The article presents the life and work of Juraj Dragišić, a philosophical and theological writer, as one of the most important and influential Croatian philosphers of 15th and 16th century. A brief presentation of his university and ecclesiastical career is followed by a closer examination of some of Dragišić’s works in which he discusses a whole range of philosophical, theological, and logical issues, such as the problem of the authenticity of prophecies, freedom of will, restoration of Christianity, logics, and dialectical (...) skill, and others. In the conclusion, it has been pointed out that Dragišić was, not only due to his works, but also his ecclesiastic and political career, a true man of his time that in the intellectual sense anticipates certain tendencies which are to become prominent in the mid of the 16th century. (shrink)

Der Artikel geht von der Einsicht aus, dass N. Cusanus und F. Patricius/Petrić zu jenen Renaissancedenkern gehören, die die Unendlichkeit des Weltalls vertreten. Im Hinblick auf diesen von ihnen geteilten Standpunkt ist es umso interessanter, ihre abweichenden, ja gegensätzlichen Meinungen bezüglich der Stellung der Erde im All und ihrer Bewertung zu verfolgen. Während sie für Cusanus eine „stella nobilis”, ein edler Stern ist, stellt sie für Petrić die „faex omnium rerum”, die Jauche aller Dinge dar. Im Text wird versucht herauszufinden, (...) was der Grund für die gegensätzlichen Standpunkte der beiden Renaissencephilosophen sein könnte. (shrink)

The starting point of this treatise is the fact that both Nicholas of Cusa and Franciscus Patricius/Frane Petrić , belong to that stream of Renaissance Thought, which propagate the thesis of the infinity of the universe. It is of great interest, considering their basic agreement about the universe, to explore the reasons of their disagreement about the position of the Earth in the universe and especially about evaluation of her position. While for Cusanus the Earth is “stella nobilis”, i. e. (...) “the noble star”, for Petrić it is “faex omnium rerum”, i. e. “faeces of all things”. The treatise represents an attempt to find out the reason of the difference in the views about the Earth in the philosophy of the two Renaissance thinkers. (shrink)

The article presents the life and work of Juraj Dragišić, a philosophical and theological writer, as one of the most important and influential Croatian philosphers of 15th and 16th century. A brief presentation of his university and ecclesiastical career is followed by a closer examination of some of Dragišić’s works in which he discusses a whole range of philosophical, theological, and logical issues, such as the problem of the authenticity of prophecies, freedom of will, restoration of Christianity, logics, and dialectical (...) skill, and others. In the conclusion, it has been pointed out that Dragišić was, not only due to his works, but also his ecclesiastic and political career, a true man of his time that in the intellectual sense anticipates certain tendencies which are to become prominent in the mid of the 16th century. (shrink)

Le texte part du fait que Nicolas de Cues ainsi que Franciscus Patricius , philosophe croate du XVIe siècle, font partie d’un courant de penseurs de la Renaissance ayant défendu l’hypothèse de l’infini de l’univers. Il est intéressant de voir comment, malgré ce point de départ commun, leurs théories sur la position de la Terre dans l’univers divergent. Si pour Nicolas de Cues, la Terre est une « stella nobilis », c’est-à-dire une étoile noble, Petrić la considère comme « faex (...) omnium rerum », déjection de toutes choses. L e texte tente de trouver l’origine de cette divergence entre les deux philosophes. (shrink)

U tekstu se polazi od uvida da Nikola Kuzanski i Frane Petrić pripadaju onim renesansnim misliocima koji zastupaju stav o beskonačnosti svemira. S obzirom na to zajedničko polazište, zanimljivo je njihovo neslaganje i štoviše oprečnost stavova vezanih uz položaj Zemlje u svemiru i njeno vrednovanje. Dok je za Kuzanskog ona »stella nobilis«, tj. plemenita zvijezda, za Petrića je »faex omnium rerum«, izmet sviju stvari. U tekstu se pokušava istražiti što je razlog tog razmimoilaženja u stavovima oko Zemlje dvojice renesansnih mislilaca.

Petrić, koji na Pletonovu tragu spise poznate pod naslovom Kaldejska proroštva pripisuje Zoroastru, »suvremeniku Abrahamovu, prvom otkrivaču astrologije i magije tj. mudrosti«, objavljuje te spise u »Dodatku« svoje Nove sveopće filozofije 1591. te 1593. godine pod naslovom Zoroaster et eius CCCXX Oracula Chaldaica, eius opera e tenebris eruta et latine reddita . Spisi će 1593. godine kao zasebno izdanje biti objavljeni u Hamburgu pod naslovom Magia philosophica hoc est Zoroaster et eius CCCXX Oracula chaldaica .Zoroastru pripisanu filozofiju Petrić zajedno sa (...) svojom vlastitom i s još tri filozofije, kao jednu »pobožnu filozofiju« podastire papi Grguru XIV. u zamjenu za Aristotelovu »bezbožnu « filozofiju što se »posvuda predaje po školama«.Prema njegovim vlastitim riječima, Petrić ulaže »nemali trud« u prikupljanje 324 stiha Kaldejskih proroštava, raspršenih po djelima različitih autora poglavito novoplatoničke orijentacije, sakupljajući ih u jedan cjelovit spis, koji raspoređuje u nekoliko tematskih cjelina i prevodi na latinski.U tekstu se nastoje sagledati Petrićevi motivi izdavanja Zoroastru pripisanih Oracula chaldaica, što se povezuje prije svega s pitanjem o tome jesu li i, ako jesu, kako su učenja iz Oracula prisutna u njegovoj vlastitoj filozofiji izloženoj u Novoj sveopćoj filozofiji.Svoj načelni stav o tome kako Proroštva funkcioniraju u njegovoj filozofiji iznosi Petrić u šestoj knjizi »Panarchije« Nove sveopće filozofije gdje kaže: »Ali mi filozofiramo pozivajući se na autoritete [pri čemu misli prije svega na Zoroastra] više kao na ures nego kao na temelj. Pozabavimo se stoga dokazima!« Premda, naime, Zoroastra priznaje kao autoritet, Petrić njegove izrijeke ne smatra filozofskim dokazima!Analizom Nove sveopće filozofije pokušava se u tekstu doći do odgovora na pitanje stoji li ova Petrićeva tvrdnja o pozivanju na autoritete kao na ures. Ujedno se nastoji sagledati specifičnost njegove interpretacije Kaldejskih proroštava, napose interpretacije koncepcije počela u njima izložene.Na kraju su značajke Petrićeve recepcije tih spisa rezimirane u jednoj njegovoj izjavi, vezanoj doduše uz pitanje razuma, no koja se može primijeniti i na sva ostala učenja izložena u Oracula chaldaica. Petrić u njoj znakovito kaže: »Međutim ta [sc. Zoroastrova] povijest o razumu ne čini se da se mnogo tiče naše filozofije, niti se pak mnogo razlikuje od nje.«The article attempts to examine Petrić’s motives for publishing Oracula Chaldaica, attributed to Zoroaster, and relate them primarily with the question of whether the teachings from the Oracles are present, and if so, in what way are they present in Petrić’s philosophy laid out in his Nova de universis philosophia.Petrić introduces his basic position on how Oracles function in his philosophy in the sixth book of “Panarchia” in Nova de universis philosophia, where he says: “But we philosophise by appealing to the authorities [by which he primarily means Zoroaster] more in the sense of an ornament than in the sense a foundation. Let us therefore deal with proofs!” Although, in fact, Petrić recognizes Zoroaster as an authority, he does not regard his sayings as philosophical proofs!Through the analysis of Nova de universis philosophia the article tries to answer the question whether the claim of appealing to the authorities merely as an ornament is justified. At the same time, it tries to expound the particularity of his interpretation of Chaldean Oracles, especially the interpretation of the notion of substance found in Oracles.Finally, the features of Petrić’s reception of these writings are summarized in one of his statements, although connected to the issue of reason, but which can be applied to all of the teachings of Oracula Chaldaica. He indicatively states: “However, this [sc. Zoroaster’s] history of reason does not seem to concern our philosophy very much, nor does it greatly differ from it.”. (shrink)