Camaldulensian Disputations

On the Active and Contemplative Life.

...[that he] should apply himself to action, so refined in every kind of virtue and adorned with all eloquence: that he may always hold beneficial and honorable opinions concerning the state original: "re publica"; referring to the common good or the commonwealth, and eloquently and abundantly persuade others of what he feels. He should be one who fears neither the violence of enemies nor the anger of seditious citizens, but repels the attack of the former with all the strength of mind and body, and breaks the impious and furious attempts of the latter with the greatest freedom of spirit. Finally, he is one who takes care that religion is cultivated, that justice and equity are preserved, and that the entire city is kept within the bounds of moderation. And so that he may accomplish these things, he spares no labor, no dangers, and finally, not even life itself. Therefore, shall we not say that he who has lived and acted thus has both fulfilled the duty of a human and deserved most excellently of the mortal race?

At this point, I am forced to greatly wonder at those who hesitantly ask whether anyone can rightly administer these things without those virtues called the moral virtues original: "de uita & moribus"; literally "concerning life and customs". If these are removed, what "right action" remains in us? Or what is there at all that can be called ours, and which is not instead common with the beasts? For what else do we seek when we seek a way of acting, except what sort of actions a person ought to perform in living a social life? Unless these are done justly, bravely, and temperately, I do not understand what they could even be. But the same logic applies to prudence original: "prudentia"; the practical wisdom required to make good decisions in real-world affairs: unless it sits at the helm like an excellent pilot and directs the course of life into a calm and safe harbor, we must necessarily be overwhelmed in the midst of the waves and storms of disturbances.

Moreover, I will dare to say this: no one will rightly administer either himself and his home or the state who is completely devoid of all learning. For in what way shall I know either what the highest human good is, or how it is acquired, if the nature of both man and the world is ignored? And who will rightly cultivate religion if they have in no part touched upon the knowledge of divine matters? Therefore, he who wishes to lead the state will not be devoid of these things.

I confess, however, that it is difficult for a man occupied with constant private and public business to have a completely exact knowledge of those matters. I am aware that this was the reason why they called Leah—who in the Hebrew Scriptures original: "hebræorum litteris"; referring to the Old Testament stands as the symbol of action—"weak-eyed" In Genesis 29:17, Leah is described as having "weak" or "tender" eyes. In Renaissance thought, this symbolized that the active life cannot see divine truths as clearly as the contemplative life (symbolized by her sister Rachel).. But she was altogether fruitful: because while she is distracted by many things, she is less able to look upward at higher truths. Yet because she has served many well, she binds many to herself through her kindness, as if they were her children.

You see, therefore, that the life spent in action is by no means to be despised. For it touches human nature most closely, and by its industry It excels from here and its labors, it binds the human race together with a sweet bond, and ensures that it cultivates justice and religion.

But since our mind—which is the only thing that makes us human—is perfected not by mortal action but by immortal knowledge (in which resides that ultimate end to which all things are referred, for the sake of which all things are done, and which is sought for its own sake), who would not see that speculation The act of deep, intellectual contemplation of divine or natural truths. is to be preferred by far?

When Battista Leon Battista Alberti (1404–1472), the famous Renaissance "Universal Man." He is a speaker in this dialogue. had said these things in roughly this manner, he himself, with his eyes fixed in a steady gaze like one who was turning over far more in his mind than he had expressed in words, sat silent for a good while. And a stupor had seized us who were present from such great learning from so multifaceted a man, so that rather those things which we had heard thus far...