GIORDANO BRUNO
A COLLECTIVE HALLUCINATION?
CLAUDIO D'ANTONIO
|
Giordano Bruno, a Collective Hallucination?
by Claudio D'Antonio
Since many years the works of this dominican
monk are being studied by prominent academicians
all over the world, but the results must
be very poor if an illustrious professor
of the Ohio State University has arrived
at the conclusion that probably he was simply
mentally sick and therefore entitles his
article “The folly of Giordano Bruno”. There
is no evidence that he had any first hand
knowledge of the Copernicanism, so his alleged
influence in the formation of the modern
thought is not seriously grounded and his
opinions about religion are just a mystical
pantheism, so the fire that burnt him did
not cause a great loss to mankind. However
brutal such a point of view may look to sensitive
souls, if Bruno has been only what is normally
accepted, i. e. a pretended philosopher with
a limited originality, it really seems that
his only merit has been the acceptance of
the martyrdom, in order to become an important
topic in juvenile anticlericalism.
GIORDANO BRUNO’S INVENTION
THE IMAGINAL LANGUAGE FOR THINKING
But maybe that the number of his fans have
a good reason for maintaining the greatness
of Giordano Bruno, that they perceive even
in they can’t grasp onto it. In fact from
the apparent folly a powerful method comes
out, the Art of Arts, he defined it, that
is the Art of Thinking, or the Artificial
Intelligence Method. Continuing the tradition
of the Art of Memory, inherited from the
classical antiquity, and the studies on Logic
and Dialectic that had greatly progressed
owing to Pietro Ispano and Raimondo Lullo,
he achieved a synthesis that consists of
a language for thinking, made of images,
in substitution of the natural language used
for communicating made of sounds. In the
books that he wrote in latin – the language
of science until a couple of centuries ago,
just like Englisk nowadays – he treats the
rules of the grammar and syntax of this language
that Leibniz called “lingua characteristica”
that is made of images, from the Greek word
character – image:
The use of images instead of sounds gives
evidence and clearness to the mental processes,
stimulates the memory and vehiculates a quantity
of informations that sound cannot take with
itself.
Being scientific books they are hard to be
read because they contain many neologisms
and the aimed target seems not indicated
clearly enough for the modern reader. Yet
Bruno puts right in the title of his writings
the mention of the “arts”, we would rather
call them techniques, that he is going to
expose. And their names are well known to
the people who happened to open a book of
rhetoric at least once in their life. Ordo
and Dispositio, that is the order in which
the topics are to be treated, Iudicium, that
is the conclusion of the discourse, Memoria,
that is the art of remembering the entire
speech and reading it not from a piece of
paper, but from the proper Locus Memoriae,
place of memory. Nevertheless this is an
imaginal language, so articles, prepositions,
adverbs, logic ties between the different
parts of the discourse can be represented
only by images and by their reciprocal position
in space. As this is a language for thinking,
its function is mainly to guide the thought
to a specific result, the truth, that emerges
in all evidence at he end of the process.
For this reason the Inventio is not only
the search of whatsoever arguments in favour
of a specific theses, but is linked to the
test of their logical validity as well.
THE CLAVIS MAGNA
The above mentioned techniques are exposed
in Giordano Bruno’s work that he collectively
names Clavis magna, the Great Key, because
this teaching is the key that opens the coffer
which contains the treasures of the Intellect,
the Nous, as Plato and Aristoteles named
the upper faculty of the human mind. But
for us this work discloses the meaning of
Bruno’s latin works up to now out of reach
for our understanding.
Many academicians believe that the Clavis
Magna has never been written, or if it was,
it has been lost. On the contrary it has
always been under their eyes under the title
of De Imaginum Compositione[1], Sigillus
Sigillorum[2], Lampas triginta Statuarum[3]
and some other books that need not to be
quoted here. The reason why the author did
not care about giving full evidence to his
invention lies in the fact that he wanted
to raise the curiosity of his readers and
then personally choose the students who deserved
to be taught the Art of Thinking. For this
reason he declared that he had made an invention
to be considered greater than the discovery
of America, because it is the source of numberless
further inventions that can be made by the
people who know his Artificial Intelligence.
[1] Translated into Italian and published
with the title of “The First Book of the
Clavis Magna” i. e.”Il Primo Libro della
Clavis Magna”, Di Renzo Editore, Roma, 1997
[2] next to appear in the Italian translation
with the title of “The Second Book of the
Clavis Magna”, i. e. “Il Secondo Libro della
Clavis Magna”
[3] Translated into Italian and published
with the title of “Il Quarto Libro della
Clavis Magna” Di Renzo Editore, Roma, 2002
|