Philosophy in Early Medieval Europe: Peter Damian and Anselm of Canterbury

Peter Damian's Treatise Against the Dialecticians

Following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire and the emergence of new states within its territory in the 5th century—often referred to as "barbarian kingdoms," with the most notable being Charlemagne's "empire" in the 8th century—a system of Christian education began to take shape in medieval Europe. This system was grounded in theology and the so-called Seven Liberal Arts (artes), which included philosophical knowledge. Philosophy was integrated with both the liberal arts and theology. In theology, it addressed metaphysical and ethical questions primarily drawn from the writings of the Church Fathers, particularly Augustine, and in some cases from philosophical works of late antiquity, such as Macrobius' Neoplatonic commentary on Cicero's "Dream of Scipio" or Boethius' "Consolation of Philosophy."

Among the sciences, philosophy was represented by dialectics (logic), studied largely due to Boethius' translations and commentaries on Aristotle and Porphyry's logical works. The study and application of dialectics led to significant historical and philosophical developments in early medieval philosophy.

Dialectics was highly valued as a method of learning, a skill for argumentation, and was primarily used in theology. The study of dialectics led to the emergence of one of the core forms of scholastic (school) education and science: the disputatio, a scholarly debate involving the examination of a problem through arguments presented pro et contra (for and against) a given thesis.

However, the use of dialectics in theology posed a risk of rationalizing religion, which was not favored by all theologians and ecclesiastical figures, especially when it led to statements that were questionable from an orthodox perspective. These concerns gave rise to what are known as the "dialectical controversies" of the early Middle Ages, debates about the limits of dialectics and its relationship with theology.

Theologians criticized John Scotus Eriugena (9th century) for his dialectical reasoning in discussions on predestination, as noted by François Picard. One of his opponents, Prudentius of Troyes, argued that Eriugena distorted the thoughts of Catholic Fathers by employing dialectical subtleties against his adversaries. Another critic, Deacon Flor, speaking for the Church of Lyons, condemned Eriugena's dialectical disputes as contrary to faith, Scripture, and the Church Fathers. Flor particularly denounced the use of syllogisms and the application of philosophy to theological matters.

In the 11th century, Peter Damian (Italian, 11th century) strongly opposed dialecticians. Initially trained in the liberal arts in Parma and well-versed in dialectics, he later became a monk, achieved the rank of cardinal, and emerged as a prominent church writer of the 11th century. His critique of dialectics is found in his most famous work, "On Divine Omnipotence." This text is written as a religious-theological treatise, analyzing and interpreting scriptural positions with numerous references to various passages from the Old and New Testaments.

Damian's fundamental critique of dialectics can be summarized as follows: the power of strict reasoning and the necessity of logical deduction pertain only to the "sequence of reasoning" and do not concern the "mutable nature of things," the "natural order," or, especially, God. For instance, in discussing the necessity or contingency of future events, he writes: "This question pertains not to the discussion of Divine majesty or the power or matter of things, but to the method and order of reasoning and sequence of words, and has no place among the sacred things of the church." Damian elaborates further: "In general, what comes from dialectical or rhetorical reasoning should not be so readily applied to Divine mysteries; nor should syllogisms or conclusions devised for use as proofs impose themselves rigidly on sacred laws or contrast their necessary conclusions with Divine power."

He famously articulated the principle that "philosophy is the handmaid of theology," asserting that scholastic knowledge, when used in the interpretation of sacred texts, should not arrogantly claim precedence but should, like a servant, perform the will of its mistress and not get ahead, so as not to err and lose the light of hidden virtue and the straight path of truth, becoming entangled in the sequence of external words.

Thus, dialectical reasoning holds no significance compared to Divine omnipotence, which has preordained all that is to come, of which "God judges as something known and long past." Nevertheless, God's actions align with the laws of logic, including the law of non-contradiction, and with the nature of things. Damian writes: "The good, that is, what the benevolent architect created, is that which cannot both be and not be at the same time, for in the nature of things, which the wise creator has established, such variability has no place."

Damian's primary aim is to demonstrate God's superiority over all dialectical reasoning, which serves as a recurring motif in his work. He seems to overlook that this implies God contradicts nature. Thus, "it should be believed that God can do all things, whether He does or does not do them." More definitively, Damian states: "God's power shatters the syllogisms of dialecticians and their cunning, putting to shame the arguments of all philosophers." He provides examples of how syllogisms are confounded, as well as nature. For instance, syllogisms prove that a tree burns if it is on fire; it does not bear fruit if it is cut down. However, Moses sees a burning bush that does not burn up (God appeared to him in the form of a burning bush); Abraham's staff sprouted shoots (a miracle by God). Damian recognizes that such victories over syllogistics do not align with the nature of things, and thus makes a pertinent qualification: "What is all this but a discrediting of the hasty opinions of the wise of this world and a revelation, contrary to the common order of nature, of God's power?"

Thus, logic (syllogisms) corresponds to the ordinary nature, and by violating it, God performs miracles, which are objects of faith because they are beyond logic and cannot be proven or disproven.

Regarding God's disruption of ordinary nature, Damian introduces a new aspect in demonstrating God's omnipotence. While he previously showed God's superiority over dialectics, he now emphasizes His supremacy in nature, using the same premise he used to diminish dialectics in comparison to God, but with the appropriate "adjustment for nature." While Damian earlier spoke of God's actions being consistent with the apparent law of contradiction in nature, he now asserts differently: "Opposite properties cannot converge in one subject. However, this impossibility, although true concerning natural necessity, does not pertain to Divine power." This reflects the same theme: just as the necessity of dialectical reasoning does not affect God's power, neither does the necessity of nature, as He is, according to religious consciousness, the supreme force and creator of the cosmos. Damian writes: "For He who gave nature its beginning easily, when He wishes, removes natural necessity. He who created nature changes the natural order at His will."

It is notable that Damian mentions that the Creator "in some way altered nature itself against nature." He provides examples of God acting against nature: the creation of the world from nothing; life arising from inanimate matter; a sleeping man losing a rib without feeling it (concerning Adam); a woman arising from a single man without a woman (concerning Eve). Damian argues that there is nothing unusual in God's actions against nature, as nature itself is full of wonders. For instance, a diamond is not cut by fire or iron but only by goat's blood; in Cappadocia, mares conceive from the wind; in the Indian island of Tilone (Ceylon?), birds are born from tree branches as animated and winged fruits. Nevertheless, Damian likely considers these natural wonders, so to speak, unusual "scientific facts," as part of God's power, as he also mentions that no one can enumerate the multitude of great manifestations of God's power that exist contrary to the usual order of nature.

The continued development of the theme of Divine miracles involves Damian urging an unreserved belief in them. These miracles "should not be debated with human arguments, but rather left to the might of the Creator." This means, in relation to dialectics, that Damian calls for replacing rational understanding of Divine omnipotence with faith in it. He states sharply: "Let those who wish grind their questions according to the rules and order of reasoning, as long as their speculations and incantations, worthy of children in schools, do not attribute imperfections to the Creator." Damian believes philosophers attempt "to grasp more than they can achieve and in their pride strive to master what is beyond them."

Faith in God's omnipotence, contrary to nature, experience, and common sense, required to be reinforced by fear, with frightening tales of punishment for blasphemers who doubted God's omnipotence. Damian recounts a story where someone doubted whether God could resurrect a rooster cut into pieces, and immediately the rooster jumped from the dish, alive and feathered, to the astonishment of the doubters. Damian draws a moral from this story: "This serves as a lesson to others not to speak frivolously about Divine omnipotence."

In a broader worldview context, Damian's attacks on dialecticians and rational thought were a fight against religious skepticism, which has historically manifested since the inception of religion. This should be understood in Damian's position when he writes about people who "consider God either non-existent or not concerned with earthly matters."