Abstract
One feature of Gassendi’s philosophical work which has become very clear through the examination of the manuscripts and published works is the homogeneity of the development of his mature Epicurean philosophy from the philosopical doctrines and presuppositions which he accepted in his lectures as a professor of Aristotelian philosophy at Aix-en-Provence, as they have been recorded in the Exercitationes. In fact, the posthumously published Syntagma philosophicum must be regarded essentially as a much more complete and effective achievement of Gassendi’s original project, outlined in the preface to the Exercitationes.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
P. Gassendi, Opera omnia, III, p. 102.
E.J. Dijksterhuis: 1961, The mechanization of the world picture, Clarendon Press, Oxford, p.425. H. Kearney has presented a similar view, as follows: “His [Gassendi’s] interest for contemporaries lay in his claim to have constructed a theory of atomism which could be reconciled with Christianity. He could claim to have baptised Democritus and Lucretius as Aquinas had baptised Aristotle.”
(H. Kearney: 1971, Science and change, 1500–1700, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, p. 170.)
Cf. P. Gassendi, Opera omnia, II. p.425b; III, pp.101, 207b; V, p.171; VI, p.54a-b.
Gassendi wrote, for example: “Where religion prescribes a thing for our belief, it is rash, indeed it is madness, even to murmur in a way that contradicts.” “Ubi religio praescripsit nobis aliquid, temeritas, imo furor est, in oppositum quidpiam mussitare.” (P. Gassendi, Opera omnia, V, p.17a.)
Cf. H.O. Evennett: 1968, The spirit of the Counter-Re formation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p.79.
Cf. Vatican Council II, “Decree on the training of Priests”, par.15, in A. Flannery (Ed.): 1975, Vatican Council II. The conciliar and postconciliar documents, Dominican Publications, Dublin, p.718.
also “A note on the controversy about the place of St. Thomas in ecclesiastical studies”, in H. Vorgrimler (Ed.): 1967–1969, Commentary on the documents of Vatican II, 5 vols., Burns and Oates, London, II, p.395.
Cf. e.g., P. Hoenen S.J.: 1949, Cosmologia, fourth edition, Pontificia Universitas Gregoriana Press, Rome, pp.99–101, 107, 108, 155, 546, 547, 552. Such modern neo-scholastic manuals of philosophy for use in seminaries were very eclectic: they provided instruction on all important systems, doctrines and theories, sometimes presenting these latter as worthy of consideration or even acceptance, along with what was usually a much vulgarized version of Thomistic-Aristotelian philosophy.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brundell, B. (1987). Conclusion. In: Pierre Gassendi. Synthese Historical Library, vol 30. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3793-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3793-2_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8187-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3793-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive