Renaissance Understandings of Humankind - Essay Example

Critically assess Renaissance understandings of humankind Renaissance understanding of humankind is multi-faceted, considering that different individuals have different understanding of the Renaissance of humankind. However, while critically assessing the different understanding, it is fundamental to start with the understanding of Pico Mirandola, a philosopher who approaches the concept of Renaissance from the very core of human kind; the creation. The Renaissance understandings of humankind by Pico, centers on the concept of freedom, as the major factor that differentiates man from the rest of the creatures and organisms placed in the world (Mirandola, 1965 p5). The aspects of sharp senses, power of reason, and high level of intelligence, as presented under the Oration On the Dignity of Man also seen as the manifesto to the Renaissance, as the aspects that put mankind in a unique category from the rest of the creatures, owing the fact that these characteristics of mankind serves as the bridge between the lower cadre of life which consists of God’s creatures, and the higher cadre consisting of God and all that is in heaven (Mirandola, 1965 p3). Therefore, the concept of hierarchy existed before the middle Ages, according to Plotinus idea of The One the Demiurge, and the Material World, and thus the middle ages just created a more organized theory. However, the most important of all the factors that completely put mankind in a unique position, is the freedom of judgment that mankind was granted by the creator, so that he could be able to differentiate the good and the bad, and based on this judgment, he could then get an opportunity to ascend upwards, from the middle category where he was created to fit, to join the upper cadre of life (Mirandola, 1965 p5). Therefore, Renaissance of humankind is pitched on the concept of happiness, which is derived from freedom, where mankind was given that; “Liberty of God the father! O great and wonderful happiness of man! It is given to him to have that which he chooses and to be that which he wills” (Mirandola, 1965 p5). Nevertheless, while the concept of freedom and happiness informs Pico’s philosophy of the Renaissance understandings of humankind, there seems to be some form of contradiction in this philosophy. His philosophy points to the fact that man was created with absolute freedom to choose, so that he could become all that he wished to become and have everything that he chose to have. However, the philosophy is later contradicted by upholding the principle that God spoke to man after creation, and told him “Though canst grow downwards into the lower natures which are brutes. Though canst again, grow upwards from thy soul’s reason into the higher natures which are divine” (Mirandola, 1965 p5). This indicates a limitation into the freedom that man was granted, indicating that while he had been given all the freedom and choices to have all that he wanted to have and become all that he wished to become, there was a limitation into that freedom, in that mankind has been restricted from ascending to the divine natures, or from reducing his nature into a brute. This is a limitation to the absolute freedom and happiness alluded to by Pico’s philosophy, considering that absolute freedom is only attainable where there is no limitation, and happiness is ultimately achieved where there are no restrictions. Therefore, Pico’s philosophy on Renaissance of humankind is contradictory. Additionally, he pitches his philosophy on the religious teachings, yet he embraces the non-religious views of other philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle, thus contradicting his philosophical principles (Mirandola, 1965 p22). The other contradicting aspect is that Pico demonstrates his philosophy through drawing from the Biblical principles and characterizations of Biblical figures such as Jacob, Job, Enoch and Moses, whose freedom and happiness were greatly limited, to affirm the freedom and happiness understanding of the Renaissance of humankind (Mirandola, 1965 p14). This serves to contradict his philosophy even further. The other perspective on the Renaissance understandings of humankind is that of Paul Richard Blum, whose perspective is based on the immortality of the soul of mankind. Blum’s philosophy of the Renaissance of humankind is that, it is the immortality of the soul that gives humanity superiority to animals, and grants mankind the lasting reality (Blum, n.d. p211). While the other creatures may cease to exist at one point in their life, the life of humans continues indefinitely, considering that life of the soul transcends the perishability of the body, and thus continues to exist, even after the body is no more (Blum, n.d. 212). While the advocates of the immortality holds that the soul does not cease to exist when the body dies, those opposing this view observes that the intellect, which is the essence of the soul, is inseparable from the body, and therefore it ceases to exist with the body (Blum, n.d. 213). The explanation for this was that human cognition is dependent on the matter, and there is no way that such intellective soul could exist without the existence of the body, which is the matter in which the soul exists. In reference to the council of Florence to Ficino, the soul of humans constantly struggles to a union with God, because it is infused with a divine power that transcends its control, thus the development of humans is towards a re-union with God, which provides for the evolution of mankind through the various intellectual stages. Therefore, the Renaissance understandings of humankind regarding the immortality of the soul centers around the question of whether the intellective souls is the substantial form of the body, and whether the soul can attain absolute happiness while it is within the body (Blum, n.d. 217). However, in demystifying the concept of the immortality of the soul, Pomponazzi observed that the soul existed in two folds; nature representing the immortal, and another means between the mortal and the immortal, which is the form that actually works with the body and ceases to exist with it. However, the immortal form of the soul is the intellective soul, which seems to operate without the body, and is therefore immortal (Blum, n.d. 220). Thus with the existence of the two folds of human soul, Pomponazzi declares that the question of the immortality of the soul, is in its technical terms, neutral, as does the aspect of the eternity of the world, and therefore is irrelevant (Blum, n.d. 222). Thus, while the concept of the immortality of the soul is central to the Renaissance understandings of humankind, its essence has been vilified as a basis of informing the Renaissance of humankind. Another philosophical perspective of the Renaissance understandings of humankind is that of James Hankins, which focuses on the culture form of humankind, based on focusing humankind in the purely biological sense, without any inclusion of the religious dogma (Hankins, 2007 p30). The perspective focuses humankind through the evolution process, while ignoring any immaterial aspect of the religious nature of mankind. This Renaissance understanding of humankind revolves around the traditional evolution and the language revival of the Renaissance, as opposed to the whole philosophy of man. Thus, through focusing on humanism, life is enriched with more virtues, pleasure and conduct, both in the exercise of power and the adherence to the powers requirement, for those that are not in the leadership roles (Hankins, 2007 p32). However, while the concept of humanism was observed as the avenue for bringing about a virtuous and pleasurable life for humankind, there was a great deal of skepticism, from some philosophers who considered the study of humanism as irrelevant. Michel de Montaigne is such one philosopher, who felt that despite the fact humankind was supposed to be freed by humanism, to ascend to new heights; it was a mere waste of time to engage in the study of humanism. He considered experience to be the plausible aspect for consideration, since it is associated with real life, as opposed to the study of ancient writings (Zalloua, 2005 p14). The fundamental concept of the culture form of humanism is the moral control of the individuals, to enhance the adoption of values that are effectively productive, where the aspects of utmost respect, positive skepticism and criticism formed the ground for evaluating the teachings and the conduct of the masters or the leaders. This created the avenue through which the authority of various teachings could be evaluated and interrogated, with the aim of establishing the truth (Hankins, 2007 p35). The basic tenet in this case, is that teaching or proclaiming something that one does not believe is in itself immoral and fraudulent, since it amounts to hypocrisy. Thus, the conduct of humankind ought to match with what mankind believes in. however, the problem associated with this philosophical view is that natural thinking can contradict the doctrines of faith, which then paves an avenue for a new revelation. Considering that the philosophy requires the principle of reasoning, faith and proclamation to match, it stifles the further development of mankind by requiring conformity, rather than the exploration of the sense of reasoning, which opens a window of new realizations. Thus, it is through the further realization that some conclusions of philosophy are incompatible with Christianity, that the advancement of mankind is achieved (Hankins, 2007 p3538). Paul Kristeller’s perspective of Renaissance understandings of humankind is that humanism is inseparable with Christianity and thus all humanists during the Renaissance were Christians (Kristeller, 1961 p155). Therefore, spiritual renewal and the reform of the Christian institutions was the basis of Christian humanism, meant at establishing a well informed Christian society. The teachings of the Christian humanism combined the ancient literature of the study of the Fathers and the bible, with the modern literature, with the aim of fulfilling the longing for spiritual and Christian institutional reforms (Kristeller, 1961 p86). This desire and commitment to see the Christian society transform into a new spiritual community differentiated the Christian humanist scholars, from the other scholars who discussed the religious aspects in their works, but did not push for the spiritual renewal or the reformation of the Christian institutions. The focus was on strengthening the soul of mankind, as opposed to the attempts of luring humankind towards obtaining of material wealth, which serve to corrupt the soul and thus hinder the effective transformation of humanity, into the desired spiritual form (Nauert, 2006 p180). Hamilton Alastair emphasizes the Renaissance philosophy based on Christianity, by observing that all humanists were brought up with the same Christian beliefs, and thus there exists no major difference in the backgrounds between the humanists and the scholastics (Alastair, 1996 p100). However, the point of difference between the humanists and the scholastics is that, true humanists had a different attitude towards the non-Christian sources, although both of these groups had the Bible as common text. Petrarch exposes the problem of the failure to treat the scripture as a scholarly or a philological source, being that its reconciliation with the other sources had been an initial difficulty. However, trying to analyze the other philological and scholarly sources such as the church Fathers’ readings, eventually led to the scriptural teachings. This meant that the time to reconcile the scripture with the other scholarly and philological materials had come, considering that none of the sources could be regarded as complete, without some reference to the scripture. Thus, through this, the “classical and the Christian views of human life and morals” were reconciled (Alastair, 1996 p100). The other perspective regarding Renaissance understandings of humankind, as presented by Paul Kristeller is the historical significance of the sources of information that were recycled and investigated during the Renaissance. The significance of the sources is dependent on the truth of the philosophical information, the extent to which such ideas are novel or old, at the time the writer of such ideas was putting them into writing (Kristeller, 1961 p103). Therefore, the Renaissance understandings of humankind shifted its focus from the mere focus on the philosophical information, to its authentication, history and the significance of the information, particularly at the time the writer was putting it in writing. The adherence to the permanent principles of philosophy, and the emphasis on the prevailing periods became the main focus of the Renaissance understandings of humankind (Kristeller, 1961 p154). This focus ensures that even though old ideas are recycled and repeated, which is inevitable in philosophy and religious concepts that forms the basis of the Renaissance understandings of humankind, their significance to the current period and their relevance to the prevailing aspects of mankind under consideration still remains. The renaissance concept of man falls under a view that is wide spread, and thus it has often been repeated (Kristeller, 1961 p112). References Alastair, H. 1999, Humanists and the Bible, 100-117. Blum, P. R., n.d., The immortality of the soul: The scope of the immortality debate in the Renaissance, 211-229. Hankins, J. 2007, Humanism, Scholasticism and Renaissance Philosophy, 30-49. Kristeller, P. 1961, Renaissance Thought II: papers on humanism and the arts. New York: Harper p86-111. Kristeller, P. 1961, Renaissance concepts of Man, 167-313. Mirandola, P. 1965, Selections from by Pico della Mirandola; Three Treatieson the Dignity of Man, The Liberty of Liberal Arts. 3-34. Nauert, C. G. 2006, Rethinking Christian humanism, 155-181. Zalloua, Z. A. 2005, Montaigne and the ethics of skepticism, Charlottesville, Va: Rookwood Press. P14 Read More