BoundSci · Boundaries of Science: Medieval Condemnations of Philosophy as Heresy
Horizon 2020 — Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions
- Duration
- 2016-09-15 → 2018-09-14
- EU contribution
- €183,455
- Participants
- 1
- Scheme
- MSCA-IF
Lines connect the coordinator with its partners.
Results in brief
Boundaries of Science: Medieval Condemnations of Philosophy as Heresy
BoundSci is a multi-disciplinary project examining the Aristotelian scientific revolution in 13th-century Europe, and controversies it provoked over conflicts between philosophy and religious faith. It has investigated why some theologians and philosophers at medieval universities, particularly those of Paris and Oxford, labelled controversial philosophical theories ‘heretical’. Medieval European society was largely Christian; and these theories of Aristotelian natural philosophy (which we today classify as ‘science’) contradicted fundamental beliefs. The project has looked at the two most controversial theories in the context of the ‘heresy’ label: Aristotle’s theory of the Eternity of the World, which conflicted with Creation; and a theory of his Arab interpreter Averroes (d. 1198), the Unicity of the Intellect, which denied the afterlife of individual souls and their destination in heaven or hell. Strictly speaking, the theories were not heretical, as they had not been condemned by a pope or general Church council, who alone had the relevant authority. Because medieval scholastics (academics) were precise in their terminology, their use of the term ‘heresy’ in this context is significant. Surprisingly, not all of those using the term opposed the theories they gave this label: in some cases, they even supported these opinions, or aspects of them. BoundSci has combined the fields of history, medieval philosophy and theology to discover what lay behind this phenomenon. It has found that complex strategies, both philosophical and political, were behind this term use. Looked at together, the views and motivations of these diverse scholastics have produced a conclusion for the project: that they constitute a negotiation over which philosophical ideas were to be accepted and which were to be excluded from medieval (Christian) society – or, to put it simply, over where the boundary of this new science was to be drawn. The project’s overarching research objective was to answer the question: Did scholastic thinkers at the heart of the Aristotelian controversy of the 13th/early 14th centuries consider dangerous Aristotelian theories heretical? Research Objective 1 was to implement a new approach to the problem by addressing the overarching research question through a concentrated phase of data collection to identify cases of scholastics labelling controversial theories ‘heretical’ in scholastic texts. Research Objective 2 was to contextualise cases of scholastics calling theories heretical to understand the thinking/motivation behind the term use. Research Objective 3 was to evaluate whether, and how, the range of philosophical views and intentions behind the ‘heresy’ term use constitute a negotiation of the boundaries of late medieval science. BoundSci’s results contextualise this scientific revolution within late medieval society in terms of what, or how, new ideas could/could not be absorbed. Its findings are important for our understanding of this phase in Europe’s scientific history, and how it shaped scientific discourse and the avenues it could pursue.
Data: CORDIS, © European Union
Project objective
‘Boundaries of Science: Medieval Condemnations of Philosophy as Heresy’ addresses the limits we place on scientific investigation, according to our world view and what new ideas we are prepared to accept. It focuses on a critical example during the foundation of modern science in the 13th/14th centuries, when Aristotelian natural philosophy (books by Aristotle and his Muslim interpreters) entered Europe. This alien thinking caused a scientific revolution, but sparked controversy where theories denied Christian doctrines central to society’s outlook. Church and university authorities opposing dangerous theories condemned them, and investigated scholars. This project builds on my surprising discovery that some medieval scholastics labelled theories heretical, but in fact the theories did not fit heresy’s medieval definition. Curiously, some who used the term held risky positions. My objective is to determine whether scholastics considered dangerous theories heretical. Preliminary findings indicate some thought they should be classed as such; while others used the term for protection when holding risky views. Both groups acted strategically, to condemn or promote theories. I believe we witness here a negotiation process of where the boundary to permitted science should be drawn. My approach is new: historiography on the subject relies on scarce documentary evidence; instead I examine a rich source novel for this question, cases of scholastics calling theories heretical in philosophical/theological writings, and I analyse the context to determine their motivation. In redefining the philosophy/heresy relationship, I will give robust new perspective to the reception history and faith/reason problem. This innovative, multidisciplinary project will make a fact-based contribution to discussion of boundaries we place on scientific thinking, and will impact on how scholars and European society perceive the origins and development of our scientific heritage.
Original text from CORDIS.
Participants
- THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD · OxfordCoordinatorUnited Kingdom
Links
Data: CORDIS, © European Union
