What is life and where does it come from? The question is very old, but it was in the 17th century, with the crisis of the Aristotelian-Galenic paradigm, that it re-emerged. Matter was now stripped of any im-pulse and capacity for self-organization: therefore, it was necessary to find something that would take into account the strength and information that it seemed to hold, especially in what were considered vital phenomena. Georg Ernst Stahl and Friedrich Hoffmann, both professors in Halle and responsible for two of the most famous medical systems of the first half of the 18th century, offered solutions to the problem that only appear to be very different. The first invoked the soul as an ideal place of pro-duction of the energy that allowed the human body to fight the putrefactive forces inside the natural world; the second referred to the concept of ether, to which he attributed modes of action basically similar to those that tradition attributed to vegetative and sensitive souls. This paper aims to highlight the positions of the two physicians, setting them in the climate of the revisitation of ancient certainties that characterized natural philosophy between the 17th and 18th centuries.
Matter is not enough. Georg Ernst Stahl, Friedrich Hoffmann and the Issue of Animism
Francesco Paolo de Ceglia
2021-01-01
Abstract
What is life and where does it come from? The question is very old, but it was in the 17th century, with the crisis of the Aristotelian-Galenic paradigm, that it re-emerged. Matter was now stripped of any im-pulse and capacity for self-organization: therefore, it was necessary to find something that would take into account the strength and information that it seemed to hold, especially in what were considered vital phenomena. Georg Ernst Stahl and Friedrich Hoffmann, both professors in Halle and responsible for two of the most famous medical systems of the first half of the 18th century, offered solutions to the problem that only appear to be very different. The first invoked the soul as an ideal place of pro-duction of the energy that allowed the human body to fight the putrefactive forces inside the natural world; the second referred to the concept of ether, to which he attributed modes of action basically similar to those that tradition attributed to vegetative and sensitive souls. This paper aims to highlight the positions of the two physicians, setting them in the climate of the revisitation of ancient certainties that characterized natural philosophy between the 17th and 18th centuries.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
