Search

In De Caelo III 2, Aristotle observes that each element is determined by an intrinsic principle to move to its proper place: earth downward, fire upward, and water and air to their respective places in the middle. However, how are we to determine the cause of elemental motion? Aristotle admits that this ranks among the most difficult problems (μάλιστα δ ' ἀπορεῖται) as it is directly related to the argument of Physics VIII 4, which defends the view that whatever is in motion is moved by something. The question of how the elements move is not resolved until we are presented with his definition of inclination (ῥοπή) in De Caelo IV 1. Inclination is the nature of each element to move to its proper place. Aristotle concludes that the principle of inclination is a cause of motion continuously orienting the elements toward their proper places by activating that which is potentially heavy or potentially light. In what follows, I shall demonstrate the internal coherence of Aristotle's natural philosophy by deploying inclination as a principle of motion and rest to define the nature of each element. This account of inclination as a principle of motion is consistent with Aristotle's definition of nature in Physics II 1. As an active principle of motion, inclination is identified with the activity (ἐνέργεια) of the element enacting and maintaining its own end (ἐντελέχεια) by being at rest in its proper place. As a passive principle of motion, inclination is identified with the passivity of the element to be moved to its proper place by another element insofar as the respective element undergoes generation or substantial change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the conception of order and disorder developed by the philosopher B. Spinoza (1632-1677), and shows how this theory supports the intelligibility of nature without attributing any kind of organization to nature. From these principles, the author questions the use of causality in intellectual history, and sketches the possibility of a complex history based upon the disorder of interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most important architectural theoreticians of the late Italian Renaissance Vincenzo Scamozzi drew an analogy between architect's work and work of a geographer in his famous treatise "La idea dell'architettura universale" (1615). That analogy based on Strabo's authority led Scamozzi to some reflections on importance of intensive examination of the territory by every architect. He considered an architect to be not only a natural scientist but a person who would be able to combine natural philosophy, mathematics and visual art in order to study and to represent (by means of visual arts) land itself before designing any project. The background of Scamozzi's reflections is clear: that was about fortification. At that time there was no distinction between a civil architect and a military one, so Scamozzi considered the geographical knowledge to be important for every architect, but especially for those who designed fortresses - objects that are, on the one hand, very closely connected with the land and on the other - with mathematics. Meanwhile, the close connection between geography, mathematics, visual arts and architecture, so definitely emphasized by Scamozzi, was to some extend reflected by his predecessors including not only architectural theoreticians but also by humanists of the Cinquecento as Baldassare Castiglione - the author of the famous "Book of the Courtier". He declared (on behalf of one of his protagonists) the art of drawing to be of great importance because it equips "the courtier" or his sovereign with visual knowledge of the governed territory. In the late XVI century Buonaiuto Lorini wrote that imperator Charles V had a real passion for drawing because it gave to him knowledge of the land with all its physical particularities, so no one could deceive him while he was at war. Later on the union of military architecture and geography was over and over again confirmed by professional lives of many military architectures and engineers (for example, Erick Dahlberg of Sweden) that were not only builders of fortification but prominent geographers as well. So that union erstwhile reflected during the Renaissance had a great impact on the future architectural thought and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sir Isaac Newton and John Locke, the founders of the Enlightenment, who were widely recognized by their contemporaries as being the most influential thinkers of their time, regardless of the research in the field of natural philosophy (Newton) or philosophical enquiries into the nature of knowledge and society (Locke), they both were involved in religious studies. They examined thoroughly some excerpts from the Holy Scripture and consulted each other the results of their research during correspondence which lasted for several years. The purpose of these studies, what had already been remarked by Voltaire, was in case of Newton finding answers to the questions that could not be resolved on the basis of empirical methodology used for the examining natural phenomena; whereas Locke sought to enlighten the grounds upon which the knowledge on society and politics was established. It is suggested that there is a similarity between their views on Christianity and on the methods of analysis the Bible applied by them. These enquiries did not lead the two thinkers towards mysticism and irrationality, yet constituted an attempt to create rational, independent of theology approach to religion and to find new methods of analysis of Biblical texts, which, subjected to the proper interpretation, would reveal undiscovered knowledge on the history of the world. It is argued here that these researches appear innovative from today's perspective because they contribute to the epistemology of religion by understanding this domain as a unique way of gaining knowledge about the past and the future history of man. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Matija Hvale (Mathias Quale or Qualle), born at Vače near Litija in present-day central Slovenia around 1470, is considered a major representative of the progressive intellectuals who sought at the turbulent turn of the 15th and 16th century, under Emperor Maximilian I's rule, to establish humanist ideas and to rid the University of Vienna of its conservatism and scholastic mentality. Hvale's example and work influenced his students as well: of these, the most important would have been Joachim von Watt - Vadianus (1484-1551), Rector of the University of Vienna in 1516-1517. Hvale's best known and most acclaimed work, based on the studies of his predecessors and contemporaries as well as on his own lectures, which sought to systematise natural philosophy and bring it closer to both scholars and students, was Parvulus Philosophiae Naturalis or Commentarii in Parvulum Philosophiae Naturalis. Published in 1513 in the Alsatian town of Haguenau (the reasons for this location are unclear: possibly to avoid his opponents from the University of Vienna), it was dedicated to his fellow countryman, later the Emperor's secretary and diplomat, Paul Oberstain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transition from Gothic to Renaissance usually explained in the canonical architectural criticism as the (re)discovery of Greco-Roman culture fostered by humanism. Faced with this traditional view, the proposed paper attempts to show that the change, rather than disciplinary, was due to the emergence of a new structure of thought. In Europe, this change entailed moving from a world and a transcendent space to another scientist, as reflected in the passage of the space/divine light of Gothic cathedrals to the space/natural light of Renaissance churches. Radical transformation that, nevertheless, maintained a common structure: the Neo-Platonic idea that behind the visible world exists a mathematical order. [8] The idea of bottom, it was following to San Augustin, that any physical was sustained in a harmonic and proportional order. Order that the scholastic considered of divine nature, while the humanists of natural character. To support this hypothesis, we search in the original sources of the philosophy and the architecture of the epoch, putting special attention to the influence that the philosophical ideas had in the vision of the world and art of the period. In short, it is shown that the universal characteristic of these notions is reflected in the wide use -both the Gothic and the Renaissance- of the number as a basis for art in general and architecture in particular. [13] In both cases, also, the accentuation of architectural elements in geometric characteristics led to a two-dimensional representation of space, principally considering that figures and not geometrical bodies were the mainstay, expressed as idealized models. Sight from our time, the communication insists on the need that exists to analyze the theory and the practice of the architecture considering the structures of thought that support them, as the only way to fully understand them. Something that is often ignored in contemporary architecture analysis, focusing more on the formal and political structures than on the philosophical ones. In academic terms, the paper belong to a wider investigation, which tries to study and demonstrate the close relationship that exists between philosophy and architecture in the development of Western architecture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Naturalism is a view that everything that exists is Nature. There doesn't exist any other reality, apart from the natural one. Naturalists require that all phenomena be expressed taking into account only their natural causes. Natural causes are the ones that are accessible for scientific cognition. Science (physics) tries to describe this reality basing on observation and experiment as a foundation for creating theoretical constructs (theories) pertaining to natural phenomena. Mark Steiner, in his book entitled The Applicability of Mathematics as a Philosophical Problem, puts forward a surprising thesis that contemporary physicists in their work retreat from naturalist vision of science, because - as the author states - the real scientific activity of scientists does not comply with their basic methodological and philosophical convictions (with naturalism). To support his thesis he points to numerous cases of significant discoveries in the newest history of physics in which the decisive role was played by human imagination and not experimental facts. This way of discovering laws in contemporary physics is - in his conviction - anti-naturalist in the sense that it relies more on human invention, on manipulating formal structures using mathematical analogies than on the methods of classical empiricism. Such an approach - in his opinion - privileges human and not naturalist (empirical) point of view. Steiner thinks that it indicates a turn towards anthropocentric viewpoint in the methodology of physics. In my view it is an over-interpretation of 'natural' cognitive procedures existing in contemporary science and relying on the use of a well-known scheme: problem - hypothesis - criticism - problem modification. Moreover, Steiner's suggestions do not match facts concerning the development of the newest cosmology in which scientific development is stimulated using sophisticated observations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heidegger, responding to the various issues that are existential for the human beings, also addresses to the philosophy of religion. Our paper is a brief assessment of Heidegger's text Phenomenology and Theology. We believe that Heidegger before rebounding relatively adequately characterized the relationship between philosophy and theology as disciplines of clear cognition and knowledge. He seeks to describe the relationship between philosophy and theology in original way, his solution retains the hallmark of originality worthy of one of the most important philosophers in the history of philosophy. Martin Heidegger was the most significant disciple of the most significant philosopher of the 20th century Edmund Husserl. Even though science was not the most prominent topic of Heidegger's treatises he addressed it as a philosopher on a number of occasions. His view of science changed mainly in connection with the Turn (die Kehre). Heidegger's reflections of science belong to most significant reflections with respect to philosophy of science of the 20th century. His sharp visionary perspective relevant also in the area of science methodology is a constructive contribution with a very positive impact applicable to all disciplines of knowledge as such. His constructive and critical view dominating his work before the Turn was replaced by a belief that the worlds of science and philosophy stand totally apart whereas the critical standpoint prevailed. Heidegger was fully aware of the differences between the viewpoints of science and philosophy before the Turn too. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]