Anders als sein berühmter Sohn Christian und als Schüler G. W. Leibniz gehört Jakob Thomasius noch der aristotelischen Schulphilosophie an; dies belegen, neben Publikationen zu allen Disziplinen einschließlich der Metaphysik, sein Kommentar zu D. Stahl, aber auch seine frühe Auseinandersetzung mit Spinoza. Zugleich verkörpert Jakob Thomasius das allmählich erwachende (auch wieder auf Melanchthon rekurrierende) Bewusstsein dafür, dass der ontologische Anspruch des Aristotelismus nicht (mehr) einzulösen war. An dessen Stelle traten das didaktisch reduzierte Lexikon philosophischer Begriffe einerseits (neben seiner Professur hatte Thomasius die Rektorate der Leipziger Gymnasien inne) und die polyhistorische Ordnung, auch vorsichtig eklektische Distanzierung der philosophischen Tradition andererseits; auch die neue Physik erfährt positive Resonanz. Dieser äußerst fruchtbare und seinerzeit erfolgreiche Autor spiegelt deutlich die inneren Probleme des frühneuzeitlichen Aristotelismus.
Unlike his famous son Christian and his pupil G.W. Leibniz, Jakob Thomasius still stands in the tradition of the Aristotelian school. Apart from publications on all disciplines including metaphysics, this is demonstrated by his commentaries on D. Stahl as well as by his early analysis of Spinoza. At the same time, Jakob Thomasius represents the new critical awareness (refering to Melanchthon) of the impossibility to follow Aristotelian ontological concepts any longer. They were replaced by the didactically reduced encyclopedia of philosophical terms on the one hand (Thomasius was at the same time university professor and rector of the Leipzig gymnasia) and by the polyhistorical system, by a careful eclectic distancing from philosophical traditions on the other hand; also the modern physics was positively approached.
This very prolific and in his time successful author shows clearly the inner conflict of Early Modern Aristotelian philosophy.
Unlike his famous son Christian and his pupil G.W. Leibniz, Jakob Thomasius still stands in the tradition of the Aristotelian school. Apart from publications on all disciplines including metaphysics, this is demonstrated by his commentaries on D. Stahl as well as by his early analysis of Spinoza. At the same time, Jakob Thomasius represents the new critical awareness (refering to Melanchthon) of the impossibility to follow Aristotelian ontological concepts any longer. They were replaced by the didactically reduced encyclopedia of philosophical terms on the one hand (Thomasius was at the same time university professor and rector of the Leipzig gymnasia) and by the polyhistorical system, by a careful eclectic distancing from philosophical traditions on the other hand; also the modern physics was positively approached.
This very prolific and in his time successful author shows clearly the inner conflict of Early Modern Aristotelian philosophy.