To appreciate the influence, covert or overt, of scepticism in the

Middle Ages we must clear the meaning of the word. Under the yoke of

tribal custom scepticism can hardly arise, there is no place for the

half-hearted, as all men feel alike so all think alike: scepticism

arises when beliefs are put into formal propositions. Then, as

experience and comparison enlarge, we detect scepticism in three forms

or degrees: namely, doubt of a particular creed; doubt of all unverified

propositions; and doubt of the validity of reason itself, whether in

respect of the supernatural only or of all argument. It is remarkable

that this last, the most devastating of the forms of scepticism, has

come from the ranks of the faithful (Pascal, Hamilton, Mansel), who in

resentment of the attacks of reason have turned blindly to rend reason

herself. No civil society has been without scepticism; even in ages of

most prevalent faith some current of doubt has flowed under the surface.

In the Ionian philosophy the place of scepticism was only restricted in

so far as many aspects of the subject-matter were not before those

thinkers; for instance no Greek philosopher would have separated faith

from reason. In the well-known words of Hippocrates, "[Greek: ouden

heteron heterou theioteron oude anthrôpinôteron, alla panta theia]."

"The Greek boldly set up his academy by the side of the temple." Even

Protagoras never taught the futility of all reason, nor even the

inconstancy of sensation which indeed is doctrine rather than

scepticism. Neo-platonism had its scepticism in the first two forms,

covering even the ground of the modern agnostic. Agnosticism does not

deny the existence of the ladder, but asserts that the ladder begins and

ends in the clouds; it is consistent therefore with ethical and

practical activity. When Abélard said "Dubitando enim ad inquisitionem

venimus, inquirendo veritatem percipimus," if a sceptic, he was no

infidel. Even in the thirteenth century it was never doubted that truth

is attainable, nor indeed that the Faith contained the truth. The

scepticism of that age was rather cautious and controversial than

faithless, and in practice divine discontent rather than indifference

([Greek: ataraxia]). Pyrrhonism on the other hand leads to slackness of

ethics; either to the insouciance of Horace and Montaigne, or to the

attitude of the seventeenth century in Padua (Pomponatius) and

elsewhere, when the "economy," ironic or disingenuous, of allotting

their several spheres to reason and dogma, if not first invented, became

as fashionable as in the pulpits and in the drawing-rooms of Mayfair.

"Comme savant j'ignore tout; comme citoyen je crois tout." The

_Hypotyposes Pyrrhonioe_ of Sextus Empiricus, whose influence in the

times of the Renascence was considerable, was not translated till the

fourteenth century. The detachment of mind and shrewd wisdom of John of

Salisbury foreshadowed Petrarch rather than Hume; and when John

discusses what it is given to man to know, asking the frequent question,

"Utrum contingat homini scire aliquid?", we must not fall into the error

of importing into his question all it connotes for ourselves. Likewise

when James of Douay (in MS. _De anima_, quoted by Hauréau) roundly says,

"Id quod recipitur ab aliquo non recipitur secundum naturam rei receptæ

sed secundum naturam recipientis ... sicut recipitur ita patitur....

Sensus judicando de sua passione non decipitur" and so on, he knew no

more whither this would lead than John Duns knew that his system must

lead to that of Spinoza. That guardians of morals and social cohesion,

from Cato to the Westminster Assembly, and from Samuel Johnson to

Cardinal Newman, should have distrusted scepticism even as reserve of

judgment, or indeed repelled it with fierceness; that priest, presbyter,

magistrate and moralist have tolerated irony, or even license, rather

than vigilant and radical criticism of doctrine, is intelligible; and

within limits springs from a justifiable apprehension. For the gay and

indolent sceptic veers to conformity, especially if he mistrust the

competence of reason; while the active sceptic endangers the theory of

his society, and of the sanctions upon which all moral conduct

temporarily depends. Hence the bitter condemnation of Galileo, "Perish

all physical science rather than one article of the Faith be lost."

Happily it is true that during times of transition piety and good

conduct survive by virtue of "inertia," that is by tradition, social

pressure, custom and sense of fitness; and it is true that in times of

transition, as in our own times, halting thought is quickened for a

while by plenitude of emotion, and wealth of æsthetic impressions makes

amends for poverty of ideas; yet that morals are based on a theory of

life is a truth still deeper and more abiding, and this deeper truth it

was the function of the "Ages of Faith" to root in the conscience of

mankind. "Abeunt studia in mores." As contrasted with Pyrrhonism,

scepticism in its normal sense, while it declares that the conformity of

notions with things in themselves cannot be postulated, for lack of an

external standpoint of comparison, and while it declines to be confuted

by the "regressus ad infinitum," for, having repudiated first principles

it is prepared to be pushed backwards to remoter and remoter causes, is

ready nevertheless to yield to assurance as facts are intercalated into

inferences, and as inferences thus stiffened by verification are found

to consist with each other and with the general context of experience.

If in the Middle Ages these various attitudes of mind were not fully

distinguished, yet scepticism was moving variably towards the demand for

verification on which all natural science is based; and the reaction was

not long delayed. In the thirteenth century the culture of Omeyad and

Abasid caliphs failed; by the end of the century philosophy was

denounced and its books were burned; the generous and learned Frederick

dashed himself in vain against the Papacy; Clement, the protector of

Bacon, was dead, and during the two following centuries, in Spain at any

rate, freedom of thought was crushed out by the Church. In the

fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the very name of Averroes--of "the

mad dog who barked against the Christ," the "Averroem impium [Greek: kai

tris kataraton]" of Erasmus--began to signify loose life as well as free

thought. Of this resentment there had been no trace in Albert or St

Thomas; but Imola had begun to wonder why Dante had treated so well

Averroes who, if the Great Commentator, was yet the father of infidels.

The Dominicans controlled the fine arts, and for them,--at Pisa, at

Siena, in the Spanish Chapel,--Orcagna, Gaddi, Spinello Aretino, Simone

Memmi abased the Empire, Averroes, and the new learning far more

intolerantly than Dante had done; and exalted the Pope, with his

handmaids Theology, Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric. In Santa Maria

Novella, Memmi represents the triumph of the Dominicans in theology,

Gaddi in philosophy; St Thomas and the Dominicans march triumphant over

Arius, Sabellius, Averroes, and Savonarola. Thus in the Middle Ages

Averroes appeared in two forms--first as the Great Commentator, later as

the blasphemer and father of infidels of the Campo Santo and of Santa

Maria Novella. In the fifteenth century the Council of Constance forbad

the laity to teach, under a penalty of forty days' excommunication. In

the sixteenth, in Granada, Ximenes burnt, it is said, 80,000 books of

Arab philosophy, as Torquemada did for Hebrew in Seville; medical works,

however, such as the Colliget[60] of Averroes, and his Commentary on

Galen, were spared.

With the greater renascence the second period of Scholasticism, and

indeed the Middle Ages themselves are closed. With the fall of

Constantinople the stream of learning, driven eastwards in the first

period of the Middle Ages, set westward again. Exiled grammarians now

found their shelter under the protection of the "literate tyrants" of

Italy, and with their spoil of manuscripts enriched the libraries of

Rome and Venice. The Universities of Bologna and Padua from their

foundation became notable for independence of thought; and, on the

revival of learning, for their peripatetic teaching as opposed to the

platonism of Florence, where, however, a spirit of accurate learning was

nurtured in the deciphering and verification of texts. The political and

commercial ambition of Venice, the Holland of Italy, of which State

Padua was the learned quarter, and the inflow of liberal thinkers from

other nations, kept her aloof from the fury of the Catholic reaction of

the sixteenth century, which ruined Paris; thus in North-east Italy the

spirit of modern science awoke sooner than in England or in France, and

inquisitive students, both home and foreign, were attracted rather to

Padua and to Bologna than, as in earlier times, to Paris.

In so far as Scholasticism may be described as a temporary

reconciliation of Aristotle--that is, of natural and secular

methods--with the Faith, this end had been attained, if at all, by St

Thomas; in St Thomas Scholasticism culminated. But no such artificial

truce could abide; and the issue of the chief scholastic controversy was

to be determined by one greater than St Thomas. The pilgrim to Ockham,

sitting in its church beneath the seven lancets of its twelfth century

window, may be solitary also in his memory of one of the greatest of

Englishmen, who saw that light six long centuries ago; yet a child

rather of our age than of his own. As Abélard had closed the gates upon

the neo-platonist tradition of Alexandria, so Ockham closed them against

realism in all its forms; and the Church cursed them both. In his own

person the occupation of professorial chairs by Franciscans came to an

end; Paris and the Thomists could not consistently oppose nominalism;

Duns the Northumbrian had inflated realism into a monstrous phantasm,

and speculative reason had to submit to the yoke of verification. Yet

what could nominalism do for theology, or for clerical schools? The

Franciscans for the most part had turned to mysticism, and thenceforth

the man of science and the devotee were to work apart. Furthermore, by

Ockham philosophy gained a new meaning, or lost all meaning. Before

Locke, Voltaire, and Kant, Ockham demonstrated that faculties were not

substances; and differentiated logic, psychology, and natural

science[61].

But if, as I have said, the way for Harvey and the other pioneers of

natural knowledge was thus prepared for them, it was still, even in the

seventeenth century, dark, rough and perilous. As in all times of

transition, still the weight of defunct systems rolled inertly along;

and while the new forces seemed to slumber stresses were accumulating.

In Oxford and Cambridge the influence of Linacre, and even of Caius[62],

seems to have been rather humanist than scientific[63]; in Oxford the

text rather than the inspiration of Aristotle prevailed, while in

Cambridge the platonist school, of which the charming Henry More was the

leader, full of inspiration as it was, soon evaporated into mysticism,

or obscurantism. Bacon and Harvey seem to have left Cambridge--for Paris

and Padua respectively--as Locke left Oxford[64], under some

discouragement. Of Paris the great days were over; it was in Padua that

medicine, long degraded or disguised, was now to prove her lineage as

the mother of natural science, and the truth of the saying of

Hippocrates that to know the nature of man one must know the nature of

all things. But on Harvey's arrival, Padua, which had become the first

school of Medicine in Europe, as was Bologna of Imperial Law[65], was

settling down upon the lees of the once noble school of Averroes: a

discipline which, by its original strength, by its freedom of thought,

and by the ascendency of its professors, had withstood in the thirteenth

century the direct condemnation of the brilliant fourth Lateran

Council; and in the sixteenth the thunders of Trent. Padua adopted

Averroism, in the fourteenth century, because of its medical contents;

in the two following centuries this system was emptied of heart and

life, but pattered and mumbled by pretentious pedants in North-east

Italy it prevailed till the seventeenth, when after a reign of three

centuries it was succeeded by the Cartesian. Of its phases in the

sixteenth century Patrizzi said, "Ingens ab his philosophorum numerus ac

successio manavit quæ in Aven Rois hypothesibus habitavit.... Inde

dubitationum ac quæstionum sexcentorum milium numerus manavit" (Disc.

Peripat. Vol. I. Venet. 1571; quoted by Renan, Averroès). The name of

Averroes, "perfectus et gloriosissimus physicus, veritatis amicus et

defensor intrepidus," became the shibboleth of philosophers who held the

different nature of the heavenly bodies against the "moderns" who

alleged the identity of matter in sky and earth, and the doctrine of the

universal against the individual soul.

Yet, in spite of Petrarch's gibes, Averroism in its spring had nursed

Padua with the milk of natural science. Even in its decay--for all

teaching of philosophy, as a separate study, must decay--the triumph of

the Faith was premature; like Jansenism, the School of Averroes, effete

as it became, held the ground for a more dangerous invasion, for

Leonardo, Telesio, Bruno, Gilbert, Sarpi, Campanella, Galileo, and

Harvey; for the pioneers of truth, not as consistency with tradition,

not as an alchemical search for real essences, nor indeed as wisdom

only; but as the verification of premises. This fuse Paracelsus fixed to

the shell which burst upon the Faith, upon Scholasticism, upon Galenism,

and even upon humanism, "So Christus spricht 'Perscrutamini scripturas';

warum soll ich nicht sagen 'Perscrutamini naturas rerum'?" The _Credo ut

intelligam_ of Augustine and Anselm of Canterbury; the _Intelligo ut

credam_ of Aquinas belonged to the past; and men began to cry "c'est

Dieu qui nous veut hérétiques." A criticism based upon a larger sense of

the relativity of knowledge, and, in the sixteenth century, a new

scepticism[66], which pierced even into the Vatican, as to the very

possibility of knowledge of the nature of being, were preparing the way

for new conceptions: but in ethics meanwhile men were falling either

into the carelessness of the scoffer or into the anti-nomianism of the

mystic. The brilliant futilities of the medieval dialectic had led to

weariness of spirit. After vain and vexatious jugglings with the dry

tissues of unchastened ratiocination, simplicity and even ignorance

brought their solace.

As from Florence humanism invaded English letters, so the Averroistic

physician of Padua became known, even in Chaucer's day, as a man of

secular rather than of Scriptural learning. In Padua, while Galileo was

teaching Euclid for a pittance, chairs of Averroistic philosophy were

filled by highly paid professors, whose "rotuli" or portfolios, many of

which now rest in the dust of the libraries of North Italy, were handed

down from one to another in deadly routine. Virtually, however, the

Averroistic tradition ended with a contemporary Paduan professor,

Cremonini, lifted into fame by Harvey's refutation in the _De motu

cordis_, and by his own repudiation of the satellites of Jupiter, bodies

for which Aristotle had made no provision. The coarseness and pedantry

of the Averroistic freethinkers, whose scepticism lacked the elegance

and sprightliness of the French, and their bastard language--mongrel of

Greek and Arabic--revolted the humanists also: "Nihil indoctius, nihil

insulsius, frigidius." "Unum te obsecro," Petrarch had said two hundred

years before (in his invectives against doctors, whom he classed with

astrologers, as afterwards indeed did Harvey more or less), "ut ab omni

consilio mearum rerum tui isti Arabes arceantur atque exsulent." "De

medicis non modo nil sperandum sed valde etiam metuendum[67]." The

doctors in their turn did not hide their disdain for poets. Whether

justly or unjustly, the Doctors of Medicine were classed with

astrologers and alchemists; the latter of whom Harvey repudiated

frankly, not altogether avoiding a contempt for chemistry itself. Clad

in fine raiment, with rings on their fingers and golden spurs on their

heels, they rode tall horses, and gave themselves pompous airs. The

humanist would rather pose as a believer than as an underbred infidel;

the Averroist protected the license of his doctrines and manners by

subterfuge and ironic evasion: and humanist and Averroist alike stood by

at the burning of Bruno[68].

It must not be supposed, however, that these pompous pedants had it all

their own way, and that Medicine was not better justified of her

children. It is full of interest for our present purpose to read in the

preface by Thomas Junta to the Edition of Averroes (1552), "Plerique

omnes juniores medici jam intolerabile in Arabum Mauritaniorumque

dogmata odium conceperunt, ut ne nominandi citandive locus relinquatur;

principes etiam Hippocratem atque Galenum habere nos prædicant." This

enlightenment seems to have come about in some part through the teaching

of Thomæus Nicolaus Leonicus[69], who began to lecture, for the first

time, from the Greek text of Aristotle (there were chairs thenceforth

for both the Arabian and the Greek Aristotle) in 1497.

It was with Galileo however that scientific research began in Padua, at

any rate for professors; and Galileo may be venerated as the first

modern naturalist to set the experimental method conceptually,

coherently, and thoroughly before himself, including the deductive side

of it. In the Harveian Oration of 1892, Dr Bridges reminded us that

Galileo conceived of motion and energy as calculable quantities, and

drew our attention to those most interesting experiments wherein

Galileo applied the pendulum to measure the rate and rhythm of the

pulse. Roger Bacon had dwelt upon experiment, but scarcely upon

methodical verification thereby. The chemistry of Albert of Cologne was

but a return of the curiosity of Geber of Cordova (in the ninth

century). Even Francis Bacon saw the method less clearly than Galileo

had done; and, as the last of the schoolmen and encyclopedists, he made

a place for it rather in literature and philosophy: he ignored, as the

scientific Descartes welcomed, the cardinal discoveries of Copernicus

and of Harvey[70]. But if Galileo discovered the experimental method as

a method, before Galileo the method was in use. Leonardo had laid down

the rule of investigation of nature by experiment, and the aphorism that

nature never deceives us; unfortunately his manuscripts were not

published. In the first half of the fifteenth century Nicholas of Cusa

weighed plants at definite stages of their growth in known weights of

earth; and he weighed the moisture of the air. His contemporary Leon

Battista Alberti of Genoa had done likewise. But above all the

scientific forerunners of Galileo and Harvey stands William Gilbert,

Fellow of St John's College, Doctor of Medicine of Cambridge, Censor and

President of this College, Physician to Queen Elizabeth, and Founder of

the science of Magnetism.

The century dating from the birth of Galileo to the death of Harvey was

perhaps the most brilliant in the history of modern knowledge. The

discovery of Greek texts had destroyed the conventional Aristotle, the

conventional Hippocrates and Galen; since the latter part of the

sixteenth century Greek had been taught in the High Schools, philosophy

was born again, and men found themselves no longer the slaves but the

kin of the great ancients. Telesius, Bruno, Campanella vindicated

natural science and liberty of thought. Galileo taught in Padua for

twenty years, including the time when Harvey graduated there; Torricelli

was a pupil of the great Florentine; in 1582, on the theory of

Copernicus, Gregory reformed the Calendar, and thus laid the axe to the

root of astrology; by Newton terrestrial physics were established in the

celestial spheres[71]. Malpighi, who was to fulfil Harvey's discovery

and foresight, was born in N.-E. Italy in the very year (1628) in which

the _De motu cordis_ was published. In 1626 Boyle was creating

chemistry. Anatomy, which had slept since its days in Alexandria, was

fully awake. The Society of the Lincei was virtually founded in 1603;

the Royal Society[72] in 1645; the Academy of France in 1656. Clinical

teaching, initiated in Salerno and advanced by the _Consilia_

_medica_[73], was formally established in Padua[74], to be pursued in

Heidelberg, Leyden, and Vienna. Thus was the study "De rerum natura

juxta propria principia" unfolded, and the "Civitas Dei" gave place to

the "Regnum Hominis."

The "Regnum Hominis"! Yet when I look, from a respectful distance, upon

the folios of the schoolmen, monuments, I am told, as empty as the

Pyramids of Egypt, my mind turns back to the fiery and turbulent tribes

which in the "deep but dazzling darkness" of the Middle Ages raged upon

a barren land before the nations began; and I wonder if the ideas which

awed them, swayed them, and welded them into stable societies were

fancies as wild and sterile; and if the men who wrought them were mere

traffickers in words. And then I wonder if we are glad that the riddle

of the origin and issues of being, which tormented their eager hearts,

is not solved, but proved insoluble: if we are glad that "sub specie

hominis" the earth, no longer the nursery of eternal souls, is but a

meteor in the sky; men and women but the gleam upon it; the sons of

Heaven but companies of whirling stones, and the Father of Heaven an

inaccessible idea.

The scholastic philosophies became inhuman only in their decrepitude. In

the equal eye of history, the Middle Ages teach us that the slow and

painful travail of natural science is not to be regarded as the belated

labour of light in the womb of darkness, nor as a mere stifling of the

growth of the human mind by tyranny and oppression, nor indeed as the

arming of moral forces against brute forces, but as the condition of

time in the making of societies on a necessarily provisional theory of

life. They teach us that conduct in state and morals depends upon a

theory of life; that although habits and even standards of ethics may

abide for a time after the theory on which they were built is sapped, it

is but for a time; that if the social discipline and fruition are to be

renewed and enlarged it must be upon a new synthesis, as laborious and

ardent as the former, and more true. Meanwhile the business of a nation,

whether in war or peace, is first to be quick and strong in action, to

be rational afterwards; and swiftness and strength come of union of

wills and singleness of heart rather than of wisdom. Even within its

borders freedom of opinion must awaken slowly; the nation strong enough

to suffer irresolutions in its outward policy has yet to appear. Hence

it is that we find in ruling classes, and in social circles which put on

aristocratical fashions, that ideas, and especially scientific ideas,

are held in sincere aversion and in simulated contempt.

The Greek was no heathen, suckled by nature and endowed only with her

instincts; he sought in his mind to improve nature: but in the

Renascence instincts were set as free as thought. In this passionate

and adventurous time to preach the destruction of the animal instincts,

or to crush them for the higher life, was a noble idea, but an

impossible hope; the animal impulses are to be trained, not suppressed,

and for this the help of science was to come. Yet science was to be not

the hated rival but a necessary ally of religion. It is not within the

province of science to answer the medieval searchings on the nature of

being, nevertheless this threshold problem--"_der Drudenfuss auf der

Schwelle_"--faces us still; and the world, so far as we have seen of it,

has always demanded a provisional answer. To-day Professor James Ward

offers it again in "Supreme Intelligence"; and Principal Caird

("Fundamental Christianity") yearns for the knowledge of infinite being

almost in the words of Plato himself:--"If," he cries, "underneath all

the phenomena of the world in which we live we can discern no principle

of reason and order, no absolute intelligence and love, then indeed"

this world is a "meaningless waste."

Gilbert Galileo and Harvey, Maxwell Hertz and Darwin have taught men not

that the speculations of the schoolmen were over-bold, for they busied

themselves with no speculations bolder or more transcendental than are

our modern theories on matter, on inertia, on the ether, or on the

origin of life, but that metaphysics by "intercalation of facts" shall

become physics, that, in the words of Descartes, concepts, if "[Greek:

meta ta physika]," "talia sint tantum ut omnibus naturae phænomenis

accurate respondeant," and that notions great and small shall be

subjected to strict verification, so far as such tests can be carried;

not that men shall deny themselves the rapture of touching that various

instrument they find within themselves, but that they shall endure the

drudgery of learning to play it in harmony with the orchestra of nature;

not that they shall desist from imagining, but that before proclaiming

hypotheses they shall be compelled to the humble task of making an

infinite number of little piles of facts. The art of experiment can grow

only with the growth of science itself; instruments of precision are not

provided till men feel the need of them. The experimental verification

of concepts is no mere alternative path, no mere renunciation, but a new

birth; a birth into a dull and vexatious discipline for the impatient

Hegelian, whether of the thirteenth or of the twentieth century, who

believes that, as mind is the product of evolution, and so the sum and

store of nature, "in dem Gedanken selbst das Wahre ist zu suchen[75]."

"Long fed on boundless hopes, O race of man,

How angrily thou spurn'st all simpler fare."

Science and Medieval Thought The Harveian Oration Delivered Before the Royal College of Physicians, October 18, 1900 · 第 3 / 6 段