(redirected from Radical Aristotelianism)
Also found in: Dictionary.
Related to Radical Aristotelianism: Monopsychism, Siger of Brabant



a trend in medieval philosophy founded by the 12th-century Arab philosopher ibn-Rushd (Aver-roës). Averroism developed the materialistic tendencies of ibn-Rushd’s interpretation of Aristotle—the idea of the eternity and, consequently, the absence of creation of the world, the mortality of the soul, and the theory of double truth—separating and even opposing knowledge to faith, philosophy to theology. Thus, in Averroism an antitheolog-ical tendency revealed itself—that “joyous free thinking,” which, as Engels put it, came to the Romance peoples from the Arabs and paved the way for the materialism of the 18th century (see his Dialectic of Nature, 1969, p. 7). Averroism was disseminated in Western Europe as a result of the Latin translations of ibn-Rushd’s works; its main representative there was Siger de Brabant, who was criticized by Thomas Aquinas in De unitate intellectus contra Averrois-tas. The persecution of the Averroists by the Catholic Church did not end their influence on European philosophy, as the appearance of the Spanish philosopher Lully in the 13th century demonstrates. In Italy, especially at the University of Padua, Averroism remained an influence until the 16th century. In 1513, Averroism was condemned by the Benevento council.


Renan, E. Averroes i averroizm. Kiev, 1903. (Translated from French.)
Trakhtenberg, O. Ocherki po istorii zap.-evrop. sr.-vek. filosofii. Moscow, 1957.
Ley, H. Ocherk istorii sr.-vek. materializma. Moscow, 1962. (Translated from German.)
O’Leary, De Lacy E. Arabic Thought and Its Place in History. London, 1939.


References in periodicals archive ?
Returning to Leon in the years 1216-1236, what is truly amazing is that such a large movement with all its social and popular implications could have gotten its impetus from readings of Aristotle's libri naturales and, in all probability, from the version commented on by Averroes, since everything proposed by this Leonese group, as Martinez Casado makes clear, brims with a radical Aristotelianism and even, at points, that brand of Averroism that was both radical and popular.
As Martinez Casado reminds us himself, in terms of the radical Aristotelianism that the Leonese profess, it is not until the 1250s that similar ideas appear in the Paris Arts Faculty, with young professors such as Siger of Brabant and Boethius of Dacia (Van Steenberghen).
According to Van Steenberghen,s reconstruction, eclectic Aristotelianism was superseded in the second half of the century by two forms of Neoplatonizing Aristotelianism, Thomism, and, in the decade of the 1270s, radical Aristotelianism. The two forms of Neoplatonizing Aristotelianism found their expression in the writings of St.