z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Evolution of the Doctrine of Signatures of Things and the Adamic Language in the Chemical Philosophy of the 16th and 17th Centuries
Author(s) -
Anton V. Karabykov
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
filosofskie nauki
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2618-8961
pISSN - 0235-1188
DOI - 10.30727/0235-1188-2020-63-8-91-105
Subject(s) - doctrine , semiotics , epistemology , conceptualization , natural philosophy , philosophy , natural (archaeology) , sign (mathematics) , legitimacy , mysticism , abandonment (legal) , narrative , context (archaeology) , literature , sociology , history , law , linguistics , theology , art , mathematical analysis , mathematics , archaeology , politics , political science
The aim of the paper is to investigate paths along which a transformation of the doctrine of natural signs was developed in works by Paracelsians, forming one of the main religious and philosophic currents of Late Renaissance. The modifications of the doctrine are discussed in a context of intensive speculations on the essence of the primordial language of humankind and on the possibility of its restoration, which can describe the intellectual life of that epoch. It is argued that within “chemical philosophy” the possibility of restoration of the Adamic language directly depends on mastering the art of interpreting natural signs ( signatura rerum ), which can give a key to correct understanding of nature. And shifts in the conceptualization of such signatures involved transformations in formulating and solving of the Adamistic problems, which did not exclude reverse causation. It is also ascertained that the most orthodox followers of Paracelsus usually appealed to the Adamistic narrative in order to reinforce legitimacy of the symbolic hermeneutics of nature, developed with chiefly medico-pharmacological purposes. Meanwhile, relatively more independent Paracelsians often paid more attention to linguo-philosophic issues. Realizing the deficiency of the doctrine of signatures for reconstruction of the primordial language, they postulated the necessity of one (or two) of the following premises: (a) supplementing the doctrine with a mystical illumination; (b) acceptance of a weaker version, according to which natural signs are just sparse reference points slightly simplifying empirical study of nature; (c) abandonment of search for the Ursprache and constructing its artificial substitute, a universal semiotic system.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here