Encyclopedia of Renaissance Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Marco Sgarbi

Unicity of Intellect

  • Tomáš NejeschlebaEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02848-4_438-1

Abstract

The concept of the unicity of the intellect emerged in association with interpretations of Aristotle’s theory of the soul distinguishing between the agent and the possible intellect. The term monopsychism is connected with the controversy, which arose in the Middle Ages with Averroes’ (Ibn Rushd) commentary on Aristotle. Averroes considers not only the agent intellect but also the material (possible) intellect as transcendent and numerically unified. Thomas Aquinas and other Christian thinkers criticized this doctrine because it negates the concept of an individual immortal human soul. In the fifteenth century, the unicity of the intellect was often viewed as an interpretation fully in agreement with Aristotle’s theory of the soul, and the doctrine is usually found in Renaissance Paduan Peripatetic philosophers, beginning with Paul of Venice and ending with Nicoletto Vernia. Criticism of the doctrine (particularly by Marsilio Ficino) influenced, however, the Church reaction and led to the condemnation of monopsychism at the Fifth Lateran Council in 1513. The anti-Averroist attitude began to prevail in the sixteenth century. As a result of Pietro Pomponazzi affair, the subject of discussion shifted from the relationship of plurality versus unicity to the issue of immortality versus mortality. Monopsychism consequently declined both as a philosophical doctrine and as a viable interpretation of Aristotle in the second half of the sixteenth century.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Allen, Michael J.B. 2013. Marsilio Ficino on Saturn, the Plotinian mind, and the monster of Averroes. In Renaissance averroism and its aftermath. Arabic philosophy in early modern Europe, ed. Anna Akasoy and Guido Giglioni, 81–97. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aquinas, Thomas. 1976. De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas. In Opera omnia, ed. Editio Leonina, vol. 43. Rome: Editori di San Tommaso.Google Scholar
  3. Aristotle. 1961. In De anima, ed. W.D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Averroes. 1953. Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis De Anima libros. In Corpus Commentariorum Averrois in Aristotelem, ed. F. Stuart Crawford. Cambridge, MA: The Medieval Academy of America.Google Scholar
  5. Bland, Kalman P. 1995. Elijah Del Medigo, unicity of intellect, and immortality of soul. Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 61: 1–22.Google Scholar
  6. Blum, Paul Richard. 2007. The immortality of the soul. In The Cambridge companion to renaissance philosophy, ed. James Hankins, 211–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Contarini, Gasparo. 2014. In O nesmrtelnosti duse I, ed. Paul Richard Blum, Tomás Nejeschleba, and Jan Janousek. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackeho Olomouc.Google Scholar
  8. Conti, Alessandro. 1992. Il problema della conoscibilità del singolare nella gnoseologiadi Paolo Veneto. Bullettino dell’Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo e Archivio muratoriano 98: 323–382.Google Scholar
  9. de Cusa, Nicholas. 1983. Idiota De sapientia: De mente. In Nicolai de Cusa Opera omnia, ed. Renate Steiger, Ludwig Baur, Karl Bormann, and Hans Gerhard Senger. Hamburgi: F. Meiner.Google Scholar
  10. Farmer, Stephen A. 1998. Syncretism in the west: Pico’s 900 theses (1486); the evolution of traditional, religious, and philosophical systems: With text, translation, and commentary, medieval & renaissance texts & studies. Tempe: Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies.Google Scholar
  11. Führer, Markus L. 2014. Echoes of Aquinas in Cusanus’s Vision of Man. Landham, Md.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  12. Garin, Eugenio. 2008. History of Italian philosophy. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  13. Hasse, Dag Nicolaus. 2004a. Aufstieg und Niedergang des Averroismus in der Renaissance: Niccolo Tignosi, Agostino Nifo, Francesco Vimercato. In Herbs des Mittelalters? Fragen zur Bewertung des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts, ed. Jan van Aertsen and Martin Pickavé, 447–473. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  14. Hasse, Dag Nikolaus. 2004b. The attraction of Averroism in the renaissance: Vernia, Achillini, Prassicio. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 47 (S83PART2): 131–147.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-5370.2004.tb02313.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hasse, Dag Nicolaus. 2007. Arabic philosophy and Averroism. In The Cambridge companion to renaissance philosophy, ed. James Hankins, 113–136. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hutton, Sarah. 2013. The Cambridge Platonists and Averroes. In Renaissance averroism and its aftermath. Arabic philosophy in early modern Europe, ed. Anna Akasoy and Guido Giglioni, 197–212. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kessler, Eckhard. 2008. Die Philosophie der Renaissance: das 15. Jahrhundert. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  18. Kuhn, Heinrich C. 1996. Venetischer Aristotelismus im Ende der aristotelischen Welt: Aspekte der Welt und des Denkens des Cesare Cremonini (1550–1631). Frankfurt am Main/New York: P. Lang.Google Scholar
  19. Kuksewicz, Zdislaw. 1983. Paul de Venise et sa théorie de l’âme. In Aristotelismo veneto e scienza moderna, ed. Luigi Olivieri, 297–324. Padova: Antenore.Google Scholar
  20. Mahoney, Edward P. 2000. Two Aristotelians of the Italian renaissance: Nicoletto Vernia and Agostino Nifo, variorum collected studies series;. Aldershot/Hampshire/Great Britain/Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  21. Marenbon, John. 2013. Ernest Renan and Averroism: The story of a misinterpretation. In Renaissance Averroism and its aftermath: Arabic philosophy in early modern Europe, ed. Anna Akasoy and Guido Giglioni, 273–284. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin, Craig. 2013. Humanism and the assessment of Averroes in the renaissance. In Renaissance averroism and its aftermath. Arabic philosophy in early modern Europe, ed. Anna Akasoy and Guido Giglioni, 65–80. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Martin, Craig. 2014. Subverting Aristotle: Religion, history, and philosophy in early modern science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Monfasani, John. 1993. The Averroism of John Argyropoulos and his “Quaestio utrum intellectus humanus sit perpetuus”. I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance 5: 157–208.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4603683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nardi, Bruno. 1958. Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano dal secolo XIV al XVI, Studi sulla tradizione aristotelica nel Veneto. Firenze: G. C. Sansoni.Google Scholar
  26. Pluta, Olaf. 1986. Kritiker der Unsterblichkeitsdoktrin in Mittelalter und Renaissance, Bochumer Studien zur Philosophie. Amsterdam: B. R. Grüner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Randall, John Herman. 1961. The School of Padua and the emergence of modern science. Padova: Antenore.Google Scholar
  28. Salatowsky, Sascha. 2006. De Anima: die Rezeption der aristotelischen Psychologie im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: B. R. Grüner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Still, Carl N. 2008. Pico’s quest for all knowledge. In Pico della Mirandola new essays, ed. Michael V. Dougherty, 179–201. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Van Dooren, Wim. 1994. Pomponazzi und Averroes. In Averroismus im Mittelalter und in der Renaissance, ed. Friedrich Niewöhner and Loris Sturlese, 309–318. Zürich: Spur.Google Scholar
  31. Wels, Henrik. 2000. Die Disputatio de anima rationali secundum substantiam des Nicolaus Baldelli, S.J., nach dem Pariser Codex B.N. lat. 16627. Eine Studie zur Ablehnung des Averroismus und Alexandrismus am Collegium Romanum zu Anfang des 17. Jahrhunderts. Amsterdam: B. G. Grüner.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Renaissance Texts, Department of Philosophy, Faculty of ArtsPalacky UniversityOlomoucCzech Republic

Section editors and affiliations

  • Anna Laura Puliafito
    • 1
  1. 1.Universität BaselBaselSwitzerland