art and nature ........... 119
6. THE MEDICAL TRADITION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
PADUA ..... : ............................................................. , .............. 131
6.1. From Pietro d'Abano to Leoniceno's medical
humanism ...................................................................... 131
6.2. The nature of medical knowledge: art or science? ....... 135
6.3. Anatomy as the basis of medical science ..................... 148
6.4. Zabarella's response to medical humanism ................. 159
7. ARTS AND.SCIENCES AT PADUA IN THE SIXTEENTH
CENTURY .............................................................................. 178
ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................... 182
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................... 183
INDEX OF NAMES ..................................................................... 195
6
Acknowledgments
Many individuals and several institutions have helped me on my
way. First of all, I would like to thank Professor Simo Knuuttila
who encouraged me to study Renaissance Aristotelianism.
Without his generosity in sharing his learning I would not have
been able to accomplish my task. I am also grateful for his
comments on a manuscript of this book.
I would also like to thank all those at the History Department of
the University of Helsinki who provided me with assistance and
advice, especially Professors An.to Leikola, Pfilvi Setfila and Pekka
Suvanto. During the years 1986-1987 I worked for a project lead by
Associate Professor Matti Viikari, who as my adviser has
constantly given me valuable criticism.
In 1988-1990 I had the priviledge to hold the post of research
associate of the Academy of Finland and I am grateful to the
Research Council for the Humanities for their confidence. During
the last five years the Renvall Institute of Historical Research has
kindly provided me with working facilities. I would also like to
thank Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation, Vfilno Tanner
Foundation and Finnish Cultural Fund (Pfilvi Priha Foundation)
for-their financial support.
The staffs of various. institutes and libraries in Italy and
elsewhere have promptly helped me in my studies. In particular I
wish to thank the staff of Villa Lante, the Finnish Institute in
Rome, and the staff of the Helsinki University Library whose kind
attitude made it a memorable pleasure to deal with them. I would
also like to express my gratitude to the Finnish Historical Society
for giving the permission to print this study in their series, and
especially to Rauno Enden, for bringing it into its final published
form.
7
The English language of this thesis was painstakingly corrected
by Gillian Day, MA. Due to later additions and changes, I can claim
sole responsibility for those weaknesses and errors which.remain.
It is impossible to name all friends who have helped me in the long
process of making this study. However, during the last few years
the help of Markku Pelton.en, Kari Saastamoinen and Ilkka
Turunen has been particularly valuable.
Finally, 1 would like to mention those nearest to me. My mother
Anna-Liisa and my late father Mikko taught me to love learning
and I am grateful for their encouragement and generosity.
However, my greatest debt is to my family. My wife Jaana Iso
Markku and our children, Antti and Outi, provided
companionship I needed to see me through a project that at times
seemed boundless.
Helsinki, on Easter Monday 1992
8