Save

Anti-Paracelsianism from Conrad Gessner to Robert Boyle

A Confessional History

In: Daphnis
Authors:
Charles D. Gunnoe Jr. Aquinas College, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Vereinigte Staaten gunnocha@aquinas.edu

Search for other papers by Charles D. Gunnoe Jr. in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Dane T. Daniel Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio, Vereinigte Staaten dane.daniel@wright.edu

Search for other papers by Dane T. Daniel in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$40.00

This article surveys the current knowledge of the anti-Paracelsian movement from a confessional perspective. It outlines the rise of the critique of Paracelsus by academic physicians such as Conrad Gessner, Thomas Erastus’s vociferous demonization, and an ambivalent Catholic reaction. Andreas Libavius and other chymical theorists remained critical of Paracelsus’s natural philosophy while engaging aspects of his alchemy. The cumulative impact reveals a widespread anti-Paracelsian discourse, which escalated in the seventeenth century due to the growing popularity of Paracelsian spiritualism.

Content Metrics

All Time Past 365 days Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 488 80 21
Full Text Views 124 2 0
PDF Views & Downloads 307 9 0