Routledge History of Philosophy Volume IV

24 THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE
rethought his position on the controversial problem of the soul, making
considerable use of the newly Latinized works of Themistius and Alexander of
Aphrodisias. No longer accepting Averroes as a reliable guide to Aristotelian
psychology, Vernia turned to the Greek commentators, who he believed
(wrongly in the case of Alexander) provided evidence that Aristotle, like Plato,
had argued for the immortality of individual souls. Christian doctrine was
therefore not simply an article of faith but could be demonstrated on purely
rational grounds. 54
This standpoint had already gained philosophical respectability earlier in the
century through the influence of Paul of Venice (1369–1429), the most famous
scholastic of his time. Although Paul never ceased to regard the Averroist unity
of the intellect as the correct interpretation of Aristotle’s De anima, he did not
think that this in itself made the position a demonstrable doctrine, for a number of
objections to it could be raised, objections based on reason as well as faith.
Although Paul and Vernia came to their conclusions by different routes, they
both maintained that there were rational as well as theological arguments in
favour of Christian dogma. 55 The barrier separating the realms of philosophy and
theology, used by generations of scholastics to defend the autonomy of their
discipline, was starting to crumble.
THE REVIVAL OF PLATONISM
Interest in Plato had been stirred among Italian humanists by Petrarch’s portrayal
of his philosophy as a theologically acceptable alternative to Aristotelianism, one
whose closeness to Christianity, moreover, had been endorsed by no less an
authority than Augustine, But until the end of the fourteenth century little firsthand
knowledge of the dialogues was possible since so few Latin versions
existed: the Timaeus was widely accessible in the fragmentary fourth-century
version of Chalcidius; the Phaedo and Meno had been translated in the twelfth
century by Henricus Aristippus; and part of the Parmenides was embedded in
William of Moerbeke’s thirteenth-century translation of Proclus’s commentary. 56
Although the Phaedo was already available in medieval Latin, Bruni chose to
produce a new humanist version in 1405. This allowed him, as with his Aristotle
translations, to demonstrate the stylistic superiority of the humanist approach to
philosophy. But there was another reason for this choice. The theme of the
Phaedo, the personal immortality of individual human souls, was a minefield for
Aristotelians. As such it was an ideal means to emphasize the superiority, from a
Christian point of view, of Platonism. In his dedication of the translation to
Innocent VII, Bruni told the pope that, although Christian doctrine on the
afterlife did not require any confirmation from classical philosophy, it would
none the less ‘bring no small increase to the true faith’ if people were made to
see ‘that the most subtle and wise of pagan philosophers held the same beliefs
about the soul as we hold’ and about many other matters as well. 57 These other
matters included, as Bruni specified in the dedication of his Gorgias translation