Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, Nov 1, 2022
The terms "Socinian" and "Arminian" (despite their often equivocal and polyvalent use) refer prim... more The terms "Socinian" and "Arminian" (despite their often equivocal and polyvalent use) refer primarily to the members of two small Christian communities viewed with great suspicion by the established churches: the Ecclesia minor of the Polish Brethren, on the one hand, and the Dutch Remonstrant Brotherhood, on the other. These were two numerically small and marginalized groups, but capable of influencing substantial numbers of theologians and intellectuals of different denominational backgrounds in many European countries. The Dutch Remonstrants faced frequent allegations of Socinianism: far from diminishing over time, these charges became harsher and more insistent after the destruction of the Ecclesia minor and the resulting Socinian diaspora. However, this study shows that the relationship was not one-way: Arminius' heirs in turn influenced those of Sozzini, as evidenced by the development of the two theological traditions on the crucial issue of Christ's redemption and atonement. At the end of the seventeenth century, on this as on other subjects, the theories of the Remonstrants established some hegemony over the doctrinal elaborations of the successors to the Socinian tradition.
The Philosophers and the Bible. The Debate on Sacred Scripture in Early Modern Thought, 2022
Bayle steers clear of the debate on the authority of Scripture and literal inspiration, apparentl... more Bayle steers clear of the debate on the authority of Scripture and literal inspiration, apparently entrenching himself within the orthodox doctrine. And yet his incursions into the biblical sphere are notable for their recklessness, because they increasingly highlight the incompatibility between the basic principles of natural morality and the conduct of some men of God, if not even of God himself. Judged against our moral standards, the divine course of action seems utterly as indefensible as that of King David
The paper is focused on the relation between art of writing and art of living in Montaigne, parti... more The paper is focused on the relation between art of writing and art of living in Montaigne, particularly in two Essays on education (Du pédantisme and De l’institution des enfants). On this ground the paper suggests some observations about the art of self-fashioning practiced by Montaigne, in the wake of humanism but also in opposition to it. This experiment is performed by writing the Essays, to the extent that ars scribendi and ars vivendi are inclined to be indistinguishable, in Montaigne’s case, in spite of his philistinism.
In questo libro si racconta la storia di un’idea che è legata al nome di Giacomo Leopardi, ma che... more In questo libro si racconta la storia di un’idea che è legata al nome di Giacomo Leopardi, ma che in realtà nasce nell’antichità e giunge fino ai nostri giorni. Secondo il Dialogo di un venditore di almanacchi e di un passeggere “nessuno vorrebbe rinascere” se la condizione fosse di “riavere la vita di prima, con tutto il suo bene e il suo male”, perché “ciascuno è d’opinione che sia stato più o di più peso il male che gli è toccato, che il bene”. Questo bilancio pessimistico della vita umana è stato condiviso da moltissimi autori e ha suscitato accese discussioni dai complessi risvolti filosofici e esistenziali. Di queste discussioni sono stati protagonisti Aristotele e Cicerone, Seneca e Agostino, Erasmo e Montaigne, La Mothe le Vayer e Bayle, Leibniz e Hume, Voltaire e Rousseau, Kant e Schopenhauer, Nietzsche e Pirandello e molti altri. Qui si ricostruisce per la prima volta questa lunga e misconosciuta vicenda, che riserva non poche sorprese e che pone a ciascuno di noi un inter...
Il libro che qui si offre per la prima volta al lettore italiano è unanimemente riconosciuto come... more Il libro che qui si offre per la prima volta al lettore italiano è unanimemente riconosciuto come uno dei grandi classici moderni sulla tolleranza, insieme al Trattato teologico- politico di Spinoza e alla Lettera sulla tolleranza di Locke. Ma a differenza degli altri due testi, pubblicati anch’essi in Olanda a pochi anni di distanza, il Commentario filosofico non è mai stato tradotto nella nostra lingua e resta per lo piú confinato a qualche citazione stereotipata nella maggior parte delle ricostruzioni della storia della libertà di coscienza e di pensiero. Eppure le tumultuose e spesso angosciose vicende degli ultimi decenni – a partire, grosso modo, dalla rivoluzione iraniana del 1979 e poi, in modo sempre piú drammatico, dopo l’11 settembre 2001 – hanno riacceso l’interesse per le origini delle idee di tolleranza, che sono ritenute, a torto o a ragione, caratteristiche della cultura dell’Occidente.Pierre Bayle (1647-1706) fu uno dei grandi protagonisti della “repubblica delle le...
In the eyes of Bayle, the Republic of Letters represents a free
and collaborative space, in whic... more In the eyes of Bayle, the Republic of Letters represents a free
and collaborative space, in which all scholars cooperate without regard to political and religious barriers; however, it is also the scene of fierce fighting, with
all against all as in Hobbes’ state of nature. Controversies, if not well regulated,
often serve to obscure the truth instead of clarifying it – yet the search for truth
cannot do without disputes. It is therefore a question of defining the rules and
limits of the controversy, despite knowing that in some ways it looks more like
a merciless struggle than a chivalric tournament. These rules are borrowed
from those typical of scholastic disputes, adapted not to the limited space of
the university classroom but to the wide and open landscape of the Republic of
Letters. However, as the foundation of these rules Bayle identifies the most basic principles of natural morality, on which every reasonable man must agree,
starting with the Golden Rule: quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris.
<div> <p>Bayle was the great adversary of Leibniz's theodicy, and it was only whe... more <div> <p>Bayle was the great adversary of Leibniz's theodicy, and it was only when faced with Bayle's reprimands against every possible theological justification of evil that Leibniz completely developed his own theory. The <i>Theodicy</i> was written, in fact, as a continual counterpoint to Bayle's arguments in the <i>Dictionnaire historique et critique</i> and other works. Bayle indicated the bankruptcy of any rational theology in confronting the question of evil, suggesting to the faithful the renunciation of every real cognitive content of their belief, and reducing it to mere <i>empty faith</i>. Christian theology thus became incapable of distinguishing itself from deism or atheism, from which it was separated only by a '<i>dispute de mots</i>'. It was the moral attributes of God in particular which Bayle considered completely ungraspable; and this was the challenge which Leibniz sought to take up, revisiting with courage and lucidity the arguments of both the theological and metaphysical traditions.</p> </div>
Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, Nov 1, 2022
The terms "Socinian" and "Arminian" (despite their often equivocal and polyvalent use) refer prim... more The terms "Socinian" and "Arminian" (despite their often equivocal and polyvalent use) refer primarily to the members of two small Christian communities viewed with great suspicion by the established churches: the Ecclesia minor of the Polish Brethren, on the one hand, and the Dutch Remonstrant Brotherhood, on the other. These were two numerically small and marginalized groups, but capable of influencing substantial numbers of theologians and intellectuals of different denominational backgrounds in many European countries. The Dutch Remonstrants faced frequent allegations of Socinianism: far from diminishing over time, these charges became harsher and more insistent after the destruction of the Ecclesia minor and the resulting Socinian diaspora. However, this study shows that the relationship was not one-way: Arminius' heirs in turn influenced those of Sozzini, as evidenced by the development of the two theological traditions on the crucial issue of Christ's redemption and atonement. At the end of the seventeenth century, on this as on other subjects, the theories of the Remonstrants established some hegemony over the doctrinal elaborations of the successors to the Socinian tradition.
The Philosophers and the Bible. The Debate on Sacred Scripture in Early Modern Thought, 2022
Bayle steers clear of the debate on the authority of Scripture and literal inspiration, apparentl... more Bayle steers clear of the debate on the authority of Scripture and literal inspiration, apparently entrenching himself within the orthodox doctrine. And yet his incursions into the biblical sphere are notable for their recklessness, because they increasingly highlight the incompatibility between the basic principles of natural morality and the conduct of some men of God, if not even of God himself. Judged against our moral standards, the divine course of action seems utterly as indefensible as that of King David
The paper is focused on the relation between art of writing and art of living in Montaigne, parti... more The paper is focused on the relation between art of writing and art of living in Montaigne, particularly in two Essays on education (Du pédantisme and De l’institution des enfants). On this ground the paper suggests some observations about the art of self-fashioning practiced by Montaigne, in the wake of humanism but also in opposition to it. This experiment is performed by writing the Essays, to the extent that ars scribendi and ars vivendi are inclined to be indistinguishable, in Montaigne’s case, in spite of his philistinism.
In questo libro si racconta la storia di un’idea che è legata al nome di Giacomo Leopardi, ma che... more In questo libro si racconta la storia di un’idea che è legata al nome di Giacomo Leopardi, ma che in realtà nasce nell’antichità e giunge fino ai nostri giorni. Secondo il Dialogo di un venditore di almanacchi e di un passeggere “nessuno vorrebbe rinascere” se la condizione fosse di “riavere la vita di prima, con tutto il suo bene e il suo male”, perché “ciascuno è d’opinione che sia stato più o di più peso il male che gli è toccato, che il bene”. Questo bilancio pessimistico della vita umana è stato condiviso da moltissimi autori e ha suscitato accese discussioni dai complessi risvolti filosofici e esistenziali. Di queste discussioni sono stati protagonisti Aristotele e Cicerone, Seneca e Agostino, Erasmo e Montaigne, La Mothe le Vayer e Bayle, Leibniz e Hume, Voltaire e Rousseau, Kant e Schopenhauer, Nietzsche e Pirandello e molti altri. Qui si ricostruisce per la prima volta questa lunga e misconosciuta vicenda, che riserva non poche sorprese e che pone a ciascuno di noi un inter...
Il libro che qui si offre per la prima volta al lettore italiano è unanimemente riconosciuto come... more Il libro che qui si offre per la prima volta al lettore italiano è unanimemente riconosciuto come uno dei grandi classici moderni sulla tolleranza, insieme al Trattato teologico- politico di Spinoza e alla Lettera sulla tolleranza di Locke. Ma a differenza degli altri due testi, pubblicati anch’essi in Olanda a pochi anni di distanza, il Commentario filosofico non è mai stato tradotto nella nostra lingua e resta per lo piú confinato a qualche citazione stereotipata nella maggior parte delle ricostruzioni della storia della libertà di coscienza e di pensiero. Eppure le tumultuose e spesso angosciose vicende degli ultimi decenni – a partire, grosso modo, dalla rivoluzione iraniana del 1979 e poi, in modo sempre piú drammatico, dopo l’11 settembre 2001 – hanno riacceso l’interesse per le origini delle idee di tolleranza, che sono ritenute, a torto o a ragione, caratteristiche della cultura dell’Occidente.Pierre Bayle (1647-1706) fu uno dei grandi protagonisti della “repubblica delle le...
In the eyes of Bayle, the Republic of Letters represents a free
and collaborative space, in whic... more In the eyes of Bayle, the Republic of Letters represents a free
and collaborative space, in which all scholars cooperate without regard to political and religious barriers; however, it is also the scene of fierce fighting, with
all against all as in Hobbes’ state of nature. Controversies, if not well regulated,
often serve to obscure the truth instead of clarifying it – yet the search for truth
cannot do without disputes. It is therefore a question of defining the rules and
limits of the controversy, despite knowing that in some ways it looks more like
a merciless struggle than a chivalric tournament. These rules are borrowed
from those typical of scholastic disputes, adapted not to the limited space of
the university classroom but to the wide and open landscape of the Republic of
Letters. However, as the foundation of these rules Bayle identifies the most basic principles of natural morality, on which every reasonable man must agree,
starting with the Golden Rule: quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris.
<div> <p>Bayle was the great adversary of Leibniz's theodicy, and it was only whe... more <div> <p>Bayle was the great adversary of Leibniz's theodicy, and it was only when faced with Bayle's reprimands against every possible theological justification of evil that Leibniz completely developed his own theory. The <i>Theodicy</i> was written, in fact, as a continual counterpoint to Bayle's arguments in the <i>Dictionnaire historique et critique</i> and other works. Bayle indicated the bankruptcy of any rational theology in confronting the question of evil, suggesting to the faithful the renunciation of every real cognitive content of their belief, and reducing it to mere <i>empty faith</i>. Christian theology thus became incapable of distinguishing itself from deism or atheism, from which it was separated only by a '<i>dispute de mots</i>'. It was the moral attributes of God in particular which Bayle considered completely ungraspable; and this was the challenge which Leibniz sought to take up, revisiting with courage and lucidity the arguments of both the theological and metaphysical traditions.</p> </div>
Il seminario si propone di affrontare alcuni dei più importanti momenti della riflessione sulla p... more Il seminario si propone di affrontare alcuni dei più importanti momenti della riflessione sulla profezia e i suoi poteri tra il primo Cinquecento e gli inizi del Settecento. Si tratta di un arco temporale vastissimo, rivoluzionato da epocali cambiamenti intellettuali e sociali, ma nel quale il problema del linguaggio profetico, che in età illuministica matura si ritrarrà sullo sfondo, si intreccia ancora, con una relativa continuità di temi e di riferimenti, ad alcuni dei più importanti nodi del pensiero religioso e della cultura filosofico-scientifica. Pomponazzi, Machiavelli, Campanella, Hobbes, Spinoza, Bayle e Vico sono i pensatori che il seminario mette in dialogo per rispondere ad alcune questioni fondamentali: che cosa si intende per profezia? Che rapporto sussiste tra il sapere profetico e le tipologie di conoscenza più suscettibili di accertamento e di verifica? Di quale tipo di linguaggio si avvale il profeta?
I sessione: 14 maggio 2020 (15:00 - 17:00) II sessione: 28 maggio 2020 (15:15 - 17:00) III sessione: 4 giugno 2020 (15:15 - 17:00)
Uploads
Papers by Stefano Brogi
and collaborative space, in which all scholars cooperate without regard to political and religious barriers; however, it is also the scene of fierce fighting, with
all against all as in Hobbes’ state of nature. Controversies, if not well regulated,
often serve to obscure the truth instead of clarifying it – yet the search for truth
cannot do without disputes. It is therefore a question of defining the rules and
limits of the controversy, despite knowing that in some ways it looks more like
a merciless struggle than a chivalric tournament. These rules are borrowed
from those typical of scholastic disputes, adapted not to the limited space of
the university classroom but to the wide and open landscape of the Republic of
Letters. However, as the foundation of these rules Bayle identifies the most basic principles of natural morality, on which every reasonable man must agree,
starting with the Golden Rule: quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris.
and collaborative space, in which all scholars cooperate without regard to political and religious barriers; however, it is also the scene of fierce fighting, with
all against all as in Hobbes’ state of nature. Controversies, if not well regulated,
often serve to obscure the truth instead of clarifying it – yet the search for truth
cannot do without disputes. It is therefore a question of defining the rules and
limits of the controversy, despite knowing that in some ways it looks more like
a merciless struggle than a chivalric tournament. These rules are borrowed
from those typical of scholastic disputes, adapted not to the limited space of
the university classroom but to the wide and open landscape of the Republic of
Letters. However, as the foundation of these rules Bayle identifies the most basic principles of natural morality, on which every reasonable man must agree,
starting with the Golden Rule: quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris.
Pomponazzi, Machiavelli, Campanella, Hobbes, Spinoza, Bayle e Vico sono i pensatori che il seminario mette in dialogo per rispondere ad alcune questioni fondamentali: che cosa si intende per profezia? Che rapporto sussiste tra il sapere profetico e le tipologie di conoscenza più suscettibili di accertamento e di verifica? Di quale tipo di linguaggio si avvale il profeta?
I sessione: 14 maggio 2020 (15:00 - 17:00)
II sessione: 28 maggio 2020 (15:15 - 17:00)
III sessione: 4 giugno 2020 (15:15 - 17:00)