Alexandrists

← Encyclopedia

The Alexandrists were a strand of Renaissance Aristotelian philosophy, strongest in the Italian universities of the early sixteenth century, that read Aristotle through his ancient commentator Alexander of Aphrodisias and concluded that the human soul is mortal — that it perishes with the body and does not survive death. The name is a later label for a position rather than a membership; it marks where a thinker stood on one fiercely contested question.

That question was the immortality of the soul, and it had split the Aristotelians into camps. The schools of northern Italy, above all Padua, had inherited two rival ways of reading Aristotle’s notoriously compressed account of intellect in the De anima. The Averroists, following the great Arabic commentator Averroes, held that there is a single immortal intellect shared by all humanity, in which each person participates without owning it. Against them stood the reading of Alexander of Aphrodisias, who had taught around 200 CE and was regarded as the most authoritative of the ancient interpreters: that the intellect is bound to the body of the individual, and so cannot outlast it. To follow Alexander was to conclude that nothing personal endures.

The position found its sharpest statement in Pietro Pomponazzi, who taught at Padua and Bologna. His treatise On the Immortality of the Soul (1516) argued that, on strictly Aristotelian and philosophical grounds, the soul must be held mortal — and then maintained that this conclusion, reached by natural reason, left the contrary truth of faith untouched. The manoeuvre was incendiary. Three years earlier the Fifth Lateran Council had declared the soul’s immortality a matter of dogma and instructed philosophers to refute arguments against it. Pomponazzi’s book was burned in Venice; he was accused of reviving the doctrine, sometimes attributed to the Averroists, that a thing might be true in philosophy and false in theology, or the reverse.

Whether he believed what he argued is a question scholarship still leaves open. Some read him as a sincere mortalist sheltering behind a formula; others take the appeal to faith at face value, as the move of a man drawing a firm line between what reason can prove and what only revelation can secure. What is clear is the shape of the dispute: the Alexandrists pressed the claim that Aristotle, read honestly, offered no warrant for a deathless soul, and they made the cost of that honesty unavoidable.

The current belongs to the wider unsettling of the soul in Renaissance thought, where the Platonic revival was raising the soul toward the divine even as the Aristotelians were arguing it down into the body. Both readings claimed the ancients; both fed the long modern argument over whether mind is something the body merely houses or something the body simply is. The Alexandrists pushed that argument to its edge and declined to look away.

→ Related: Cartesianism · Psyche · Neoplatonism