Throughout the 11th and 12th centuries, education saw a massive boost in popularity, with universities popping up all throughout Europe, from Oxford, England in 1096 to Bologna in Italy in 1088. With these universities grew the studies of the various liberal arts, not the least significant of which being the study of philosophy. As one could expect, religion was a hot topic for philosophy at the time, as it is today. Many different scholars brought many different ideas to the table regarding the scriptures (Bennett 273). Wading through all of the interpretations and ideas regarding scripture was likely a confusing pain, and lead people to find contradictory conclusions, muddying the waters of religion even further.
Enter one Peter Abelard. Abelard, born 1079, was a fierce logician of the middle ages. He found various contradictions in the teachings of the scriptural authorities, and went on to create a method of resolving these contradictions through the use of logic. This method would go on to become what is known as the “scholastic method” (Bennett 275). All of this was contained in the topic of this blog entry, a book entitled “Sic et Non,” or in English “Yes and No,” originally published around 1122. In the text, Abelard establishes that his intent is not to question the authority of God, but to instead highlight the contradictions made by later philosophers, scribes, and translators (Medieval Sourcebook). Abelard then establishes his method of logically resolving said contradictions. From there, Abelard lists 158 different questions and the different takes each philosophy has on the questions. Abelard does not, however, apply his own method to resolving these contradictions, instead leaving it up to his students (Bennett 276).
This book, and Abelard’s thoughts and works in general, caused him a great deal of trouble, as various other teachers would come to attack him. One such example was that of Bernard of Clairvaux, who labelled his theology “wild imaginations upon the Holy Scripture” (Bennett 276). Abelard was chased around to various places until his death in 1142, but his book would come to play an important role in education for years to come.
Works Cited
Bennett, Judith M. Medieval Europe: a Short History. Langara College, 2016.
“Medieval Sourcebook: Peter Abelard (1079-1142): Prologue to Sic Et Non.” Internet History Sourcebooks Project, https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/Abelard-SicetNon-Prologue.asp.
Historical artifacts from the Middle Ages. Vivid, colorful, and illuminating the past. Here we analyze objects, artifacts, monuments, relics, and material culture as a response to the numerous myths that circulate 'fake news' about the Middle Ages--from their belief in the flat earth (fake!) to the female lock-n-key chastity belts (fake!). In addition, this site will highlight medieval films in all their attempted history (for better or worse). Let's get medieval.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I love Abelard's approach, because he is not searching to diminish or tear down religion, simply reach a truth with it. Abelard caused people to question and think about things that they before had simply just taken as the truth.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSince Aristotle's works were not popularized in Europe until the late 12th Century, it is very interesting to me that Abelard had the mindset of logical criticism similar to an Aristotilian approach in the 11th Century. This makes me wonder if Abelard may have had some Muslim or Jewish influence. His approach is also reminiscent of the philosophy of Al-Mamun, perhaps there is a link there?
ReplyDeleteI always hear of these highly touted institutions, but we never hear about what they taught the students at these Universities. This blog post is very helpful in furthering my knowledge about these Universities. I really enjoy Abelard’s approach to religion and schooling. Great post!
ReplyDeleteHe must of had nerves of steel to speak his mind like he did. I am sure others had questions or doubts about the bible but they were to scared to go against the grain.
ReplyDeleteI like how he was willing not to follow suit and challenged the spiritual leaders were saying. Seemed a head of his time not just going what the church said and challenged for more reason.
ReplyDeleteI think we have forgotten how to do stuff like this now at days. We have, with social media, forgotten how to converse and discuss. Instead we only tare down each other with personal attacks. We like to use ad hominem for our debates.
ReplyDelete