The Role of Skepticism in Early Modern Philosophy: a Critique of Popkin's "Sceptical Crisis" and a Study of Descartes and Hume

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Role of Skepticism in Early Modern Philosophy: a Critique of Popkin's University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School March 2019 The Role of Skepticism in Early Modern Philosophy: A Critique of Popkin's "Sceptical Crisis" and a Study of Descartes and Hume Raman Sachdev University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Philosophy Commons Scholar Commons Citation Sachdev, Raman, "The Role of Skepticism in Early Modern Philosophy: A Critique of Popkin's "Sceptical Crisis" and a Study of Descartes and Hume" (2019). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/7920 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Role of Skepticism in Early Modern Philosophy: A Critique of Popkin’s “Sceptical Crisis” and a Study of Descartes and Hume by Raman Sachdev A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Co-Major Professor: Roger Ariew, Ph.D. Co-Major Professor: Douglas Jesseph, Ph.D. Alexander Levine, Ph.D. William Goodwin, Ph.D. Date of Approval: March 29, 2019 Keywords: Academic, Cartesian, Humean, hyperbolic doubt, Montaigne, Pyrrhonism Copyright © 2019, Raman Sachdev Acknowledgments I would like to thank my dissertation committee members, Professors Alex Levine and William Goodwin, and my Co-Major Professor, Doug Jesseph, for their support. I am especially grateful to my Co-Major Professor, Roger Ariew. During my time as a doctoral student at the University of South Florida and, in particular, throughout my process of writing this dissertation, Professor Ariew has offered me his time, his guidance, and his encouragement. In addition, his scholarly work has provided me with an exemplary model for how to do research in the history of philosophy. I am thankful to my friends and colleagues at the University of South Florida whom I have gotten to know over the past few years. They include Simon Dutton, Daniel Goodson, Dahlia Guzman, Dwight Lewis, Erli Mertika, Alex Shillito, Zach Vereb, Brad Warfield, and John Walsh. I thank my parents-in-law, Ashok Kumar and Indu Gupta, for their love and blessings. I thank my uncle, Salil Sachdev, for showing me that happiness is an attainable goal. To my brother, Rohit, and my sister, Richa: a rambunctious and obnoxious boy like myself could not have asked for better siblings. To my parents, Vivek and Sadhna Sachdev: words cannot express how grateful I am for all that you have done for me. Finally, to my wife, Sonal: you are my guide, my inspiration, my strength, and my motivation. I am fortunate to love you and to be loved by you, and I am a better man because of you. Table of Contents Abbreviations.................................................................................................................................. iii Abstract........................................................................................................................................... iv Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 I. Popkin and I: Our Respective Motivations ...................................................................... 3 II. Popkin’s “Sceptical Crisis” ............................................................................................ 4 III. Defining Skepticism, Naming a Skeptic ....................................................................... 5 IV. An Outline of the Project .............................................................................................. 7 Chapter One: Ancient Skepticism and Early Modern Skepticism before Descartes....................... 9 I. Pyrrhonism Against the Dogmatists: Equipollence, Suspension of Judgment, and Tranquility............................................................................................................. 10 II. Academicism: Probabilistic Reasoning and Universal Inapprehensibility................... 18 III. Pre-Cartesian Skepticism............................................................................................. 24 IIIa. Francisco Sanches Against the Aristotelians: That Nothing is Known.............................................................................................................. 28 IIIb. Michel de Montaigne: Against Intellectual Arrogance and Human Vanity............................................................................................................... 32 IIIc. Pierre Charron: Much Like Montaigne, Seeker of Wisdom.......................... 38 IV. Conclusion................................................................................................................... 42 Chapter Two: Popkin on Descartes and Skepticism...................................................................... 45 I. Popkin’s History of Skepticism: The “Sceptical Crisis”................................................ 45 II. Descartes and the Threat of Skepticism........................................................................ 50 III. Descartes’ Certainty through Pyrrhonism.................................................................... 59 IV. Descartes on His First Meditation Skepticism............................................................. 64 V. Hyperbolic Doubt in Part One of the Principles of Philosophy.................................... 66 VI. Descartes’ Works without Hyperbolic Doubt.............................................................. 69 VIa. The Regulae................................................................................................... 70 VIb. The Discourse on Method.............................................................................. 75 VIc. The Geometrical Presentation of the Meditations......................................... 78 VII. Descartes’ Concession................................................................................................ 83 VIII. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 86 i Chapter Three: Descartes and Skepticism..................................................................................... 90 I. The Influence of Skepticism on Descartes’ Thought..................................................... 91 II. Montaigne, Sextus, and Cicero in the Discourse on Method........................................ 93 III. Descartes’ Views on Skepticism: The Correspondence............................................ 100 IIIa. On the Pyrrhonists, the Skeptics, and Skepticism........................................ 103 IIIb. On the Use of Doubt.................................................................................... 107 IV. Conclusion................................................................................................................. 111 Chapter Four: Hume and Skepticism........................................................................................... 114 I. Descartes the Anti-Skeptic, Hume the Skeptic............................................................. 115 II. Hume’s Criticisms of Cartesian Skepticism................................................................ 120 III. Pierre Bayle: “Supersceptical” Fideist....................................................................... 124 IV. Popkin on Hume’s Pyrrhonism.................................................................................. 129 IVa. Hume the Pyrrhonist: Dogmatist and Skeptic.............................................. 131 IVb. Melancholy versus Tranquility.................................................................... 136 IVc. Hume the Just Reasoner............................................................................... 139 V. Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 142 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 144 References.................................................................................................................................... 148 ii Abbreviations A Descartes, René. Philosophical Essays and Correspondence. Edited and Translated by Roger Ariew. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 2000. Cited by page number following the citation of AT. AC Descartes, René. Meditations, Objections, and Replies. Edited and Translated by Roger Ariew and Donald Cress. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 2006. Cited by page number following the citation of AT. AT Descartes, René. Œuvres de Descartes. Edited by Charles Adam and Paul Tannery. Paris, 1910. Cited by volume and page numbers. CSM Descartes, René. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes: Volumes I–II. Translated by John Cottingham, Robert Stoothoff, and Dugald Murdoch. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1984–1985. Cited by volume and page numbers following the citation of AT. CSMK Descartes, René. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes: Volume III, The Correspondence. Translated by John Cottingham, Robert Stoothoff, Dugald Murdoch, and Anthony Kenny. New York,
Recommended publications
  • Western Philosophy Rev
    Designed by John Cornet, Phoenix HS (Ore) Western Philosophy rev. September 2012 The very process of philosophy has been a driving force in the tranformation of the world. From the figure who dwells upon how to achieve power, to the minister who contemplates the paradox of the only truth (their faith) yet which is also stagnent, to the astronomers who are searching the stars for signs of other civilizations, to the revolutionaries who sought to construct a national government which would protect the rights of the minority, the very exercise of philosophy and philosophical thought is at a core of human nature. Philosophy addresses what are sometimes called the "big questions." These include questions of morality and ethics, ideology/faith,, politics, the truth of knowledge, the nature of reality, and the meaning of human existance (...just to name a few!) (Religion addresses some of the same questions, but while philosophy and religion overlap in some questions, they can and do differ significantly in the approach they take to answering them.) Subject Learning Outcomes Skills-Based Learning Outcomes Behavioral Expectations and Grading Policy Develop an appreciation for and enjoyment of Organize, maintain and learn how to study from a learning, particularly in how learning should subject-specific notebook Attendance, participation and cause us to question what we think we know Be able to demonstrate how to take notes (including being prepared are daily and have a willingness to entertain new utilizing two-column format) expectations perspectives on issues. Be able to engage in meaningful, substantive discussion A classroom culture of respect and Students will develop familiarity with major with others.
    [Show full text]
  • May 12, 2017 Department of Philosophy Undergraduate Course Descriptions
    UB Spring Session January 30 - May 12, 2017 Department of Philosophy Undergraduate Course Descriptions PHI 101 Introduction to Philosophy K. Cho M, W, F, 9:00 AM-9:50 AM Class # 24095 This is an introductory philosophy course with a compact and yet global design. Instead of the frequently adopted but seldom fully utilized textbooks averaging 630 pates we have chosen a text with only 130 ages but packed with content that is literally “Global”. Text: John Dewey, Confucius and Global Philosophy, by Joseph Grange, 2004, SUNY Press; Plus Occasional Handouts in class. The choice of the two names Dewey and Confucius is more symbolic. Nobody would think these two embody the Western half and The Eastern half of the world; philosophy it is rather in terms of “working connections” they reveal to each other that we perceive them as representatives of our age it its needs. Dewey was certainly a typical American philosopher, who like no one else. Advanced the cause of Pragmatism. But he was also the American philosopher who was the most open to the world. He lectured in Beijing and promoted talented Chinese scholars who came to seek his guidance. And who remembers today that Dewey was thoroughly at home in Kant’s, Kant's Critique and was a skilled Hegelian dialectician? “Breathing is an affair as much as it is an affair of the air”. Or “Walking is an affair of legs as much as it is an affair of the earth.” In these simple words, Dewy translated the speculative language of German Idealism and made philosophy an affair of living.
    [Show full text]
  • Skepticism and Pluralism Ways of Living a Life Of
    SKEPTICISM AND PLURALISM WAYS OF LIVING A LIFE OF AWARENESS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZHUANGZI #±r A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN PHILOSOPHY AUGUST 2004 By John Trowbridge Dissertation Committee: Roger T. Ames, Chairperson Tamara Albertini Chung-ying Cheng James E. Tiles David R. McCraw © Copyright 2004 by John Trowbridge iii Dedicated to my wife, Jill iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In completing this research, I would like to express my appreciation first and foremost to my wife, Jill, and our three children, James, Holly, and Henry for their support during this process. I would also like to express my gratitude to my entire dissertation committee for their insight and understanding ofthe topics at hand. Studying under Roger Ames has been a transformative experience. In particular, his commitment to taking the Chinese tradition on its own terms and avoiding the tendency among Western interpreters to overwrite traditional Chinese thought with the preoccupations ofWestern philosophy has enabled me to broaden my conception ofphilosophy itself. Roger's seminars on Confucianism and Daoism, and especially a seminar on writing a philosophical translation ofthe Zhongyong r:pJm (Achieving Equilibrium in the Everyday), have greatly influenced my own initial attempts to translate and interpret the seminal philosophical texts ofancient China. Tamara Albertini's expertise in ancient Greek philosophy was indispensable to this project, and a seminar I audited with her, comparing early Greek and ancient Chinese philosophy, was part ofthe inspiration for my choice ofresearch topic. I particularly valued the opportunity to study Daoism and the Yijing ~*~ with Chung-ying Cheng g\Gr:p~ and benefited greatly from his theory ofonto-cosmology as a means of understanding classical Chinese philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Skepticism Foundationalism and the New Fuzziness: the Role of Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Legal Theory Robert Justin Lipkin
    Cornell Law Review Volume 75 Article 2 Issue 4 May 1990 Beyond Skepticism Foundationalism and the New Fuzziness: The Role of Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Legal Theory Robert Justin Lipkin Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert Justin Lipkin, Beyond Skepticism Foundationalism and the New Fuzziness: The Role of Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Legal Theory , 75 Cornell L. Rev. 810 (1990) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol75/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BEYOND SKEPTICISM, FOUNDATIONALISM AND THE NEW FUZZINESS: THE ROLE OF WIDE REFLECTIVE EQUILIBRIUM IN LEGAL THEORY Robert Justin Liphint TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................. 812 I. FOUNDATIONALISM AND SKEPTICISM ..................... 816 A. The Problem of Skepticism ........................ 816 B. Skepticism and Nihilism ........................... 819 1. Theoretical and PracticalSkepticism ................ 820 2. Subjectivism and Relativism ....................... 821 3. Epistemic and Conceptual Skepticism ................ 821 4. Radical Skepticism ............................... 822 C. Modified Skepticism ............................... 824 II. NEW FOUNDATIONALISM
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Arcesilaus and Carneades
    C:/ITOOLS/WMS/CUP/552750/WORKINGFOLDER/BCP/9780521874762C03.3D 58 [58–80] 24.9.2009 7:15AM harald thorsrud 3 Arcesilaus and Carneades Arcesilaus initiated a sceptical phase in the Academy after taking over in c. 268 BCE. He was motivated in part by an innovative reading of Plato’s dialogues. Where his predecessors found positive doctrines to be systematically developed, he found a dialectical method of arguing and the sceptical view that nothing can be known (akatalêpsia, De Or. 3.67,seeDL4.28, 4.32). He also advanced this conclusion in opposition to the ambitious system of the Stoics, claiming further that the appropriate response to the pervasive uncertainty generated by his method is the suspension of judgement (epochê). Arcesilaus’ dialectical method was practiced without significant modification in the Academy until Carneades, who became head sometime before 155 BCE.1 Carneades both continued and strength- ened Arcesilaus’ method (ND 1.11, Acad. 2.16, see also Acad. 1.46, and Eusebius, Praep. evang. 14.7.15). Sextus marks the change by referring to Plato’s Academy as Old, Arcesilaus’ as Middle, and Carneades’ as New (PH 1.220). Since the main interpretative issues regarding both Arcesilaus and Carneades depend on the concepts of akatalêpsia and epochê,we must try to determine what they mean, how they are related, and what attitude the Academics take towards them – i.e. in what sense, if any, are these their sceptical doctrines? iarcesilaus The view that Arcesilaus derived from Plato’s dialogues might have taken one of two very different forms. He might have discovered some arguments that show knowledge is not possible.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conversion of Skepticism in Augustine's Against the Academics the Conversion of Skepticism in Augustine"S Against the Academics
    THE CONVERSION OF SKEPTICISM IN AUGUSTINE'S AGAINST THE ACADEMICS THE CONVERSION OF SKEPTICISM IN AUGUSTINE"S AGAINST THE ACADEMICS BY BERNARD NEWMAN WILLS, B.A., M.A. A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor ofPhilosophy McMaster University C Copyright by Bernard Newman Wills DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (2003) McMaster University (Religious Studies) Hamilton, Ontario TITLE: The Conversion of Skepticism in Augustine's Against the Academics AUTHOR: Bernard Newman Wills, B.A., M.A. SUPERVISOR: Dr. P. Travis Kroeker NUMBER OF PAGES: v, 322 ABSTRACT This thesis examines Augustine's relation to Academic Skepticism through a detailed commentary on the dialogue Against the Academics. In it is demonstrated the significance of epistemological themes for Augustine and their inseparability from practical and religious concerns. It is also shown how these issues unfold within the logic ofAugustine's trinitarianism, which informs the argument even ofhis earliest works. This, in turn, demonstrates the depth of the young Augustine's engagement with Christian categories in works often thought to be determined wholly, or almost wholly, by the logic of Plotinian Neo-Platonism. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Travis Kroeker for his advice and considerable patience: my readers Dr. Peter Widdicome and Dr. Zdravko Planinc: Dr. David Peddle for several useful suggestions and general encouragement: Dr. Dennis House for teaching me the art of reading dialogues: Mr. Danny Howlett for his editorial assistance: Grad Students and Colleagues at Memorial University of Newfoundland and, in a category all their own, my longsuffering wife Jean and three boisterous children Kristin, Jeremy and Thomas.
    [Show full text]
  • Hegel's Critique of Ancient Skepticism
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Philosophy Theses Department of Philosophy Summer 8-1-2012 Hegel's Critique of Ancient Skepticism John Wood Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses Recommended Citation Wood, John, "Hegel's Critique of Ancient Skepticism." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2012. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses/113 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HEGEL’S CRITIQUE OF ANCIENT SKEPTICISM by JAY WOOD Under the Direction of Dr. Sebastian Rand ABSTRACT Recent work on the philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel has emphasized his interest in skeptical concerns. These contemporary scholars argue that, despite common opinions to the contrary, Hegel actually had a very keen interest in skepticism, one that informed and motivated much of his overall project. While I welcome this recent literature, I argue here that contemporary scholars have overemphasized the importance of skepticism for Hegel. By looking closely at Hegel’s arguments against skepticism in the Phenomenology of Spirit, I argue that Hegel’s anti-skeptical arguments are in fact major failures. Hegel’s failure is at odds with the emphasis that contemporary literature places on Hegel’s interests in skepticism. For a philosopher who was supposedly centrally concerned with skeptical issues, Hegel sure does not act like it. I conclude that the tension here is the result of contemporary scholars’ overemphasis of the role that skepticism plays in Hegel’s project.
    [Show full text]
  • Dirk Held on Eros Beauty and the Divine in Plato
    Nina C. Coppolino, editor ARTICLES & NOTES New England Classical Journal 36.3 (2009) 155-167 Eros, Beauty, and the Divine in Plato Dirk t. D. Held Connecticut College ontemporary intellectual culture is diffident, perhaps hostile, towards the transcendent aspects of Plato’s metaphysics; instead, preference is given to the openness and inconclusiveness of CSocratic inquiry. But it is not possible to distinguish clearly between the philosophy of Socrates and Plato. This essay argues first that Socrates does more than inquire: he enlarges the search for truth with attention to erotics. It further contends that Plato’s transformative vision of beauty and the divine directs the soul, also through erotics, to truth not accessible to syllogisms alone. We must therefore acknowledge that Plato’s philosophy relies at times on affective and even supra-rational means. Debate over the function of philosophy for Socrates and Plato arose immediately following the latter’s death. The early Academy discussed the mode and intent of reason for Socrates and Plato in terms of whether it was best characterized as skepticism or dogmatism. The issue remains pertinent to the present discussion of how Plato intends mortals both to live a life of reason and strive for the divine which is beyond the normal grasp of reason. What we regard as the traditional “Socratic question” arose in the early nineteenth century from studies of Plato by the Protestant theologian and philosopher, Friedrich Schleiermacher. The phrase stands for the attempt to winnow out an historical figure from the disparate accounts of Socrates found in Plato, Xenophon, and Aristophanes.
    [Show full text]
  • Leibniz's Monads Vis-À-Vis the Immortality of the Soul
    LEIBNIZ’S MONADS VIS-À-VIS THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL: A COMPARATIVE APPROACH George Franklin Umeh* Abstract Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz published little during his lifetime, and his philosophical masterpiece, Monadology is such a triumph of succinct expression that, to fully interpret it, one must look at many other works and to his correspondence, in order to know the detailed arguments which underlie its conclusions. Leibniz raised a problem in his attempt to compare his monads with the human soul, sharing the same features of immortality. Philosophers are divided in this idea, while some refute it as illogical, some still accept it though with a pinch of salt, saying that he is not the originator of the idea. However, I salute his courage for taken such a bold step in making this delicate comparison of the monads and souls’ immortality. It is also worthy of note that more philosophers have written on the immortality of the soul but the most classical of them all is that of Thomas Aquinas. The importance of this work is to help us understand the deep relationship between the monads and the human souls. To achieve this, the method of comparative analysis of the ideas is going to be used, giving it an interpretation to discover the strength of Leibniz’s argument and his flaws. Solution to the flaws will be proffered. Keywords: Monads, Soul, Immortality, Substance Introduction Interpretation of Leibniz is made doubly difficult by the fact that he changed his mind about certain of his most influential ideas during the course of his lifetime, while remaining obstinately attached to them and unable overtly to reject them.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconciling Aesthetic Philosophy and the Cartesian Paradigm Taryn Sweeney IDVSA
    Maine State Library Digital Maine Academic Research and Dissertations Maine State Library Special Collections 2018 Aesthesis Universalis: Reconciling Aesthetic Philosophy and the Cartesian Paradigm Taryn Sweeney IDVSA Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalmaine.com/academic Recommended Citation Sweeney, Taryn, "Aesthesis Universalis: Reconciling Aesthetic Philosophy and the Cartesian Paradigm" (2018). Academic Research and Dissertations. 21. https://digitalmaine.com/academic/21 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Maine State Library Special Collections at Digital Maine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Academic Research and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Maine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AESTHESIS UNIVERSALIS: RECONCILING AESTHETIC PHILOSOPHY AND THE CARTESIAN PARADIGM Taryn M Sweeney Submitted to the faculty of The Institute for Doctoral Studies in the Visual Arts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy November, 2018 ii Accepted by the faculty of the Institute for Doctoral Studies in the Visual Arts in partial fulfillment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Committee Chair: Don Wehrs, Ph.D. Hargis Professor of English Literature Auburn University, Auburn Committee Member: Merle Williams, Ph.D. Personal Professor of English University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg Committee Member: Kathe Hicks Albrecht, Ph.D. Independent Studies Director Institute for Doctoral Studies in the Visual Arts, Portland iii © 2018 Taryn M Sweeney ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a profound gratitude to my advisor, Don Wehrs, for his tremendous patience, sympathy, and acceptance of my completely un-academic self as I approached this most ambitious and academic of undertakings.
    [Show full text]
  • Monadology a New Translation and Guide
    Leibniz’s Monadology A New Translation and Guide Lloyd Strickland Leibniz’s Monadology A New Translation and Guide LLOYD STRICKLAND For Dan Cook and Vernon Pratt, for all of the help and support over the years: thank you © Lloyd Strickland, 2014 Edinburgh University Press Ltd The Tun - Holyrood Road, 12(2f) Jackson’s Entry, Edinburgh EH8 8PJ www.euppublishing.com Typeset in 11/13pt Ehrhardt MT Pro by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire and printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon CR0 4YY A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 0 7486 9321 4 (hardback) ISBN 978 0 7486 9323 8 (webready PDF) ISBN 978 0 7486 9322 1 (paperback) ISBN 978 0 7486 9324 5 (epub) The right of Lloyd Strickland to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI No. 2498). Contents Acknowledgements iv Key vi Abbreviations vii Introduction 1 About the Text and Translation 13 The Monadology 14 The Structure of the Monadology 34 The Monadology: Text with Running Commentary 39 Appendix 162 1. Theodicy 162 2. The Principles of Nature and Grace, Founded on Reason 270 3. Leibniz to Nicole Remond: Appendix on Monads 278 Glossary of Terms 280 Questions for Further Study 283 Further Reading 285 Index 292 Acknowledgements I would like to extend my warmest thanks to an anonymous reviewer for Edinburgh University Press for feedback on the entire manuscript. Parts of the commentary were incorporated into a talk given to members of the Oxford Philosophical Society in November 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtue of Feminist Rationality
    The Virtue of Feminist Rationality Continuum Studies in Philosophy Series Editor: James Fieser, University of Tennessee at Martin, USA Continuum Studies in Philosophy is a major monograph series from Continuum. The series features first-class scholarly research monographs across the whole field of philo- sophy. Each work makes a major contribution to the field of philosophical research. Aesthetic in Kant, James Kirwan Analytic Philosophy: The History of an Illusion, Aaron Preston Aquinas and the Ship of Theseus, Christopher Brown Augustine and Roman Virtue, Brian Harding The Challenge of Relativism, Patrick Phillips Demands of Taste in Kant’s Aesthetics, Brent Kalar Descartes and the Metaphysics of Human Nature, Justin Skirry Descartes’ Theory of Ideas, David Clemenson Dialectic of Romanticism, Peter Murphy and David Roberts Duns Scotus and the Problem of Universals, Todd Bates Hegel’s Philosophy of Language, Jim Vernon Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, David James Hegel’s Theory of Recognition, Sybol S.C. Anderson The History of Intentionality, Ryan Hickerson Kantian Deeds, Henrik Jøker Bjerre Kierkegaard, Metaphysics and Political Theory, Alison Assiter Kierkegaard’s Analysis of Radical Evil, David A. Roberts Leibniz Re-interpreted, Lloyd Strickland Metaphysics and the End of Philosophy, HO Mounce Nietzsche and the Greeks, Dale Wilkerson Origins of Analytic Philosophy, Delbert Reed Philosophy of Miracles, David Corner Platonism, Music and the Listener’s Share, Christopher Norris Popper’s Theory of Science, Carlos Garcia Postanalytic and Metacontinental, edited by James Williams, Jack Reynolds, James Chase and Ed Mares Rationality and Feminist Philosophy, Deborah K. Heikes Re-thinking the Cogito, Christopher Norris Role of God in Spinoza’s Metaphysics, Sherry Deveaux Rousseau and Radical Democracy, Kevin Inston Rousseau and the Ethics of Virtue, James Delaney Rousseau’s Theory of Freedom, Matthew Simpson Spinoza and the Stoics, Firmin DeBrabander Spinoza’s Radical Cartesian Mind, Tammy Nyden-Bullock St.
    [Show full text]