Philosophy

Bessarion’s more important philosophical works are the In calumniatorem Platonis and the De natura et arte. The former is a long and scholarly work, consisting of four books (Monfasani 1976). The first book refutes Trapezountios’ criticisms of Plato, arguing that Plato was very erudite and covered all parts of philosophy. Bessarion also puts Plato’s philosophy in its historical framework; he adopts the view of the ancient apologists and Numenius that Plato borrowed from the wisdom of Moses and that he shared several Pythagorean doctrines, another ancient view, which was also defended by Plethon. In the second book Bessarion sets out to show that Plato’s philosophy comes closer to the Christian doctrine than that of Aristotle, although he acknowledges that neither of them arrived at it. In order to substantiate this claim, Bessarion offers a detailed exposition of Plato’s philosophy, in which he presents the most significant doctrines ofPlato, making also reference to the relevant ones ofAristotle. Bessarion is not polemical to Aristotle, arguing that the defense of

Plato should not entail the rejection of Aristotle (In calumniatorem, II.3). In his third book, Bessarion aims to show that Plato’s doctrines had many followers, including Aristotle. A large part of this book deals with theology, the questions of divine providence, and the immortality of the soul, connecting Plato with Thomas Aquinas, Albert the Great, and Averroes (Mohler 1942:III.6.3-6.4,10.9,15, 17.2, 21.7). The final book takes issue with Trapezountios’ claims that question the morality and usefulness of Platonic philosophy, such as the claim that Plato exhorts the youths to a life of pleasure and that he supports the sharing of wives. Bessarion argues that Plato must be judged by the standards of his time, which was ignorant of the Christian teaching (IV.3).

Bessarion’s treatise On Whether Nature Deliberates or Not (De nature et arte, Mohler 1942:III.92-147) addresses a topic much discussed at the time (Monfasani 1976:166167). In it, Bessarion defends the view that nature deliberates and acts with a certain purpose and in this, he claims that Plato and Aristotle are in accord (Chap. 2). Bessarion takes position on the perennial philosophical issue of how the intellect differs from nature (Chap. 7). Replying to Plethon, Bessarion argues that the intellect is different from nature by being separable from it and a moving cause, and that nature is moved by the divine intellect. In this sense, nature is the instrument of the intellect through which the latter gives, completes, and perfects things (Mohler 1942:III.132). Bessarion maintains that the soul is not separable from nature, which implies that Bessarion, following the Neoplatonists, considers the intellect to be the essence of the soul.

On the question of substance, Bessarion defends Aristotle against Plethon in his attitude to consider as substances the individual things, while he maintains that the universals, the Platonic Forms exist essentially as concepts in the intellect (Against Plethon on Aristotle About Substance, Mohler 1942:III.149-150). Bessarion adopts an interpretation of the Forms that goes back to Neoplato-nists from Porphyry onwards. According to this interpretation, the Forms are either ‘‘in the things’’ (en tois pragmasi), determining the nature of things, or applied ‘‘on the things’’ (epi tois pollois), being concepts in the human intellect by means of which man cognizes, and also ‘‘before the things’’ (pro ton pollon), being causes and models of everything that there is. Bessarion argues that Aristotle preserves all these uses of Forms, as he accepts immanent Forms, concepts, and also a first god who thinks (Mohler 1942:III.150), which means that Bessarion adopts the interpretation of later Platonists according to which the transcendent Forms exist only in the divine mind.

Bessarion was important in the history of philosophy first for his attempt to introduce the classical Greek philosophical tradition to the westerners and also for raising the standards for the scholarly study of classical philosophers in the West. His detailed presentation of Platonic philosophy in his In calumniatorem Platonis was the first of its kind in the Latin world, and it was also the first to deal at length with later Platonists, preserving long quotations from them. Unlike the medieval students of Aristotle, Bessarion makes the study of Greek philosophers from the original a requirement, while he also puts emphasis on the knowledge of the relevant philosophical tradition, ancient and medieval, before treating a philosophical question.

See also: > George Gemistos Plethon > Metaphysics, Byzantine > Thomism, Byzantine