HUMANISM THROUGH

RENAISSANCE

DESIDERIUS ERASMUS

1466 - 1536

He is a Dutch Renaissance humanist,

Catholic,

Priest, Social Critic, Teacher,

and a Theologian.

He has been called the “crowning glory of Christian

Humanist”.

He believes that Religion is a

process and not an act.

Religion is less to enlighten the mind than to transform

the heart.

That the goal of all our efforts is Christ, and the

road to Him is faith.

The first one who wanted to advocate the reformation of

Catholic Church’s Revolution.

Erasmus felt that the Roman Catholic Church

needed to reform its superstitious and corrupt

behaviour.

His most famous work, In Praise of Folly in 1509

attacked monks, theologians, and other

Christians

for not seeing the true purpose of life, which is

to imitate Christ.

Using humanist techniques for

working on texts, he prepared

important new Latin and Greek editions of the New Testament.

His Latin and Greek translations of the

Bible

became instrumental for the Church’s

Reformation.

With the use of his works,

Christianity

ideas started to spread among people.

And with his advocacy on Church’s Reformation,

more and more people believe in Christianity

Again.

Giambattista Vico

1668—1744

The first to merit the name

Philosopher of History

He is often credited with the

invention of

Philosophy of History

He was the first to take seriously the

possibility that people had

fundamentally different schema of thought in different

historical eras.

Became the first to chart a course of

history that depended on the

way

the structure of thought changed

over time.

The verum-factum principle is one of his

two most famous ideas.

Holds that one can know the truth in what one makes.

He believed that to know something fully

requires understanding how it

came to be.

Explains that since we are the cause of what we make,

we can know what was made.

Since humans have made the civil world, they can

understand the cause of the civil world and know the

truth about it.

Since natural objects were not made by the scientists who study

them,

their nature must remain to some degree

mysterious.

He also believed that the historian must

look to the past and understand it in

collective

and institutional as well as personal

(empathetic) terms.

The past should be understood sympathetically -- the historian should not

judge the past according to present standards and

values.

The past ought to be examined in light of its historical context (the

"pastness of the past").

JESRAEL AMBROS

MEDRANO

BSED-III Social Studies

09/10/15