|
The
Philosophy of
Nicholas
of Cusa
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Background: The New
Consideration of Nature
The Renaissance, as an age of transition, was
not conducive to the building of great
philosophical systems. It contained, in germinal
form, the directive ideas of modern times, but
under the guise of the past. Thinkers preferred to
write in ancient Latin, and the style of their
writing is also archaic. Under this external
aspect, which smacks of antiquity, are hidden the
signs of the next age.
The greatest representatives of thought, in the
order of time, are Nicholas of Cusa, Telesio,
Bruno, and Campanella;
the most important is Bruno. In the thought of all
these men there is a new view of nature, in which
nature is considered immanently, according to the
forces inherent in it, and is accessible to
experience and reason. These forces are considered
as living ones, vital spirits, demons; everything
is animate; the physical world has a soul.
It is necessary to investigate these animate
forces, for it is on the basis of their activity
that all events can be explained. It is because of
this desire to bring into subjection the occult
forces of nature that during the Renaissance we
find so widely diffused the science of "magic,"
which professes to know the good and evil spirits
of nature, and to make them allies in good and evil
enterprises.
Also characteristic are alchemy, with its
objective of discovering the philosophical stone
which can change everything into gold; and
medicine, with its hope of finding the panacea of
evil by uncovering the common animating force of
the universe. This is a charlatan school, to be
sure, but it indicates the tendency of some of the
chief exponents of the age to explain nature
through the forces imbedded in it.
Hence we see Neo-Platonic tendencies, and the
Neo-Platonic thinkers mentioned above. Although
Neo-Platonism, logically developed, leads to
pantheism, the thinkers of the Renaissance, with
the exception of Bruno, are not pantheists. Without
any logical foundation they still affirm
transcendency, but this more from faith than from
conviction.
Now to the
Philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa
I.
Life and Works
Nicholas Cryfts, called Nicholas of Cusa
(picture) from the name
of his native city, was born in 1401. German by
birth, he was Italian in his spiritual and cultural
formation. Before going to Padua for the study of
law, mathematics and astronomy, he had come under
the influence of the mysticism of Master Eckhart.
Ordained a Catholic priest, he took part in all the
religious controversies of the time, and worked
especially with the Council of Florence, which, it
was hoped, would lead to the union of the
churches.
He was made Cardinal and Bishop of Bressanone.
His favorite authors were St. Augustine,
Pseudo-Dionysius, Scotus Erigena, St. Bonaventure,
and other Neo-Platonists. A man of severe habits,
he died at Todi in 1464. His principal work is
De docta ignorantia (On Scientific
Ignorance); notable also are his De
conjecturis (On Conjectures); and De ludo
globi (On the Game of the World).
Nicholas of Cusa was a Neo-Platonist in thought,
and this led him to formulate a new type of logic
and a new interpretation of nature
(metaphysics).
II.
Theory of Knowledge
Human knowledge is a collective and unifying
activity; there are three stages in acquiring this
knowledge: phantasy, reason, intellect.
Phantasy (sense knowledge) has for its scope the
unification into a single representation of the
multiple data of the senses.
Reason (meaning abstractive and discursive
knowledge) is the faculty which abstracts universal
concepts; it never arrives at perfect unity. The
knowledge of reason, moreover, is deficient because
it represents reality in an improper manner, for it
is only founded on individual beings. Hence it
follows that concepts result from contradictory
notes, for instance, unity and multiplicity, being
and non-being. The principle of contradiction, the
basis of Aristotelian Scholastic logic, is good
within the limits of reason, but it gives us an
improper knowledge of reality.
We arrive at the knowledge of the reality (God),
and hence of unity and the infinite, only by means
of a third activity of the spirit, the faculty of
intellect, which is supra-rational understanding,
mystical intuition. This faculty, overcoming all
differences and multiplicity, presents the reality
(God) as perfect unity, in which all differences
are reconciled in the infinite life, the
"coincidence of opposites." The principle of
coincidence is for Nicholas of Cusa a new one on
which logic must be based in order to arrive at the
knowledge of reality.
Hence the title of Nicholas' work De Docta
ignorantia, which indicates the limitation of
human understanding (reason) as opposed to the
knowledge of God that is free of all such
limitation (supra-rational). Thus the agnosticism
of Nicholas of Cusa is corrected by his fideism,
which of course has nothing to do with
philosophy.
III.
Theodicy
God is infinite. The infinity of God leads
Nicholas of Cusa to affirm the coincidence of
opposites. Observing how, in a circumference
carried to infinity, the straight and the curved
line coincide, he affirms that in the infinity of
God all oppositions are identified, all
distinctions overcome, and all contrariety fades
into nothingness, since the correlative is not to
be found. God is the "implicatio" of all opposites.
But what in God is "implicatio" and "complicatio,"
becomes "explicatio" in the universe, which results
from multiplicity, distinction, and opposition.
This concept does not differ substantially from
the Neo-Platonic idea. The "explicatio" is
equivalent to Platonic emanations, by virtue of
which God, absolute unity, becomes multiple through
subsequent emanations. The concept of Nicholas of
Cusa becomes more dangerous because of the
consequences he derives from "explicatio." The
world is an infinite potential, and because
of this it participates in an attribute of
divinity. This theory was to be reaffirmed by
Giordano Bruno. God is
as it were contracted in beings; He is the absolute
quiddity of all the things in which He is
contracted.
Nicholas of Cusa was the first philosopher to
separate himself from Scholasticism. He began with
a logic based on the coincidence of opposites -- at
variance with Aristotelian-Scholastic logic, which
is based on the principle of contradiction. In
metaphysics he was Platonic, and the notion of the
transcendence of God was thus seriously
compromised.
In The Radical
Academy
Elsewhere On the
Internet
|