Customer Reviews

A History of Philosophy, Vol. 2: Medieval Philosophy - From Augustine to Duns Scotus

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Warning: this book is not for the faint-of-heart -- or faint-of-mind! Staggeringly detailed, Copleston's history of philosophy is one of the masterworks of twentieth century scholarship, but should only be assayed by those who have done their basic work in philosophy already. As a Jesuit, this volume is perhaps the closest to Copleston's heart, given that it covers Catholic philosophy from Augustine to Thomas Aquinas (who Copleston believes is his own truest philosopher), as well as a few odds and ends of medieval philosophy. The sections on Augustine and Aquinas are still required reading for anybody wanting to understand the attempt to reconcile philosophy and theology, the primary intellectual debate of the middle ages in Europe. For many readers, the debate simply won't matter any longer, but anybody wishing to understand the medieval mind absolutely needs to read this book. Yes, your head may swim in keeping the arguments over what now seems to many to be inconsequential trivia, but the terms and arguments that Aquinas defined set the ground for many unresolved arguments to follow.

Anyone acquainted with the history of philosophy knows there is a tendency to treat Medieval philosophy as a low point between the grandeur of Greece and the radiant glow of Descartes, who salvaged philosophy from the dim ruminations of Christian theology. This theme is given notable currency in popular histories like Russell's _History of Western Philosophy_, Durant's _The Story of Philosophy_, and Gottlieb's more recent _Dream of Reason_. While these books might pay homage to Aquinas as a synthesizer of Aristotle and Catholicism, his eminent contemporaries hardly merit a sentence. Supposedly, real philosophy did not begin in earnest until it was reawakened by the "kiss of Descartes." Here Frederick Copleston, a great Jesuit scholar, seeks to remedy the damage by recreating the rich philosophical tapestry of Medievalism, a time in which philosophy hardly slept, but was full of energy and acerbic controversy.

While Christianity was definitely the philosophical template that all Medievalists began with, there was still an enormous range of conflict and disputation. Just as there is not a single issue that ensnares modern philosophy, the Medievalists were engrossed with a whole range of issues -- epistemology, politics, rationalism, and so on. A prickly controversy that the Medievalists dwelt on was the "problem of universals", an enigma that dates back to Plato and Aristotle, who each took opposing sides to the problem. On the surface the problem of universals might not seem like a problem at all, and indeed most people do not recognize it as such until they encounter it in Philosophy 101. While different formulations can be given to the problem the most succint way of presenting it is as follows: what, if anything, in extramental reality corresponds to the universal concept in the human mind? In other words, our minds (or brains) can only produce thoughts and conepts, but the world (extramental reality) is made up of particular, individual things. So what is the relationship between our thoughts and individual things, between between the intramental concept and the extramental reality? For instance, when the scientist expresses his knowledge of things he does so in abstract and universal terms, he does not make a statement about a particular atom, but atoms in general, and if the universal term has no foundation in extramental reality, his science is a social construction. This is one of the vexing issues the Medievalists tried to confront and resolve and fortunately progress was made in the area.

The crude, "exaggerated" realism of Christian Platonists, like Saint Anslem, eventually gave way to the more moderate realism of Aquinas. The extreme realists were under the impression that class-names for genera and species -- things like trees, elms, felines, cats, dogs, etc -- had a real existence -- the mental concept was indentical to extramental reality. There is a unitary nature between our minds and the world, terms had a real existence, and were not just a useful means of mental economy. Of course the brilliant dialectician Abelard exposed the nonsense behind this crude realism and paved the way for the moderate realism of Aquinas.

The existence of God, the immortality of the individual soul, the Trinity, the Resurrection and all the other facets of Christianity were accepted as self-evident by almost all Medieval philosophers. However, such theological unanimity did not guarantee philosphical unanimity. In fact, there is a great controversy throughout the Middle Ages on the proper role of reason, what role it plays in servicing theology, and what its ultimate limits are. The debate between St. Bonaventure and St. Aquinas over the existence of God and the possibility of an eternal universe highlights this admirably. While Aquinas surely thought the universe had a beginning in time, he thought reason was impotent in proving it does. Bonaventure dissents, and unleashes a series of ingenious arguments that expose the absurdity of an eternal universe. For instance, he notes that the idea of an eternal universe (one with no beginning) leads to obvious antinomies: for every solar revolution there are twelve lunar revolutions, so if the universe was infinite how could there be twelve times more lunar revolutions than solar revolutions? There can not be twelve times infinity. Also, how could we ever have arrived at this point, since that would mean we would need to pass through infinity, an impossibility. So clearly reason can establish the finite nature of the universe, and hence a contingent world requiring an infinite Creator.

This is just a sample of the issues that Copleston illuminates in this thorough, scholarly, and higly academic work. Other writers of philosophy hardly measure up to his exactness and comprehensiveness. He shows no hesitation in making short work of the often careless and erroneous pontificating of other writers, like Bertrand Russell. One gets to enjoy the subtle sparring matches that Copleston participates in, skewering Russell's simplistic understanding of Aquinas, his pretentious denunciation of Aristotle's logic, and the backward tendency of Medieval philosophy. Finally, Copleston reminds us that the Middle Ages were not a dark period where learning and progress were stagnant, but a time when Europeans immersed themselves in knowledge and learning, an age that saw the founding and spreading of the university system, a phenomenon that directly lead to the rise of science throughout the West.

I have now read the first two volumes of Copleston's History of Philosophy, and plan to read the remaining seven. Based on reviews and the monumental scope of the work itself, I had high expectations coming in, and I must say that the books have so far exceeded these expectations. My only prior experience with philosophy had been Bertrand Russell's history, which I thoroughly enjoyed, although in retrospect I gleaned more entertainment from it than any real knowledge of the history of philosophy. Copleston's work is much more academic and it does, to a degree, presuppose at least a cursory knowledge of the history of philosophy as well a foundation of philosophic terminology. However, if you are willing to put some work and thought into the books, especially at the outset, it is possible, I believe, to fully understand these volumes without a prior knowledge of the history of philosophy. For example, I've taken notes as I've read, and have found that many of the philosophical terms used, while not always defined explicitly, are used frequently enough that their meaning can be inferred satisfactorily.

I'll attempt to summarize what I took from this particular volume, that on Medieval philosophy: The philosophy of Aristotle represents a complete system and was the pinnacle of the ancient philosophies. However, his complete system was not known in the West until the twelfth century -only his logic and fragments of other parts was known before this and mostly indirectly. Philosophy in medieval Europe prior to this had been inextricably tied up with Christian theology -the Church fathers and medieval theologians had used what they knew of ancient philosophy to rationally support what they knew through revelation. Now confronted with Aristotle's complete system -a system derived without the aid of revelation -it was only a matter of time before thinkers began developing systems independently of Christian dogma. This began with St. Thomas Aquinas who attempted to reconcile Aristotle with Christian revelation. Despite the value of this -and Aquinas is still considered THE Catholic philosopher -Copleston argues that St. Thomas's system paved the way for future philosophers to develop philosophies independent of theology and even, in fact, to take the subject matter of theology as their own, for better or for worse.

One other comment I'd like to make: it is impossible to have a completely objective history of philosophy (or history of anything for that matter); the author picks and chooses what topics to include and emphasize, how to classify the topics, in what order, etc. Copleston was a Jesuit theologian and his expertise is medieval philosophy, especially Thomas Aquinas. Therefore, I fully expected a bias in this book towards that philosophy. This bias is present to a slight degree, as probably can't be helped; for example, Copleston will often show how a particular philosophic idea contrasts to the Scholastic philosophy. However, I can only recall one or two times where the author, in this or the previous volume, gives his own opinions as to the value of the philosophical ideas presented. Copleston simply states that this was the idea of this particular philosopher and leaves it at that. He will on occasion give his thoughts as to the importance or the future impact of an idea or philosopher, but that is the job of any good historian; he rarely assigns a value to a particular idea, and the few times he does, it is explicit that he is doing so.

The readers were originally seminarians. Often a critical word or phrase is rendered in Latin or Greek. You can work around that by treating the word as a symbol for an idea otherwise explicated, but sometimes in this book (less so in the prior ones) a critical eplanation or reference is entirely in Latin. The book, as is true with all of the others, is well worth the work involved in studying it. It is neither an in depth analysis of everything, nor a beginner's text. Excellent for college students and particularly philosophy students who have finished the survey courses.

Father Copleston, S.J. wrote a readable account of an important era in intellectual history. Father Copleston's book is well organized and well written. He is clear that the phrase Middle Ages is misguiding. The approximate era of A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOLUME 2:MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY deals with approximately a thousand years (c.500 AD-1500 AD). This time frame can be divided by the Dark Ages, the Early Middle Ages or Frankish history, a Second Dark Ages, the High Middle Ages, etc.

Father Copleston begins his study with the Partistic Period (Ancient Western Civilization thinking) and the impact of St. Augustine (446-520) and his great book titled THE CITY OF GOD. Chapters one through ten give the reader a comprehensive examination of ideas and European thought at a time when learning could have very well disappeared in Western Europe. Father Copleston includes some of the important figures in the Patristic Era such as Isodore (570-636), Boethius (480-524)Cassoidorus (577-665), etc.

Father Copleston does a credible job in describing what is known as the Carolingian Renaissance. He mentions the valuable contributions of Alcuin (730-804) and Eriugena (815-877). The fact that Alcuin established a school at Aachen and developed bookhand as the format for handwritten books and study materials is invaluable in the teaching and learning for posterity. Eruigena was probably the first speculative philosopher in Western Europe since the disintegration of the Ancient Roman Empire. His work cannot be overestimated.

Father Copleston deals with the problems of "Universals" in the early Medieval schools. He also explains the debate between the Nominalists and the Realists. Father Copleston's examination of the Medieval curriculum is useful. Undergraduate students studied the Trivium (Grammar, Rhetoric, and Logic). Students were taught to read well, to think, to speak well, and the write well. Once these students mastered this curriculum, they could study the Quadrivium (Astronomy, Music, Arithmetic and Algerbra, and Plane Geometry). If these students pursued further studies, they could study Medicine, Canon Law, and Theology which was considered The Queen of the Sciences.

One should note that Medieval Catholic universities were centers of intellectual activity and spirited debate which has disappeared from the record. In other words, Father Copleston undermines that the Catholic Church authorities somehow undermined serious learning and thinking when in fact they encouraged it.

Father Copleston begins his treatment of Scholasticism with St. Anselm (1033-1109) whose PROLOGIAN was a serious study that at some point the Catholic Faith had to be reasonable to be accepted. This study began the fruitful development of Scholastic Philosophy. Mention should be made of Peter Abelard (1079-1142) whose SIC ET NON caused scandal until scholars realized that this was a "how to" book on solving complex philosophical and theological problems. One should know of Peter Lombard's (1100-160) FOUR BOOKS OF SENTENCES which became the standard text of Medieval theological studies.

Father Copleston does an outstanding job in presenting St. Albertus Magnus (1193-1280) and the Catholic Church's intellectual giant, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) whose SUMMA THEOLOGICAL and SUMMA CONTRAL GENTILES set the standard for subsequent theological and philosophical studies. St. Thomas Aquinas development an Aristotlian reasoned approach to Catholicism. The importance of the Angelic Doctor (St. Thomas Aquinas) was and is crucial to Catholcism and Catholic universities. Subsequent studies in Medieval theological studies were either defenses of crituques of the Angelic Doctor's work whose thinking became part of the permanent philosophy.

Father Copleston gives credit to Islamic scholars such as Avacena(980-1037) and Averroes(1126-1198) whom St. Thomas Aquinas called The Commentator-The Commentator on Aristotle. Father Copleston also gives serious mention of Jewish scholars such as Maimonides (1135-1204) who is mentioned by, among others, St. Thomas Aquinas.

Father Copleston tackeled a difficult historical task, and his book is one of the best this reviewer has read on Medieval Philosophy and theology. The book is comprehensive as well as a good introduction the History of Medieval Philosophy. A good companion volume is Father Duffy's THE QUEEN OF SCIENCES. This reviewer strongly recommends Father Copleston's HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOLUME 2.

Volumne II is a great introduction to one of the least covered areas of Western philosophy. Copleston did a great job giving a general overview of the major figures (and a few lesser known), their views from a philosophical angle, and showed why they are important. He also makes clear several important issues, such as the lack of distinction between philosophy and theology and the influence of some of the Islamic philosophers (inasmuch as they affected Europeans).

This book is so valuable because the medieval works are less accessable from a philosophical point of view than ancient and modern works. If you want to know Kant's or Plato's philosophy you can read their actual writings to get a clear understanding. But the theological nature of the medieval works makes that difficult. While it is true that they cannot be completely seperated, the anachronistic distinction does exist to us, and Copleston did a great job cutting through the theology to get to the philosopy.

The major problem is the lack of translation at certain points. When the author lists the works of Augustine, he lists them in Latin. I found myself just glossing over several lines of Latin text. He also used Latin throughout the book to list arguements. Since I don't speak Latin I either guessed what he meant, looked it up, or glossed over it.

Copleston's series, "The History of Philosophy", is quite possibly the best introduction to the history of philosophical thought that has ever been published and certainly the best currently in print.

You will be hard pressed to find a better collection of solid philosophical surveys in one place. The beauty of the series is that Copleston has clearly done his research on each period and each thinker of Western philosophy.

I cannot recommend this series any more highly. It is a must-have collection for anyone who is a scholar (professional or casual) of philosophy, theology or any of the arts.

If this isn't on your bookshelf, it should be!

Copleston is in his element here, in the second volume of his mammoth history. He writes on every philosopher imaginable giving good space to obscure and otherwise ignored minor thinkers of the period in question. As to be expected, Copleston gives the major share to Aquinas with Scotus following closely. Recommended for readers with some knowledge of philosophical concepts only as it is a difficult text for beginners new to the subject.

This is the second volume in Frederick Copleston's classic nine volume A History of Philosophy. Like all the volumes in this series, it is an exhaustive study of the period covered and presents the development of the philosophical thought of the period as an interrelated whole where trends ebb and flow as ideas are introduced and synthesized within the systems of the great thinkers of the time.

All of this is done within a framework where Copleston, as a professor in a Catholic seminary, is mindful of pointing out the elements that would become adopted within the framework of Christian philosophy and theology. Even though Copleston has a seminary audience in mind, he does not attempt to "Christianize" those who were not Christian nor launch polemical attacks against those ideas at odds with the Christian faith. He presents the philosophical ideas thoroughly and fairly and gives both the supporting evidence cited by supporters and the critiques by opponents. Also pointed out in detail is how each philosopher's work influenced contemporaries and later thought with, of course, special consideration of the influence for good or bad on Christianity.

This volume covers the patristic period through to the golden age of medieval scholasticism. Many histories of philosophy ignore the importance of medieval thought and end up treating the birth of modern philosophy with Descartes as if it arose in an historical vacuum. Copleston skillfully brings to life this neglected period of philosophical activity and this serves to give greater understanding to the historical and intellectual context of later developments.

Those who dismiss all philosophy that serves to aid Christian theology are guilty of neglecting the theological underpinnings in much of classical Greek thought. Though Plato and Aristotle were certainly not deists in the Judeo-Christian sense, their concepts of the demiurge and the prime mover cetainly have implications of a decidedly theological nature. Many patistic writers began to defend the faith using this philosophical framework and demonstrated that which is true and good is no threat to Christianity and argued that philosophy in its most pure form leads has God as proper end.

Copleston divides this volume into five parts. The first begins with a discussion of some of the most philosophical of the earlier patristic writers before beginning a long discussion of the thought of St. Augustine of Hippo. St. Augustine would remain the dominant figure in the Western Church until the scholastic period and many reactions to scholasticism both in the Reformation and among Catholics would appeal to the great bishop of Hippo as their intellectual forebearer. Copleston gives an excellent and thorough exposition and sheds light on almost every aspect of his thinking. A shorter treatment of Western thinkers in the immediate post-Augustinian period closes this section.

The next few centuries were barren periods for learning in the West but the few lights that shown through are covered in the next two sections on the Carolingian Renaissance and the early scholastic period. John Scotus Eruigena and St. Anselm are the most notable figures, respectively, for these two periods and the development of thinking on universals that would become the focus of much debate in the coming centuries.

The focus is turned in the fourth section to the recovery of the Aristotelian corpus. The important commentators on Aristotle from Islamic and Jewish sources are covered as well as the beginning of the translation of Aristotle's works. The reaction - both supportive and not - of the Christian West to this "new" learning is explained.

The fifth and final section of the book is the longest and, for a Catholic philosopher like Copleston, the most important. Here is the truly "golden age" of scholasticism as a series of great thinkers would take the stage to use philosophy to aid the Catholic faith. The three great figures of this period - St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas Aquinas, and John Duns Scotus - are given extensive coverage. The interraction of these three contemporaries and their solutions to the complex questions of the day - particularly that of universals - is fully explained. Lesser figures are also covered including two (St. Albert the Great and Roger Bacon) whose work in a primitive form of what we would later call "science" was very far ahead of its time.

For those with an interest in the factors that would give rise to the development of modern Western thinking, this book is a godsend. Nowhere else is such complete coverage of Christian philosophy of the period available. The only thing one could hope for is if there had been a full treatment of the great thinkers of the Eastern Church such as the Cappadocians. However, given the unfamiliarity of the West with the Eastern tradition at the time this was written, it is an understandable though regrettable omission.

For a thorough investigation of the history of Western philosophical thought and a wrestling with the great thinkers of the Western philosophical tradition, there is no better choice than Copleston's A History of Philosophy. For the Christian, in particular, who wishes to understand the interaction of philsophy and Christian theology, this work is unparalleled.

I have to begin by confessing that I have refused to even look at Medieval Philosophy for most of my fairly long life. When I was just a boy at St. John's College, I quit after one year. My boyish self thought that he had absorbed the Greeks and the Romans, and had no wish to waste time with...gack...Dark Age Idiots squabbling over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

Well.

I have now finished Vol. I of this history, and embarked on Vol. II, and I must say that I am thoroughly enjoying the tale so far! Is this because the philosophy is intrinsically interesting, or because of Frederick Copleston's sublime presentation and discussion of that philosophy?

Make no mistake here: Copleston was one of the best teaching-writers who ever lived. (Gosh! Those Jesuits! They seem to do this over and over again!!)

Big surprise #1: Augustine becomes my favorite philosopher! Well, at least for these points, which I will summarize from memory: "Many people doubt the evidence of the senses as inherently unreliable. Well, we have all seen an oar in the water, and are aware of optical illusions, but anyone who wants to throw out all of our information from the senses is making a terrible mistake. We learn everything from what we see and sense of the world. In the same way, we cannot trust the statements of other men; they are often unreliable. But anyone who insists on tossing all of the knowledge obtained from other men is an idiot: our human knowledge has grown great because of what we can see, and what we can hear from other men."

Somehow, I want to place this beside Immanuel Kant's love of the starry firmament. (How did Kant KNOW that the night sky was filled with stars, aside from opening his eyes and LOOKING?)

The second major surprise has been to discover that medieval philosophy was not just blind dogmatism and blinkered prejudice. The philosophers of pre-modern Europe were indeed groping in the dark (as are we), but they did have Plato and the Bible to help them, and they INSISTED on trying to discuss them rationally.

We should not spit on the graves of these men. They were devout, and sometimes wildly mistaken, but they were doing their very best to take Plato and Aristotle and make something BETTER. At the very least, it is a story with a compelling human interest.

Which is just about the last thing I expected from this book!

Have a look for yourself some day! Of course, you have to begin with Volume I to make sense of Volume II. Just 5-10 pages a day will get you there, if you are patient and persevering. :-)