Medieval Theocentrism versus Renaissance Anthropocentrism

Anthropocentrism breaks with the domination of Theocentrism in society, which leads man to produce, live, think, conceive the arts in a different way and inaugurates a new phase in history.

The term “Renaissance” was taken as a historiographical category from the point of view of Jacob Burckhardt, in the 19th century. When publishing the work The culture of the Renaissance in Italy, in 1860, the historian exposed the Renaissance as a movement originated and inherent in Italy. As characteristics, one can note the exaltation of life in the world, theoretical and practical individualism, the clash against religion with the worldliness of life, there is opposition to spiritual domination through the religious thoughts of the Church, art is seen with a great role social, there is the birth of a strong historical sense with the historiographical school of Antiquary, and there is a resumption and renewal of philosophical naturalism.

Thus, Burckhardt explains the Renaissance as the birth of a new culture, opposed to medieval culture, and as a new look at the productions of antiquity: “in fact, it is the synthesis of the new spirit that was created in Italy with antiquity itself, it is the spirit that, breaking definitively with the spirit of the medieval era, inaugurated the modern era” (REALE, 2009, p. 10).

However, we must bear in mind that Burckhardt’s thesis was refuted by several authors, some of whom did not agree with the notion of the Renaissance only as the new, as a break with the Middle Ages, given that some of the most discussed thoughts in the Renaissance were already present in the Middle Ages. Burckhardt’s thesis should also not be completely discarded and, therefore, serves us to point out – even if in a more radical way – some ruptures that occurred between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. As it is not our objective to enter into the historiographical debate about the problem of historical time, we will adopt the view that the Renaissance represents both ruptures and continuities with the Middle Ages. Therefore, we must approach the Renaissance in what it contains, both in terms of continuity with previous thought and ruptures with it, given that:

Between contrariety and homogeneity, there is “diversity. Now, to say that the Renaissance is a ‘different’ period from the Middle Ages not only allows us to distinguish the two periods without opposing them, but also to easily identify their links and their tangencies, as well as their differences, with great critical freedom (REALE, 2009, p. 12)

The Renaissance is also conceived, therefore, as a great spiritual phenomenon of regeneration through the return to the ancients, although this return made the Renaissance people recreate themselves, creating the new.

Restricting our object of study, we will address an important break in more detail: the break with the medieval theocentric thesis and the emergence of the anthropocentric view in the Renaissance. We aim to expose synthetically what are the characteristics of both and their oppositions.

What is Theocentrism?

Theocentrism – from the Greek θεóς and κέντρον – is a doctrine that takes God as the foundation of all existing order in the world, which prevailed in the Middle Ages. Its principles are respect, moderation, humility, abnegation and attention. Such a doctrine can be understood as characteristic of the Middle Ages, because in this historical period, all questions surrounded the idea of ​​God, due to the dominance of Christian theological thought. Augustine is primarily responsible for this way of thinking, because he discusses spiritual salvation and the condition of man in the world, concluding that there is a double origin of man – divine origin and origin of original sin.

In his expositions, he points to the corruption of man through original sin and that is why man came to be seen as an inferior, imperfect creature, created by God and in need of seeking salvation. It is known that, in the Middle Ages, there were no institutions dedicated to knowledge, and so the Church took control of knowledge without major obstacles. The search for spiritual salvation became predominant in medieval thought and behavior, in addition to the perspective of God as being above everything, including man. Nature is conceived as a divine creation and work and, thus, new proofs of the goodness and existence of the creator of the world are studied. The relationship between man and nature has God as a mediator: “The position of God, as the center of the universe and controller of nature (climate, seas and land), is the key idea to understand the position of man in nature” (HENRIQUE , 2009, p. 47). The Nature of man, even though he is a divine creation, is one of submission towards God.

The understanding of the concept of Nature proposed in the Middle Ages is closely linked to the theocentric vision of the world, moreover, both visions are concomitant. Thus, the idea of ​​a divine creation of nature, of a nature that has no existence of its own, can be said to be religious. Theology will have the function of mediating the relationship between man and nature, with the Bible being the source of answers to all questions about it: “Nature is configured as a physical-theological nature, seen as a very important physical test to demonstrate the existence of a Creator. Nature, or creation, has a purpose, defined in the process of preparing this test” (HENRIQUE, 2009, p. 46).

As explained in the quote above, nature is characterized as physical because it exists concretely and theological because it has a relationship of dependence with the divine, because it depends on it to exist. Thus, God creates nature and it is the proof of his existence.

In this way, we can infer from the above that theocentrism based the world view around God, the view of man as a sinner whose need is salvation, the view of nature as intrinsically linked to the divine and dependent on it.

What is anthropocentrism?

Anthropocentrism – from the Greek άνθρωπος and κέντρον – is an ideological system that understands man as the center of human investigations, and the universe must be conceived according to his relationship with it. Note that there is a resumption of Protagoras’ statement that man is the measure of everything. Man, as a central figure, marks the social world, the philosophical, artistic, scientific world, marks all the aspects that involve him. Themes such as the problematization of human feelings, the forms of human institutions are notorious in this period.

The behavior of man as a medieval mystic and religious is denied to a certain extent, so that attention turns to earthly things, to man himself, since he is seen as a son of God, created in his image and likeness. However, there is still a strong mystical, esoteric conception, which contemplates the mysteries – given that this conception is more present in the humanist period of the Renaissance, that is, at the end of this period. Reason comes to be understood as a divine aspect in man, having the ability to understand things created by God. Intellectual curiosity was the hallmark of the Renaissance, and that is why the questioning of man in his exteriority became so important. Man becomes a distinct element in divine creation, he begins to be investigated in his different aspects. We can see, therefore, anthropocentrism as a new vision of the world. And in this world, God is not central to the questions.

Anthropocentrism was an irrefutable hallmark of the Renaissance. Between the 15th and 16th centuries, new paradigms began to govern man, such as thinking about nature; the thought of man as an individual – whose purpose is to achieve self-realization. Some authors claim that the entire historical context was responsible for the anthropocentric reflection, and as one of the elements of this context, we can highlight the passage from feudalism to mercantile capitalism, in the 15th century.

With the rise of the bourgeoisie – a class that wanted to show its new social condition – and with the desire of the nobles to also express their wealth, there was intense funding for the arts in this period. Among these, paintings that portrayed man in his individuality and in his characteristic psychological aspects predominated. The divine was still portrayed, but in a different way.

Man became more independent with regard to the contact, interpretation and production of knowledge – the original ancient classics were resumed, without previous interpretations or translations – and this became stronger with the creation of the press, by Gutenberg, around 1439. It was this invention that gave the impetus for the democratization of knowledge and the rapid dissemination of new ideas and that contributed fundamentally to the development of the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Scientific Revolution and also to the emergence of Modernity.

The intensification of the great navigations may also have contributed to the new vision that man now has of himself and the world. By understanding the regularities that govern nature, men can expand their horizons, increase trade, get in touch with other cultures, that is, man comes to see himself as capable of self-realization, of innovating. The new vision of himself consists in the fact that man discovered in himself an endless source of inspiration and knowledge, thus he and nature became the center of questions.

We must emphasize that the universe starts to be conceived in a rational and empirical way, without the religious and dogmatized domination coming from the Church. Truth becomes linked to reason, since it has the ability to explain reality, unlike medieval thought, for which truth is linked to beliefs and religion.

Anthropocentrism breaks with the domination of Theocentrism in society, which leads man to produce, live, think, conceive the arts in a different way. Man, therefore, becomes independent of the will of God, no longer an extension of the divine will. Man’s life can no longer be understood as a journey towards God – which was guided by the Church. In this way, the central points that characterize Anthropocentrism and Theocentrism are highlighted, as well as their radical differences.

Related