Print

Aristotelianism in the 17th century

DOI
10.4324/9780415249126-DA081-1
Versions
DOI: 10.4324/9780415249126-DA081-1
Version: v1,  Published online: 1998
Retrieved March 28, 2024, from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/aristotelianism-in-the-17th-century/v-1

1. Some notable doctrines

What was taught in the schools during the seventeenth century was Aristotelian, but remains difficult to describe: probably not one of Aristotle’s doctrines was held by all early modern scholastics. Some central Aristotelian theses were discarded. For example, Théophraste Bouju, in a work whose title page announces that all of it has the authority of Aristotle, rejected the Aristotelian four elements, discarding the sphere of fire and, as a consequence, argued against the radical heterogeneity of the sub-lunary and supra-lunary spheres (Bouju 1614). However, he safeguarded the de facto immutability of the heavens. Many of the theses that became canonical with later Aristotelians, such as the doctrine of substantial forms, also found early modern critics (Maignan 1653; Fabri 1686); there were even textbook writers who proclaimed the compatibility of peripatetic philosophy and atomism (Sennert 1618; Casimir of Toulouse 1674). Thus, it would be difficult to justify the epithet ‘monolithic’, although such pejorative labels have been applied to late scholasticism from the beginning. René Descartes wrote in a letter to Mersenne dated 11 November 1640 that there is nothing that seems as improbable to him than the philosophy of the schools: he does not think it difficult to refute, ‘for one can easily upset all the foundations to which they agree and, once this is achieved, their particular disputes would appear inept’.

In fact, many Aristotelians of the seventeenth century were forward-looking, accepting the latest scientific developments including Galileo’s celestial observations (Crassot 1618; du Chevreul 1623; du Moulin 1644, and others). Their philosophy of science can be characterized as probabilistic (Eustachius 1609 III.1: 1–3; and others), and some of their doctrines provide a background against which modern philosophy developed (see §§2, 5 of this entry). With the exception of the most noted (including Francisco Suárez and, possibly, Eustachius a Sancto Paulo, studied at least for his significance for Descartes) these thinkers are now generally neglected. In the Protestant world, such scholastic writers as Franco Burgersdijk at Leiden and Bartholomaeus Keckermann at Heidelberg were widely read, gaining fame primarily as logicians. In England, philosophers such as Thomas White and Kenelm Digby demonstrated flexibility in their attempts to graft the new philosophy on to Aristotelian roots.

Print
Citing this article:
Ariew, Roger. Some notable doctrines. Aristotelianism in the 17th century, 1998, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-DA081-1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/aristotelianism-in-the-17th-century/v-1/sections/some-notable-doctrines.
Copyright © 1998-2024 Routledge.

Related Articles