In the 17th century natural and international law stood as the first theory of the modern state. But what did it look like before it was caught up in the history of modern statehood? In the topology of early modern knowledge ius naturae was regarded as a body of established thinking common to all disciplines. Philosophy, theology and jurisprudence were in complete agreement on a number of points: natural law was God-given; since the act of Creation divine commandments had been (...) inscribed into the hearts of men; natural law, the Decalogue, and the demands of ethics were identical. Natural law was nothing other than the eternal order imposed on humankind and the world by God since time began. Can this idea be reconciled with the modern state, its origins in disorder, and its need for the decision-making exercise of will? (shrink)

La justicia, según Domingo de Soto, co-fundador de la Escuela de Salamanca, es el eje que vincula ley y derecho, los dos núcleos de su De iustitia et iure. Y la justicia, cuyo tratamiento último lo proporciona la filosofía y la teología, es una virtud humana que busca la justa relación de dos elementos, y que tiene por objeto la equidad, que se mide no tanto por la intención del agente, sino por su contenido objetivo. Lo justo se mide por (...) dos planos, el del presupuesto y la consecuencia a los que se corresponden la ley y el derecho, con una estructura teleológica. (shrink)

In the history of political and legal thought we can consider either the ideological contents or the way of communicating them. If we reconstruct the history of Late Scholasticism in this second sense, we can appraise the contribution of Domingo de Soto, who organized the entire scholastic matter in a clear system and introduced with his treatise On justice and law a successful literary form of discussion. In this sense, Soto deserves to be considered a founder of Late Scholasticism together (...) with Francisco de Vitoria. Relevant is the scheme he adopted in the topological distribution, as he joined the notions of law and of justice through a doctrine of freedom and dominion, which figured as a true starting point for a theory of law, especially for a theory of natural law. (shrink)

The question whether both enemies in a war could claim the same right, was a fundamental topic in the early modern theory of war and Grotius treated it briefly in his On Law of Prize and Booty. The jurisprudence of the seventeenth century developed two explanations: the Scholastic tradition held that only one party could fight with right reason, whereas some authors of the humanistic tradition thought that in some cases it was impossible to solve this question. Grotius took elements (...) from both traditions, applying them to two different levels of his argument. If we namely consider the rulers, we should accept the Scholastic conclusion that only one party can fight with right reason. But the subordinate soldiers do not always have an exhaustive knowledge of the situation and need first of all to acknowledge that their superiors command legitimately. Thus, each level uses a different logical relationship in the Aristotelian square because the enemies follow in the former case the pattern of contrary propositions, but in the latter they obey a pattern of subcontrary propositions. (shrink)

Johann Christoph Gottsched gehört unbestritten zu den zentralen Figuren der deutschen Frühaufklärung. Wie wohl kein anderer vor und nach ihm hat er die Entwicklung der deutschsprachigen Sprach-, Rede-, Dicht- und Bühnenkunst geprägt, geleitet von der festen Absicht, diesen Künsten wo möglich eine wissenschaftliche Begründung, eine überschaubare kritische Historie sowie eine klare und elegante Darstellung zu verleihen. Über diese Bemühungen hinaus, hat sich insbesondere die neuere Forschung weiteren Facetten seines riesigen Werkes zugewendet. So erscheint Gottsched als Vorbild zahlreicher Zeitschriftenprojekte, als wichtiger (...) Popularisator der Leibnizschen und Wolffschen Philosophie, als zentraler Reformer der zeitgenössischen Homiletik, als Drehscheibe bei der Vermittlung europäischer Dichtung und Gelehrsamkeit. Die Beiträge des vorliegenden Bandes tragen der gesamten Breite der Gottsched-Forschung Rechnung, prüfen alte Erkenntnisse und stellen neue Einschätzungen zur Diskussion. Darüber wird die Aufmerksamkeit auch auf weniger bekannte Aspekte des Gottschedschen Oeuvres gelenkt, so etwa auf Beiträge zu den Naturwissenschaften und der Staatslehre, auf die akademische Lehrtätigkeit und auf das zunehmende Interesse an anthropologischen und ästhetischen Fragen. MIT BEITRÄGEN VON: Erich Achermann, Thomas Althaus, Detlef Döring, Frank Grunert, Gerda Hassler, Peter Hesselmann, Hanspeter Marti, Christian Meierhofer, Dagmar Mirbach, Merio Scattola, Oliver Scholz, Tomas Sommadossi, Holger Steinmann, Gideon Stiening, Andres Strassberger, Dietmar Till, Klaus Weimar und Jan-Henrik Witthaus. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.3 (2003) 414-415 [Access article in PDF] Gregorio Piaia, editor. La presenza dell'aristotelismo padovano nella filosofia della prima modernità: Atti del Colloquio internazionale in memoria di Charles B. Schmitt (Padova, 4-6 settembre 2000). Rome and Padua: Antenore, 2002. Pp. 488. Paper, € 38.00.Dedicated to the impact of Paduan Aristotelianism on early modern philosophy, this volume, edited by Gregorio Piaia, presents the proceedings of (...) a much-anticipated conference held in memory of Charles B. Schmitt at the University of Padua on September 4-6, 2000, jointly co-sponsored by Padua's Department of Philosophy, the Centro per la Storia dell'Università di Padova, the Seminar für Philosophie und Geistesgeschichte der Renaissance of the University of Munich, the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Natural Philosophy of the Catholic University of Nijmegen, and the Foundation for Intellectual History of London. It was indeed Schmitt's merit (one thinks first and foremost of The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy he edited in 1988) to have revised in the most critical and convincing way the image historians of philosophy had of Renaissance Aristotelianism as a backward-looking movement unable to express any vitality, to say nothing about its influence on later philosophers. Obviously, the Paduan Aristotelians did not achieve the same impact as Descartes and they did not produce the sharp reactions the libertins provoked. Yet, their impact was substantial, as many contributors show, with a concentration in the north of central Europe, i.e., in Germany and in Scandinavia.The volume opens with a paper by Stefano Perfetti on the physician, statesman, and philosopher Giulio Cesare Scaligero, who belongs among the Paduan Aristotelians because he received his education at Padua. The works of the "pure Aristotelian" (following the definition of this movement provided by Wilhelm Risse) Giacomo Zabarella, surely the most celebrated of the group, is the subject of papers by Francesco Bottin, Ian McLean, Sachicko Kusukawa, Daniel A. Di Liscia, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, David A. Lines, Antonino Poppi, Paul Richard Blum, Giovanna Varani, Gregorio Piaia, and Giuseppe Micheli. They have looked into the impact of Zabarella's philosophy, logic, and theory of demonstration (the celebrated regressus) in contexts such as Lutheran Germany and Scandinavia, Reformed Germany and Holland, and Catholic Italy and France during the impressive span from the publication of Melanchthon's Dialectic in 1520 to that of Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790. Less known today, but quite influential until 1648, was the "eclectic Aristotelian" (to use Schmitt's phrase) and colleague (and antagonist) of Zabarella, Francesco Piccolomini, whom Jill Kraye, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, and David A. Lines consider in their papers. Piccolomini became famous for his mediation between Aristotelianism and Platonism. He revived "the soul of Aristotle and the spirit of Plato," as a contemporary said. Pierre Bayle and Jakob Brucker highlighted Piccolomini's efforts to combine Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy; and modern scholars have identified many [End Page 414] Platonizing elements in his Aristotelianism. In the hope of producing a more accurate and complete picture of eclectic Aristotelianism within the context of Renaissance moral philosophy, Jill Kraye's paper explores a neglected side of Piccolomini's ethical thought, namely his careful account of Stoicism. Finally, a group of papers with a more general scope needs to be mentioned, namely Heinrich C. Kuhn's survey of works of Paduan Aristotelians in German libraries, Charles H. Lohr's paper on the sources of Calvinist theories of science, and Ekhard Kessler's paper on the relation of logic to hermeneutics. As a last remark, of the seventeen contributions to this important volume, which no research library should be without, eight are in Italian, six in English, and three in German. Riccardo Pozzo Università di Verona... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.3 (2003) 414-415 [Access article in PDF] Gregorio Piaia, editor. La presenza dell'aristotelismo padovano nella filosofia della prima modernità: Atti del Colloquio internazionale in memoria di Charles B. Schmitt (Padova, 4-6 settembre 2000). Rome and Padua: Antenore, 2002. Pp. 488. Paper, € 38.00.Dedicated to the impact of Paduan Aristotelianism on early modern philosophy, this volume, edited by Gregorio Piaia, presents the proceedings of (...) a much-anticipated conference held in memory of Charles B. Schmitt at the University of Padua on September 4-6, 2000, jointly co-sponsored by Padua's Department of Philosophy, the Centro per la Storia dell'Università di Padova, the Seminar für Philosophie und Geistesgeschichte der Renaissance of the University of Munich, the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Natural Philosophy of the Catholic University of Nijmegen, and the Foundation for Intellectual History of London. It was indeed Schmitt's merit (one thinks first and foremost of The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy he edited in 1988) to have revised in the most critical and convincing way the image historians of philosophy had of Renaissance Aristotelianism as a backward-looking movement unable to express any vitality, to say nothing about its influence on later philosophers. Obviously, the Paduan Aristotelians did not achieve the same impact as Descartes and they did not produce the sharp reactions the libertins provoked. Yet, their impact was substantial, as many contributors show, with a concentration in the north of central Europe, i.e., in Germany and in Scandinavia.The volume opens with a paper by Stefano Perfetti on the physician, statesman, and philosopher Giulio Cesare Scaligero, who belongs among the Paduan Aristotelians because he received his education at Padua. The works of the "pure Aristotelian" (following the definition of this movement provided by Wilhelm Risse) Giacomo Zabarella, surely the most celebrated of the group, is the subject of papers by Francesco Bottin, Ian McLean, Sachicko Kusukawa, Daniel A. Di Liscia, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, David A. Lines, Antonino Poppi, Paul Richard Blum, Giovanna Varani, Gregorio Piaia, and Giuseppe Micheli. They have looked into the impact of Zabarella's philosophy, logic, and theory of demonstration (the celebrated regressus) in contexts such as Lutheran Germany and Scandinavia, Reformed Germany and Holland, and Catholic Italy and France during the impressive span from the publication of Melanchthon's Dialectic in 1520 to that of Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790. Less known today, but quite influential until 1648, was the "eclectic Aristotelian" (to use Schmitt's phrase) and colleague (and antagonist) of Zabarella, Francesco Piccolomini, whom Jill Kraye, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, and David A. Lines consider in their papers. Piccolomini became famous for his mediation between Aristotelianism and Platonism. He revived "the soul of Aristotle and the spirit of Plato," as a contemporary said. Pierre Bayle and Jakob Brucker highlighted Piccolomini's efforts to combine Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy; and modern scholars have identified many [End Page 414] Platonizing elements in his Aristotelianism. In the hope of producing a more accurate and complete picture of eclectic Aristotelianism within the context of Renaissance moral philosophy, Jill Kraye's paper explores a neglected side of Piccolomini's ethical thought, namely his careful account of Stoicism. Finally, a group of papers with a more general scope needs to be mentioned, namely Heinrich C. Kuhn's survey of works of Paduan Aristotelians in German libraries, Charles H. Lohr's paper on the sources of Calvinist theories of science, and Ekhard Kessler's paper on the relation of logic to hermeneutics. As a last remark, of the seventeen contributions to this important volume, which no research library should be without, eight are in Italian, six in English, and three in German. Riccardo Pozzo Università di Verona... (shrink)