PDA

View Full Version : The Truth About Emperor Frederick The Second



TimelessTheist
08-23-2014, 07:28 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVdQ8CFFT5g

What now, secularists?

Quantum Weirdness
08-24-2014, 04:03 PM
Although I am not a secularist, I thank you for the educational video.

TimelessTheist
08-24-2014, 04:47 PM
Although I am not a secularist, I thank you for the educational video.

Nah, I just said that because secularists often claim Frederick the Second as their own due to the myths made up about him.

shunyadragon
08-26-2014, 01:57 PM
Nah, I just said that because secularists often claim Frederick the Second as their own due to the myths made up about him.

I think your overstating the claims that Frederick II was a secularist?, or whatever that means at the time he ruled. Sources?!?!? Richard Dawkins did not even go that far. Some older historians of the early 20th century used such modern terms as free thinker to describe his views, but secularism and atheism as such did not really exist at the time he ruled, except among some philosophers of that period and maybe earlier. The closest I can find as a true secularist was Lucretius of 1st century BCE Rome.

It could possibly concluded that he had some Deist views, and possibly a In any historical analysis, it is important to avoid ascribing our modern perceptions of specific philosophies or ideologies to persons who lived long ago. Historians used to describe him as a Renaissance Man or free thinker as those phrases are understood today. He did establish the University of Naples independent of the Roman Church to promote a more secular education.

A careful reading of all his writings indicate he remained an establishment believer in God and the authority of the Roman Church. I do believe the description of him as a limited Renaissance thinker within the tradition of the Roman Church as ok.

TimelessTheist
08-26-2014, 06:52 PM
Some older historians of the early 20th century used such modern terms as free thinker to describe his views

Eh, they describe him as an early secularist.


It could possibly concluded that he had some Deist views,

No it can't. He was Roman Catholic, through and through.


Historians used to describe him as a Renaissance Man or free thinker

Well, I agree with the first one, however the term 'freethinker' is practically a meaningless term now-a-days.


He did establish the University of Naples independent of the Roman Church to promote a more secular education.

Eh, all universities not built by the Church itself were considered separate from the Church. Though, there's no evidence that he did it to provide a more "secular education", whatever that means, especially since Thomas Aquinas attended it.

shunyadragon
08-27-2014, 07:36 PM
Eh, they describe him as an early secularist.

Who?

Most reliable academic sources describe him as secular leanings, as I did, and not a secularist. This use of secularist would be a contradiction.




No it can't. He was Roman Catholic, through and through.

I did not say he was a deist, his writings indicate predominantly theism supporting the Divine authority of theocracy, but also indicate some deist views.




Well, I agree with the first one, however the term 'freethinker' is practically a meaningless term now-a-days.


What terms used now-a-days has little meaning at the time of Frederick II

Eh, all universities not built by the Church itself were considered separate from the Church. Though, there's no evidence that he did it to provide a more "secular education", whatever that means, especially since Thomas Aquinas attended it.

He built it to be separate from the church, So what about Thomas Aquinas?