Nel corso della sua lunga attività di insegnamento presso le Università di Padova e di Bologna, Pietro Pomponazzi si confrontò ripetutamente con il De anima di Aristotele e con il relativo commento di Averroè. Il suo primo corso svolto in qualità di professore ordinario a Padova risale al 1499, il frutto più maturo delle sue riflessioni è sicuramente il celebre Tractatus de immortalitate animae, pubblicato a Bologna nel 1516, che lo proiettò al centro di polemiche, discussioni e condanne. (...) Gli studenti del Pomponazzi ci hanno tramandato gli appunti di numerosi suoi commenti al Corpus aristotelicum. Fra questi, di particolare interesse è l'esposizione sul primo libro del De anima, che il professore svolse a Padova sul cadere dell'anno 1503, e che fu riportata e messa in bella copia da un nobile veneziano, Antonio Surian, che frequentava le sue lezioni. Il volume presenta l'Expositio super I De anima secondo l'unico manoscritto che ci è pervenuto, conservato nella Biblioteca Nazionale di Napoli (VIII D 81), e reca un fondamentale contributo alla ricostruzione della formazione e dello sviluppo della dottrina psicologica pomponazziana. (shrink)

... TRACTATUS DE IMMORTALITATE ANIM Ж. PR 0 OE^MIU M. * Continens intentionem, feu libri materiatn & can* fam intentionis. F rater Hieronymus Natalis, ...

In the years after the first circulation of Sidereus Nuncius, Galileo’s Padua anti-Copernican colleague, the staunch Aristotelian philosopher, Cesare Cremonini, published a book on ‘traditional’ cosmology, Disputatio de coelo in tres partes divisa which puzzled the Roman authorities of the Inquisition and the Index much more than any works on celestial novelties and ‘neo-Pythagorean’ astronomy. Cremonini’s disputation on the heavens has the form of an over-intricate comment of Aristotle’s conceptions, in the typi­cally argumentative style of Scholasticism. Nonetheless, it immediately raised (...) the concern of Cardinal Bellarmin, the Pope and other Inquisitors. At a close reading, Cremonini’s interpretation of Aristotle’s cosmos proved radically anti- Christian. It represented a radicalization of Pomponazzian Alexandrism. In fact, Cremonini did not only circulate Aristotelian principles used by Pom­ponazzi to argue for the soul’s mortality. He also wiped away all transcendence from the Aristotelian cosmos. In fact, he marginalized the function of the motive Intelligences by explaining heavenly motions through the action of animal-like inseparable souls although he did not erase nor reduced all Intelligences to only one, in accordance with Alexander. Also, he put at the center of Aristotle’s cosmos the idea of its eternity, a thesis which he explicitly connected with the rejection of the idea of God the Creator. Cremonini assumed that the univer­sal efficiens, that is the efficient cause of all motion and change in the world, is nothing but the first heaven. As a result of this radically naturalist reading of Aristotle, he banned God from the cosmos, reduced Him to the final cause of the world, and deprived Him of any efficiency and will. This essay on less ex­plored sources of Renaissance astronomical debates considers the institutional, cultural and religious setting of Cremonini’s teaching and conceptions. It as­sesses the reasons for his troubles with the religious authorities, and the politi­cal support he was granted by the Serenissima Republic of Venice inspite of the scandalous opinions he circulated as a university professor. My reconstruction of his views is based on the Disputatio de coelo of 1613 and later works, which are directly connected with cosmo-theological polemics with the religious au­thorities: his Apologia dictorum Aristotelis de quinta coeli substantia and the unpublished book De coeli efficientia, two manuscript copies of which are preserved in the libraries of Padua and Venice. (shrink)

This essay deals with Girolamo Fracastoro’s ensouled cosmology. His Homocentrica sive de stellis (1538), an astronomy of concentric spheres, was discussed by the Padua School of Aristotelians. Since the polemics over the immortality of the human soul, which had famously opposed Pomponazzi to Nifo, psychological discussions—including those about heavenly spheres’ souls—raised heated controversies. Fracastoro discussed the foundations of his homocentric planetary theory in a dialogue titled Fracastorius, sive de anima (1555). In a 1531 exchange with Gasparo Contarini, Fracastoro discussed (...) celestial physics, including problems linked to mathematical analysis of physical causation. Contarini expressed his doubts over Fracastoro’s lack of consideration of Aristotelian viewpoints on heavenly souls and intelligences. Fracastoro offered an account of cosmic animation in his later dialogue “On the Soul,” taking a different path than his Paduan teachers. He picked up the Platonic idea of the “world soul,” freely connecting it with Aristotelian views about the ensouled cosmos of concentric spheres, resulting in an eclectic composition of Platonic, Aristotelian, and Averroistic elements. Fracastoro grounded his renewed mathematical astronomy on an understanding of the cosmos as a living whole. His animated homocentric cosmos represented a development of Aristotelian premises and a step beyond this legacy. (shrink)

In Pomponazzis Erkenntnistheorie, Paolo Rubini examines the radical views on human knowledge held by the Renaissance Aristotelian philosopher Pietro Pomponazzi (1462-1525), and interprets them in accordance with Pomponazzi's 'naturalistic' conception of the mind as essentially corporeal.

PRÉFACE Joël Biard et Thierry Gontier La figure de Pietro Pomponazzi est représentative de la profusion et de l'inventivité de la culture universitaire du ...

Since the early decades of the sixteenth century, Pomponazzi has been a name to conjure with: to some, the first of the modern atheists; to others, a hero of the new philosophy. But how much direct influence did his work have? This question is explored in terms of the way in which oracular divination is treated. In the sixteenth century, the range of conceptual categories available to explain such phenomena was threefold: natural, supernatural or simply unreal. In some cases, (...) such as those of demonic possession, the person was able to be examined directly. But the same conceptual triad was also applied to another kind of case, one whose subject could not be examined, since she had long been consigned to history ? the Pythia or priestess of the ancient Delphic oracle, who had famously foamed and babbled during her prophetic frenzy. For some writers on divination, this subject was of particular interest, since it had been explicitly discussed by ancient sources: whether the Pythia's ravings were real or invented, natural or supernatural, could be analysed with categories borrowed from Cicero, Plutarch and, above all, Aristotle. Within the sixteenth?century territory disputes over Aristotle's corpus, the pagan oracles, represented above all by the Pythia, offered a test case for the broader problem of the place of divination within the natural world. The central antagonist in this tussle was Pietro Pomponazzi, whose treatment of the ancient oracles, although brief, played an important part in his radical interpretation of Aristotle. For many of his contemporary readers, it was this subject, with its specific historical dimension, that highlighted the faults in his positions on nature and divination. (shrink)

A long historiographical tradition has claimed that the famous Pietro Pomponazzi’s Tractatus de immortalitate animae had been inspired by Tommaso de Vio’s Commentary on De anima – whose basic thesis was that, according to the principles of Aristotelian philosophy, the human soul was mortal – even though Pomponazzi in his entire work never mentioned Caietanus as a model. Firstly, this article frames the status quaestionis focusing on affinities and divergences between the two books and on the possible (...) relationship and exchange between the two authors, especially on the topic of the Aristotelian psychology. Secondly, the present study shows what emerges from a cross-reading of the sources which includes the collection of the Opuscula published in 1519 by the Dominican friar Bartolomeo Spina, who explicitly accused Caietanus of having paved the way for the scandalous and anti-Christian Pomponazzi’s position. The important gain of this collation of texts is the discovery of an unseen moment of debate with Caietanus inside Pomponazzi’s Tractatus. (shrink)

El noûs poie-tikós de Aristóteles ha sido objeto de innumerables estudios y debates a lo largo de la historia de la filosofía. Este artículo trata sobre la visión que de él tiene el aristotélico renacentista P. Pomponazzi, célebre, entre otras cosas, por suscitar una agria polémica con su tesis de que la razón natural no ofrece argumentos que puedan sostener la inmortalidad del alma. Esta tesis tiene que dar respuesta, sin embargo, a aquellos textos aristotélicos que hablan de la (...) inmaterialidad e inmortalidad del intelecto. El autor estudia esta respuesta de Pomponazzi en el contexto de los elementos más importantes de su psicología. (shrink)

El noûs poie-tikós de Aristóteles ha sido objeto de innumerables estudios y debates a lo largo de la historia de la filosofía. Este artículo trata sobre la visión que de él tiene el aristotélico renacentista P. Pomponazzi, célebre, entre otras cosas, por suscitar una agria polémica con su tesis de que la razón natural no ofrece argumentos que puedan sostener la inmortalidad del alma. Esta tesis tiene que dar respuesta, sin embargo, a aquellos textos aristotélicos que hablan de la (...) inmaterialidad e inmortalidad del intelecto. El autor estudia esta respuesta de Pomponazzi en el contexto de los elementos más importantes de su psicología. (shrink)

An essay on Pietro Pomponazzi, the philosopher and founder of the Aristotelian-Averroistic School. His great work De immortalitate animi, gave rise to a storm of controversy between the orthodox Thomists of the Catholic Church, the Averroists headed by Agostino Nifo, and the so-called Alexandrist School. The treatise was burned at Venice, and Pomponazzi himself ran serious risk of death at the hands of the Catholics. Two pamphlets followed, the Apologia and the Defensorium, wherein he explained his paradoxical (...) position as Catholic and philosophic materialist. His last two treatises, the De incantationibus and the De fato, were posthumously published in an edition of his works printed at Basel. Chapters: Aristotle in the Early Middle Ages; The Arabians and St. Thomas; Pomponazzi as an Aristotelian; Pomponazzi's Psychology; The Soul; Intelligence; Sense; Reason; Knowledge; The Nature of Virtue; and Natural Law in Human Life and Religion. (shrink)

The aim of this work is to focus on the most unusual application of the Lateran bull Apostolici regiminis, the founding document of the inquisitorial legislation which regulated the teaching activity of philosophy professors by forcing them to refute any heterodox theory and to teach the doctrine of faith. In 1519, the inquisitor of Bologna Giovanni de’ Torfanni censored the book Defensorium, in which the secular Aristotelian philosopher Pietro Pomponazzi developed against his colleague Agostino Nifo a long series (...) of arguments in favor of the mortality of the human soul without match them with their respective Christian refutations, as prescribed by the papal bull. Nevertheless, as a result of a not well documented negotiation with the competent authorities, Pomponazzi was relieved of all obligations, provided that he submitted his book to the emendations of the Dominican theologian Crisostomo Javelli. Pomponazzi accepted the agreement and Javelli drew up a list of forty-two solutions to as many mortalistic arguments found in Defensorium. Javelli’s list – titled Solutiones rationum animi mortalitatem probantium quae in Defensorio contra Niphum excellentissimi Petri Pomponatii formantur – was then attached to Defensorium and in this way Pomponazzi gained permission to print and sell his book. After a short reconstruction of the key steps of this affair, the present work provides a critical edition of Javelli’s Solutiones, based upon both the sixteenth-century editions of the text, the first one contained in Defensorium, the other included in Pomponazzi’s Tractatus acutissimi, utillimi, et mere peripatetici. (shrink)