Rational Knowledge About The Natural World And Theology During The Middle Ages

The elusive relation of rational knowledge about the natural world and theology during the Middle Ages, both in Christendom and Islamdom, remains a topic of discussion among historians. When we refer to the search of rational knowledge related to nature in the Middle Ages, it is important to remember that we are not speaking about modern-day science. Probably, the best way to refer to the endeavor of investigating the natural world in this period is to employ the term natural philosophy: a field concerned with the explanation of natural phenomena by means of reasoning. While some argue that natural philosophy and theology were clearly different in this epoch, others state that there was no distinction between them. For instance, Grant has

However, it is important to keep in mind that the interpretation of this work is still a topic of debate among scholars (Dallal 2010, 139). For al-Ghazali, there was a dispute between philosophy and religion, and it contained three parts (al-Ghazali 1997, 5). The first one was simply a difference of linguistic conventions (Dallal 2010, 139), the second one involved philosophical theories that had not to be disputed on religious grounds due to their solid demonstrations, and the third one refers to philosophers’ claims that contradicted the Islamic dogma (and thus had to be refuted). On the second category – the one of my interest – al-Ghazali

Probably, the most prominent one was Thomas Aquinas. Although assisted by others, Aquinas produced an accommodation between Aristotelian philosophy and theology. He corrected philosophical claims that seemed to contradict the Christian dogma and imported Aristotle’s natural philosophy into Christian theology (Lindberg 2002, 68). However, it is not possible to assume that the entirety of the medieval Christian scholarship adopted the Thomistic point of view. It is important to remember that some of Aquinas’ ideas were included among the 219 propositions that Étienne Tempier condemned in 1277 (Grant, A Source Book in Medieval Science 1974, 46). Moreover, Pope John XXI appears to have accepted this measure taken by the bishop of Paris, including the penalty of excommunication for those who upheld any of the 219 propositions (Grant, A Source Book in Medieval Science 1974, 46). For these reasons, it is arguable that Aquinas’ works did not necessarily translate into a generalized consensus about the unicity of natural philosophy and theology. Hence, Thomas’ writings do not rule out the possibility of a natural philosophy that remained distinct and independent of