Talk:Renaissance of the 12th century
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Renaissance of the 12th century is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:
|
|||
Hi, Stbalbach. You just edited the section about Scholasticism and pointed that scholasticism is a method, not a philosophy. I am familiar with your definition of scholasticism (and I like it), but I am also familiar with it being described as a philosophy in some texts (and also read works suggesting that both definitions existed and were both valid...). My experience trying to read about it makes me believe that it’s hard for people to agree about WHAT scholasticism really was, and what the scholastics defended... Moreover, no one seems to agree about which scholar was indeed a scholastic, or who wasn’t a scholastic, or who was anti-scholastic…
If you can point me to any good reference in the Internet about this topic it would be great. I’ve been confused about it for months. --Leinad ¬ 
pois não? 17:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
People get confused because scholasticism was orignally applied to philosophy so when you talk about medieval philosophy, your talking scholasticism, it's become synonymous. But it's just a tool or didactic system, not a philosophical view of the world. The scholastic method has been applied to other things besides philosophy. I'm not sure what to say but any text that calls it a philosophy is incorrect or unclear in its terminology. Some sources:
- John W. Baldwin, The Scholastic Culture of the Middle Ages, 1000-1300, 1997.
- Philip Daileader, The High Middle Ages, The Teaching Company, 2001. (Daileader is PhD Harvard U., Medieval History, and currently teaches at William and Mary, this was my primary source for the Scholasticism article).
-- Stbalbach 19:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chronological focus
The article at present spills over into the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, talking about all sorts of things that happened after the rise of the universities and the emergence of scholasticism. More appropriate would be the discussion of the rise of the Universities from the cathedral schools of the Twelfth century.
The discussions of major thirteenth and fourteenth century figures like Scotus, Ockham, Buridan, and Oresme are totally inappropriate. I don't have time to attack this right now, but I will cut out a few totally irrelevant areas.
In general, the outline for this article can be pretty well defined by the contents of Haskins and Benson, et al. --SteveMcCluskey 14:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
