Giordano Bruno: The Forgotten Philosopher
by John
J. Kessler, Ph.D., Ch.E.
In the year 1548
an Italian boy was born in the little town of Nola, not far from
Vesuvius. Although, he spent the greater part of his life in
hostile and foreign countries he was drawn back to his home at
the end of his travels and after he had written nearly twenty
books.
Bruno
When he was
thirteen years old he began to go to school at the Monastery of
Saint Domenico. It was a famous place. Thomas Aquinas, himself a
Dominican, had lived there and taught. Within a few years Bruno
had become a Dominican priest.
It was not long
before the monks of Saint Dominico began to learn something
about the extraordinary enthusiasm of their young colleague. He
was frank, outspoken and lacking in reticence. It was not long
before he got himself into trouble. It was evident that this boy
could not be made to fit into Dominican grooves. One of the
first things that a student has to learn is to give the teacher
the answers that the teacher wants. The average teacher is the
preserver of the ancient land marks. The students are his
audience. They applaud but they must not innovate. They must
learn to labor and to wait. It was not Bruno's behavior but his
opinions that got him into trouble.
He ran away from
school, from his home town, from his own country and tried to
find among strangers and foreigners a congenial atmosphere for
his intellectual integrity that he could not find at home. It is
difficult not to get sentimental about Bruno. He was a man
without a country and, finally, without a church.
Bruno was
interested in the nature of ideas. Although the name was not yet
invented it will be perfectly proper to dub Bruno as an
epistemologist, or as a pioneer Semanticist. He takes fresh
stock of the human mind.
It is an
interesting fact that here, at the close of the 16th Century, a
man, closed in on all sides by the authority of priestly
tradition, makes what might be termed a philosophical survey of
the world which the science of the time was disclosing. It is
particularly interesting because it is only in the 20th Century
that the habit of this sort of speculation is again popular.
Bruno lived in a period when philosophy became divorced from
science. Perhaps it might be better to say that science became
divorced from philosophy. Scientists became too intrigued with
their new toys to bother about philosophy. They began to busy
themselves with telescopes and microscopes and chemical
glassware.
In 1581 Bruno went
to Paris and began to give lectures on philosophy. It was not an
uncommon thing for scholars to wander from place to place. He
made contacts easily and was able to interest any group with
whom he came in contact with the fire of his ideas. His
reputation reached King Henry III who became curious to look
over this new philosophical attraction. Henry Ill was curious to
find out if Bruno's art was that of the magician or the
sorcerer. Bruno had made a reputation for himself as a magician
who could inspire greater memory retention. Bruno satisfied the
king that his system was based upon organized knowledge. Bruno
found a real patron in Henry Ill and it had much to do with the
success of his short career in Paris.
It was about this
time that one of Bruno's earliest works was published, De Umbras
Idearum, The Shadows of Ideas, which was shortly followed by Ars
Mernoriae, Art of Memory. In these books he held that ideas are
only the shadows of truth. The idea was extremely novel in his
time. In the same year a third book followed: Brief Architecture
of the Art of Lully with its Completion. Lully had tried to
prove the dogmas of the church by human reason. Bruno denies the
value of such mental effort. He points out that Christianity is
entirely irrational, that it is contrary to philosophy and that
it disagrees with other religions. He points out that we accept
it through faith, that revelation, so called, has no scientific
basis.
In his fourth work
he selects the Homeric sorcerer Circi who changed men into
beasts and makes Circi discuss with her handmaiden a type of
error which each beast represents. The book 'Cantus Circaeus,'
The Incantation of Circe, shows Bruno working with the principle
of the association of ideas, and continually questioning the
value of traditional knowledge methods.
In the year 1582,
at the age of 34 he wrote a play Il Candelajo, The Chandler. He
thinks as a candle-maker who works with tallow and grease and
then has to go out and vend his wares with shouting and
ballyhoo:
"Behold in
the candle borne by this Chandler, to whom I give birth, that
which shall clarify certain shadows of ideas ... I need not
instruct you of my belief. Time gives all and takes all away;
everything changes but nothing perishes. One only is immutable,
eternal and ever endures, one and the same with itself. With
this philosophy my spirit grows, my mind expands. Whereof,
however obscure the night may be, I await the daybreak, and they
who dwell in day look for night ... Rejoice therefore, and keep
whole, if you can, and return love for love."
There came a time
when the novelty of Bruno had worn off in France and he felt
that it was time to move on. He went to England to begin over
again and to find a fresh audience. He failed to make scholastic
contact with Oxford. Oxford, like other European universities of
this time, paid scholastic reverence to the authority of
Aristotle. A great deal has been written about the Middle Ages
being throttled by the dead hand of Aristotle. It was not the
methods of Aristotle nor the fine mind of Aristotle which were
so much in question as it was the authority of Aristotle. A
thing must be believed because Aristotle said it. It was part of
the method of Bruno to object in his own strenuous fashion to
the cramming down one's throat of statements of fact because
Aristotle had made such statements when they were plainly at
variance with the fresh sense experience which science was
producing.
In his work The
Ash Wednesday Supper, a story of a private dinner, being
entertained by English guests, Bruno spreads the Copernican
doctrine. A new astronomy had been offered the world at which
people were laughing heartily, because it was at variance with
the teachings of Aristotle. Bruno was carrying on a spirited
propaganda in a fighting mood. Between the year 1582 and 1592
there was hardly a teacher in Europe who was persistently,
openly and actively spreading the news about the "universe which
Copernicus had charted, except Giordano Bruno. A little later on
another and still more famous character was to take up the work:
Galilee.
Galileo never met
Bruno in person and makes no mention of him in his works,
although he must have read some of them. We may not blame
Galilee for being diplomat enough to withhold mention of a
recognized heretic. Galilee has often been criticized because he
played for personal safety in the matter of his own
difficulties. We demand a great deal of our heroes.
While in England
Bruno had a personal audience with Queen Elizabeth. He wrote of
her in the superlative fashion of the time calling her diva,
Protestant Ruler, sacred, divine, the very words he used for His
Most Christian Majesty and Head of The Holy Roman Empire. This
was treasured against him when he was later brought to trial as
an atheist, an infidel and a heretic. Queen Elizabeth did not
think highly of Bruno. She thought him as wild, radical,
subversive and dangerous. Bruno found Englishmen rather crude.
Bruno had no
secure place in either Protestant or Roman Catholic religious
communities. He carried out his long fight against terrible
odds. He had lived in Switzerland and France and was now in
England and left there for Germany. He translated books, read
proofs, and got together groups and lectured for whatever he
could get out of it. It requires no great stretch of the
imagination to picture him as a man who mended his own clothes,
who was often cold, hungry and shabby. There are only a few
things that we know about Bruno with great certainty and these
facts are the ideas which he left behind in his practically
forgotten books, the bootleg literature of their day. After
twenty years in exile we picture him as homesick, craving the
sound of his own native tongue and the companionship of his own
countrymen. But he continued to write books. In his book De la
Causa, principio et uno, On Cause, Principle, and Unity we find
prophetic phrases:
"This entire
globe, this star, not being subject to death, and dissolution
and annihilation being impossible anywhere in Nature, from time
to time renews itself by changing and altering all its parts.
There is no absolute up or down, as Aristotle taught; no
absolute position in space; but the position of a body is
relative to that of other bodies. Everywhere there is incessant
relative change in position throughout the universe, and the
observer is always at the center of things."
His other works
were The Infinity, the Universe and Its Worlds, The Transport of
Intrepid Souls, and Cabala of the Steed like unto Pegasus with
the Addition of the Ass of Cyllene, an ironical discussion of
the pretensions of superstition. This "ass," says Bruno, is to
be found everywhere, not only in the church but in courts of law
and even in colleges. In his book The Expulsion of the
'Triumphant Beast' he flays the pedantries he finds in Catholic
and Protestant cultures. In yet another book The Threefold Leas
and Measure of the Three Speculative Sciences and the Principle
of Many Practical Arts, we find a discussion on a theme which
was to be handled in a later century by the French philosopher
Descartes. The book was written five years before Descartes was
born and in it he says: "Who so itcheth to Philosophy must set
to work by putting all things to the doubt."
He also wrote Of
the Unit, Quantity and Shape and another work On Images, Signs
and Ideas, as well as On What is Immense and Innumerable;
Exposition of the Thirty Seals and List of Metaphysical Terms
for Taking the Study of Logic and Philosophy in Hand. His most
interesting title is One Hundred Sixty Articles Directed Against
the Mathematics and Philosophers of the Day. One of his last
works, The Fastenings of Kind, was unfinished.
It is easy to get
an impression of the reputation which Bruno had created by the
year 1582 in the minds of the clerical authorities of southern
Europe. He had written of an infinite universe which had left no
room for that greater infinite conception which is called God.
He could not conceive that God and nature could be separate and
distinct entities as taught by Genesis, as taught by the Church
and as even taught by Aristotle. He preached a philosophy which
made the mysteries of the virginity of Mary, of the crucifixion
and the mass, meaningless. He was so naive that he could not
think of his own mental pictures as being really heresies. He
thought of the Bible as a book which only the ignorant could
take literally. The Church's methods were, to say the least,
unfortunate, and it encouraged ignorance from the instinct of
self-preservation.
Bruno wrote:
"Everything, however men may deem it assured and evident,
proves, when it is brought under discussion to be no less
doubtful than are extravagant and absurd beliefs." He coined the
phrase "Libertes philosophica." The right to think, to dream, if
you like, to make philosophy. After 14 years of wandering about
Europe Bruno turned his steps toward home. Perhaps he Was
homesick. Some writers have it that he was framed. For Bruno to
go back to Italy is as strange a paradox as that of the rest of
his life.
He was invited to
Venice by a young man whose name was Mocenigo, who offered him a
home and who then brought charges against him before the
Inquisition. The case dragged on. He was a prisoner in the
Republic of Venice but a greater power wanted him and he was
surrendered to Rome. For six years, between 1593 and 1600 he lay
in a Papal prison. Was he forgotten, tortured? Whatever
historical records there are never have been published by those
authorities who have them. In the year 1600 a German scholar
Schoppius happened to be in Rome and wrote about Bruno, who was
interrogated several times by the Holy Office and convicted by
the chief theologians. At one time he obtained forty days to
consider his position; by and by he promised to recant, then
renewed his "follies." Then he got another forty days for
deliberation but did nothing but baffle the pope and the
Inquisition. After two years in the custody of the Inquisitor he
was taken on February ninth to the palace of the Grand
Inquisitor to hear his sentence on bended knee, before the
expert assessors and the Governor of the City.
Bruno answered the
sentence of death by fire with the threatening: "Perhaps you, my
judges, pronounce this sentence against me with greater fear
than I receive it." He was given eight more clays to see whether
he would repent. But it was no use. He was taken to the stake
and as he was dying a crucifix was presented to him, but he
pushed it away with fierce scorn.
They were wise in
getting rid of him for he wrote no more books, but they should
have strangled him when he was born. As it turned out, they did
not get rid of him at all. His fate was not an unusual one for
heretics; this strange madcap genius was quickly forgotten. His
works were honored by being placed on the Index expurgatorius on
August 7, 1603, and his books became rare. They never obtained
any great popularity.
In the early part
of the 18th Century English deists rediscovered Bruno and tried
to excite the imagination of the public with the retelling of
the story of his life, but this aroused no particular
enthusiasm.
The enthusiasm of
German philosophy reached the subject of Bruno when Jacobi
(1743-1819) drew attention to the genius of Bruno and German
thinkers generally recognized his genius but they did not read
his books. In the latter part of the 19th Century Italian
scholars began to be intrigued with Bruno and for a while "Bruno
Mania" was part of the intellectual enthusiasm of cultured
Italians. Bruno began to be a symbol to represent the forward-
looking free-thinking type of philosopher and scientist, and has
become a symbol of scientific martyrdom. Bruno was a truant, a
philosophical tramp, a poetic vagrant, but has no claims to the
name of scientist. His works are not found in American
libraries. In this age of biographical writing it is surprising
that no modern author has attempted to reconstruct his life,
important because it is in the direct line of modern progress.
Bruno was a pioneer who roused Europe from its long intellectual
sleep. He was martyred for his enthusiasm.
Bruno was born
five years after Copernicus died. He had bequeathed an
intoxicating idea to the generation that was to follow him. We
hear a lot in our own day about the expanding universe. We have
learned to accept it as something big. The thought of the
Infinity of the Universe was one of the great stimulating ideas
of the Renaissance. It was no longer a 15th Century God's
backyard. And it suddenly became too vast to be ruled over by a
15th Century God. Bruno tried to imagine a god whose majesty
should dignify the majesty of the stars. He devised no new
metaphysical quibble nor sectarian schism. He was not playing
politics. He was fond of feeling deep thrills over high visions
and he liked to talk about his experiences. And all of this
refinement went through the refiners' fire -- that the world
might be made safe from the despotism of the ecclesiastic 16th
Century Savage. He suffered a cruel death and achieved a unique
martyr's fame. He has become the Church's most difficult alibi.
She can explain away the case of Galileo with suave
condescension. Bruno sticks in her throat.
He is one martyr
whose name should lead all the rest. He was not a mere religious
sectarian who was caught up in the psychology of some mob
hysteria. He was a sensitive, imaginative poet, fired with the
enthusiasm of a larger vision of a larger universe ... and he
fell into the error of heretical belief. For this poets vision
he was kept in a dark dungeon for eight years and then taken out
to a blazing market place and roasted to death by fire.
It is an
incredible story.
The "Church" will
never outlive him.
* http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_kessler/giordano_bruno.html
I believe;
The priests fired Bruno in order go to Paradise while
he was closer to God than them.
Sincerely
Hossein Javadi
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Newest
articles
|