SCIENZA NUOVA

The Italian philosopher Giambattista Vico (1668-1744) is surprisingly little-known, considering that he is credited as the greatest Italian philosopher of the Enlightenment, the creator of modern philosophy of history and a builder of the foundations of cultural anthropology and ethnology. In his philosophical outlook he is anti-Cartesian, but he is by no means derivative on those grounds. In fact, much of what he says is all new, and he has been praised for his originality by several major subsequent thinkers, such as Goethe and Hegel, and particularly, Karl Marx. On the other hand, he appears to have been an outsider to his own age, and despite the freshness of his approach and the greatly challenging and interesting nature of his theories, it is really astounding that his name had never spawned a mighty European tornado of far-reaching controversy and debate.

Two particular examples of this unusual situation around Vico will suffice here. Montesquieu was known to have a copy of Vico’s magnum opus (its full title that has lent itself in an abbreviated form to this entry’s title is Principi di Scienza Nuova d’intorno alla Comune Natura delli Nazioni. I must also mention the fact that the phrase New Science had already been in prior use by Galileo but in reverse order as Nuova Scienza) and in the philosophy of history, which he is claimed to have inaugurated) and to have studied it assiduously, but he never mentions Vico or his book in any of his writings. Another example is that Vico was reportedly a major influence on Bertrand Russell, but for some reason his name is not in the name index to his History of Western Philosophy, although he does make extensive comments about Vico in his other books.

Before coming up with his Scienza Nuova (first edition: 1725, revised in 1730, revised again in1744), Vico had developed his main underlying principle, known as verum factum, in his 1710 De Italorum Sapientia. It says that Verum esse ipsum factum. This means that truth can only be verified through creation or invention and not through observation, as Dèscartes had thought: The criterion and rule of the true is to have made it. Accordingly, our clear and distinct idea of the mind cannot be a criterion of the mind itself, and still less of other truths. For while the mind perceives itself, it does not make itself. This criterion for truth would shape the history of civilization in Scienza Nuova, since he would argue that civil life, like mathematics, is wholly constructed.

The book attempts a compromise between Christian teaching and secular historical knowledge. Humanity as God’s Creation was good, but then, through its improper exercise of free will, became sinful, was punished by the Flood and was nearly wiped out. The survivors were divided into the chosen people, namely the Jews who received God’s Revelation and started a life under Divine guidance, and giganti, forefathers of pagans, who subsisted in virtually beastly states, gradually climbing out of them through the power of religion. Even pagan religions, Vico says, become the means of re-humanizing the giganti, giving rise to social institutions and communities of people. “Only religion compels peoples to commit heroic acts, driven by emotions.”

There are several major themes in Vico’s philosophical teaching. One, taken from Polybius, in opposition to the Cartesian rationalism and the prevailing natural-legal theories of his time is the cyclical development of society (corso e ricorso). The recurring cycle of three ages: the divine, the heroic, and the human, constitutes, in his words, la storia ideale eterna.

Another  major theme is that of God’s Providence. God governs the world according to His design, and He seals the destinies of nations according to His Will. Vico does not believe, however, in the idea that God’s punishing anger or mercy can be directly felt either as national misery or as national happiness. God reveals Himself in history only through human nature. The latter is inclined to think only of its personal advantage; however, the Spirit of God, while allowing human passions free play, makes man contemplate, and wisely directs this free play, in order that civil institutions, the overcoming of barbarism, and eventually humanity might evolve out of it. As Vico puts it, “He turned their limited designs to the service of His higher purposes, in order to assure the preservation of the human race on this earth.”

Vico’s peculiar ideas about language and myth are also of great interest. He says that man’s thinking and his language were completely poetic at an early historical stage, born out of his fantasy. The myths are poetic tales of history, told employing some fantastic tribal notions, made comprehensible owing to people’s unbounded imagination. Thus, Hercules, for instance, although not a historical personality, reflects real life, as a “heroic character of the nation founders, from the viewpoint of their efforts.” Thus, for Vico, languages and myths, the most authentic relics of ancient times, become the authentic source of historical knowledge, whereas whatever has been reported by the historians and philosophers of later times, has been corrupted by their contemporary biases, and therefore is of no value.

And finally, his concept of class struggle. Vico realized the peculiar connection between formalistic cruelty and primeval colorfulness, underlying the legal principles of antiquity; the significance of the class struggle between the patricians and the plebeians, transforming the state, and thus, the significance of class struggle as such. Karl Marx was particularly appreciative of Vico’s idea of the innate ineradicable hostility among the social classes.

Once again this reminder: the subject matter here is extremely interesting to me from several perspectives: philosophically, historically, and linguistically, and I am looking forward to digging up much more of the original Vico, which will enable me to analyze his contribution to posterity, by my own standards. This will be done at the earliest opportunity, but, unfortunately, now is not the time for it. Meantime, the purpose of posting this entry now is primarily my reader’s edification.