DOCSLIB.ORG

The Philosophy of Malebranche [Microform]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Philosophy of Malebranche [Microform] MASTER NEGATIVE NO. 93-81554-15 ii MICROFILMED 1 993 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK of the as part . ^ "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project Funded by the „„.^„ WMRNT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or other reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copyright law. AUTHOR: SWABEY, WILLIAM CURTIS TITLE: THE PHILOSOPHY OF MALEBRANCHE PLACE: [HOUSTON, TEX.] DATE: 1921 * Master Negative # COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGFT Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliograpiiic Record M 194LI29 i DS Swabey, William Curtis t 1894- The philosophy of Malebranche, by V/illiam Curti 8 Swabey ... ^Houston, Tex,, Gulfport printing co. 1921. 94 24 cm. I p. Thesis (Ph.D), Cornell, 1921. I 96^21 ^ h^ Restrictions on Use: TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA fJLM SIZE: Si_Wk!^HJ^ REDUCTION RATIO: l/jT IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA: ^^^- fllATiB IIB ^ ,^ ^ DATE FILMED:__Wll43^_ INITIALS. JAfrP HLMED BY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS. INC WOOnRRinr:F~rT c Association for Information and image RAanagement 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 Silver Spring. Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 Centimeter 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 mm iiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii iiiiiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiil m TTJ m¥m TTT TTT 1 Inches 2.5 1.0 32 2.2 m 40 2.0 I.I 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 MfiNUFfiCTURED TO fillM STfiNDfiRDS BY fiPPLIED IMfiGE. INC. "5" ' THE PHILOSOPHY OF MALEBRANCHE BY WILLIAM CURTIS SWABEY, A. M. K A THESIS Presented to the Faculty op the Graduate School t* OP Cornell University for the Degree op Doctor op Philosophy 'J 1921 m^ inttitCitpof^etD|»orb LIBRARY THE PHILOSOPHY OF MALEBRANCHE : BY WILLIAM CURTIS SWABEY, A. M. A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School OF Cornell University for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 1921 t PREFACE. In the following pages, I have attempted merely to give an accurate historical account of the main philosophical opinions of Father Malebranche; the perhaps more important task of making a critical ap- praisal of the truth of these opinions has been largely left to some future date. It is, at any rate, clear that PRESS OP OULFPORT PRINTINO CO. the system of Malebranche, as a chapter in the history K HOUSTON. TEXAS of the Platonic tradition, deserves more consideration than it has hitherto received. I must take this occa- sion to express my gratitude to my teachers at Cornell University, and especially to Professor J. E. Creigh- ton, without whose kindly encouragement this disser- tation would never have been completed. The Author. 3S TABLE OF CONTENTS PAOB Chapter I. Introduction 5 Chapter II. Malebranche *s Psychology 12 The Faculties of the Mind 13 THE PHILOSOPHY OF MALEBRANCHE. The Senses 16 The Imagination 19 Chapter I : Introduction. Our Lack of an Idea of the Soul 25 Bouillier, in his splendid Histoire de la philosophie cartesi- enne, declares that Malebranche Chapter III. Malebranche 's Psychology (Cont.) 29 is the greatest metaphysician of France after Descartes.^ Few would contest The Natural Inclinations 29 this statement.* Now Malebranche was a member of the Congregation of the The Passions 30 ^ Oratory of Jesus. This latter may be described as an associa- tion of priests, Chapter IV. Malebranche 's Theory op Knowledge 34 devoted to prayer, study and teaching.^ Its mem- bers were not monks, and it had neither The Argument for Vision in God 34 secret constitution nor \/ solemn vows, other than those of the priesthood itself.^ They Malebranche and St. Augustine 43 were simply priests united by a common love of piety and sci- Malebranche and Locke 43 ence, living in common according to the ideals of the primitive Malebranche and Berkeley 45 church. Upon entering the Oratory, a priest did not renounce Malebranche and Arnauld 46 his liberty, but was always as free to leave as he had been to enter; and each of the members preserved a certain independ- I' Chapter V. Malebranche 's Methodology 49 ence, being permitted to devote himself to the study for which Aids to Attention 49 he felt most inclination.* The Oratory was distinguished by a Rules of Method 51 happy combination of philosophy, science, scholarship and the- ology.* Its liberal spirit is seen in the rule which dispensed a 1/ Chapter VI. Malebranche 's IMetaphysics and Theology. .57 member who showed some special aptitude for study from all Mind and Body 57 other duties.* Intelligible Extension and the Existence of God 59 The famous ecclesiastic, Bossuet, declared, in his Oraison Occasionalism 64 Funehre du P. Boiirgoing, speaking of Cardinal de BeruUe, that his * ' great love for the Church inspired him to form Image and Cleaning 66 a company to which he desired to give no other spirit than that of the Existence of Bodies 67 Church, nor other rules than the canons, nor other superiors than Chapter VII. IVIalebranche 's Metaphysics and Theology the bishops, nor other bonds than charity, nor other solemn oaths than those of baptism and priesthood, a company where (Continued) 7] a holy liberty creates a holy obligation, where there is obedience The Divine Omnipotence 71 without dependence and government without command, where The Attributes of God 73 all authority is in gentleness and where respect is not aided by The Theory of Providence 76 fear; a company in which a charity that banishes fear works a The Explanation of Evil 77 great miracle and in which with no yoke charity is able, not only to captivate, but also to annihilate ; Divine Will and Divine Reason 78 self-will a company in which to form true priests they are lead to the source of truth, where Chapter VIII. Malebranche 's System op Ethics 81 » Bouillier. op. cit., Ed. Love of the Eternal Order of 1854, Vol. II, p. 32. Henceforth referred to as BouU- 81 lier simply. Unless otherwise stated, the references are all to Vol. II. Force of Mind 87 J. Simon, in his able Introduction to his edition to the Oeuvres de Malebranche (XLIII), says: "Ce fou de MtUebranehe eat une de nos grandet gloires Liberty of Mind nationaies ; 999 89 visions mHaphysiques sont une icole de 9age99e et de profonde philo9ophie, et plai99 i Dieu pour I'honneur de la Obedience to Order philosophie et le progris de I' esprit humain, qu'U notts 91 puisse naitre den rHeurs comme lui!" Bouillier, p. 4. * Bouillier, p. 5. ; INTBODUCTION 6 THE PHILOSOPHY OF MALEBBANCHE tiana, published under the name of Ambrosius Victor, he de- they have always at hand the holy books to seek in them without velops his views at length, claiming the authority of Augustine rest the letter by the mind, the spirit by prayer, depth by re- this work is the most noteworthy predecessor of the Recherche treat, etc/'* de la verite.^^ In this Philosophia Christiana, Andre Martin ex- As Bouillier remarks, Bossuet's praise marks the difference pounds the doctrine of St. Augustine concerning God, man, ani- between the Jesuits and the Oratory.'' And just as these two mals, and concerning many other topics, but it is not difficult societies were opposed in spirit, so they were opposed in philoso- to see that it is always Descartes who is speaking through Augus- phy. Cardinal de Berulle gave the Oratory its initial tendency.^ tine.^° Thus in his Sanctus Augustinus de anima hestiarum he His admiration was, in the first place, for y St. Augustine, a fact claims to find many arguments in Augustine that support the which made the Oratory always open to suspicion of Jansenism.® Cartesian theory of animal automatism. ^° But Andre Martin is And, through St. Augustine, the Oratory came to esteem Plato above all the precursor of ^lalebranche in the way in which he V more than Aristotle even before the time of Descartes.** Thus emphasizes Augustine's version of Platonism in regard to the certain of the early Fathers of the Congregation sought to in- eternal truths and the divine ideas. ^° He held that there were, troduce the Platonic doctrine. Father Fournenc was the author in the divine mind, ideas of all creatures, just as in the mind of of a complete course of philosophy which appeared in 1665 in an artist there is an idea of his work; and that God does not which he declared his intention of uniting the spirit of Plato draw his knowledge of his creatures from his creatures them- with the true philosophy of Aristotle.® But when the Cartesian selves but from his own ideas of them." We say that we behold philosophy came into vogue the original y Platonic tendency of creatures, but in truth we behold their ideas in God, although the Oratory was at first forgotten.^ their ideas have neither extension nor figure." And, lastly, However much influence de Berulle may have exerted to the among the Oratorians before the time of Malebranche who were advantage of Plato, his friendship and admiration for Descartes followers of Descartes, we have the learned Father Poisson, who were even more influential in determining the philosophical ten.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Modern” Philosophy: Introduction
    “Modern” Philosophy: Introduction [from Debates in Modern Philosophy by Stewart Duncan and Antonia LoLordo (Routledge, 2013)] This course discusses the views of various European of his contemporaries (e.g. Thomas Hobbes) did see philosophers of the seventeenth century. Along with themselves as engaged in a new project in philosophy the thinkers of the eighteenth century, they are con- and the sciences, which somehow contained a new sidered “modern” philosophers. That might not seem way of explaining how the world worked. So, what terribly modern. René Descartes was writing in the was this new project? And what, if anything, did all 1630s and 1640s, and Immanuel Kant died in 1804. these modern philosophers have in common? By many standards, that was a long time ago. So, why is the work of Descartes, Kant, and their contempor- Two themes emerge when you read what Des- aries called modern philosophy? cartes and Hobbes say about their new philosophies. First, they think that earlier philosophers, particu- In one way this question has a trivial answer. larly so-called Scholastic Aristotelians—medieval “Modern” is being used here to describe a period of European philosophers who were influenced by time, and to contrast it with other periods of time. So, Aristotle—were mistaken about many issues, and modern philosophy is not the philosophy of today as that the new, modern way is better. (They say nicer contrasted with the philosophy of the 2020s or even things about Aristotle himself, and about some other the 1950s. Rather it’s the philosophy of the 1600s previous philosophers.) This view was shared by and onwards, as opposed to ancient and medieval many modern philosophers, but not all of them.
    [Show full text]
  • Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Spring 2010 Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Jason Skirry University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Skirry, Jason, "Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection" (2010). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 179. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Abstract This dissertation presents a unified interpretation of Malebranche’s philosophical system that is based on his Augustinian theory of the mind’s perfection, which consists in maximizing the mind’s ability to successfully access, comprehend, and follow God’s Order through practices that purify and cognitively enhance the mind’s attention. I argue that the mind’s perfection figures centrally in Malebranche’s philosophy and is the main hub that connects and reconciles the three fundamental principles of his system, namely, his occasionalism, divine illumination, and freedom. To demonstrate this, I first present, in chapter one, Malebranche’s philosophy within the historical and intellectual context of his membership in the French Oratory, arguing that the Oratory’s particular brand of Augustinianism, initiated by Cardinal Bérulle and propagated by Oratorians such as Andre Martin, is at the core of his philosophy and informs his theory of perfection. Next, in chapter two, I explicate Augustine’s own theory of perfection in order to provide an outline, and a basis of comparison, for Malebranche’s own theory of perfection.
    [Show full text]
  • Time Atomism and Ash'arite Origins for Cartesian Occasionalism Revisited
    Time Atomism and Ash‘arite Origins for Cartesian Occasionalism Revisited Richard T. W. Arthur Department of Philosophy McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario Canada Time Atomism and Ash’arite Origins for Occasionalism Revisited Introduction In gauging the contributions of Asian thinkers to the making of modern “Western” philosophy and science, one often encounters the difficulty of establishing a direct influence. Arun Bala and George Gheverghese Joseph (2007) have termed this “the transmission problem”. One can establish a precedence, as well as a strong probability that an influence occurred, without being able to find concrete evidence for it. In the face of this difficulty (which appears to occur quite generally in the history of thought) I suggest here that the influence of earlier thinkers does not always occur through one person reading others’ work and becoming persuaded by their arguments, but by people in given epistemic situations being constrained by certain historically and socially conditioned trends of thought—for which constraining and conditioned trends of thought I coin the term "epistemic vectors"—and opportunistically availing themselves of kindred views from other traditions. As a case in point, I will examine here the claim that the doctrine of Occasionalism arose in seventeenth century Europe as a result of an influence from Islamic theology. In particular, the Ash’arite school of kalâm presented occasionalism as a corollary of time atomism, and since to many scholars the seventeenth century occasionalism of Cartesian thinkers such as De la Forge and Cordemoy has appeared as a direct corollary of the atomism of time attributed to Descartes in his Meditations, Ash’arite time atomism is often cited as the likely source of Cartesian Occasionalism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosophy of the Imagination in Vico and Malebranche
    STRUMENTI PER LA DIDATTICA E LA RICERCA – 86 – Paolo Fabiani The Philosophy of the Imagination in Vico and Malebranche Translated and Edited by Giorgio Pinton Firenze University Press 2009 the philosophy of the imagination in Vico and male- branche / paolo Fabiani. – Firenze : Firenze university press, 2009. (strumenti per la didattica e la ricerca ; 86) http://digital.casalini.it/97864530680 isBn 978-88-6453-066-6 (print) isBn 978-88-6453-068-0 (online) immagine di copertina: © elenaray | dreamstime.com progetto grafico di alberto pizarro Fernández © 2009 Firenze university press università degli studi di Firenze Firenze university press Borgo albizi, 28, 50122 Firenze, italy http://www.fupress.com/ Printed in Italy “In memory of my mother ... to honor the courage of my father” Paolo Fabiani “This is more than my book, it also represents Giorgio Pinton’s interpretation of the imagi- nation in early modern philosophy. In several places of my work he felt obliged to simplify the arguments to easy the reading; he did it in agreement with me. In a few others, he substituted, with intelligence and without forcing, the structure of the original academic version in a differ- ent narrative organization of the contents. He has done a great job. It is an honor for me that the most important translator of Vico’s Latin Works into Eng- lish translated and edited my first philosophical essay. I heartly thank Giorgio Pinton, a true master of philosophy; Alexander Bertland, a very good scholar in Vico studies; and the editorial staff of FUP, expecially
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Specter of Spinozism: Malebranche, Arnauld, Fénelon
    The Specter of Spinozism: Malebranche, Arnauld, Fénelon What might a French Bishop, a German Lutheran polymath, two unorthodox Catholic priests—both French, one an Oratorian Cartesian in Paris and the other a Jansenist on the lam in the Spanish Low Countries—and a Huguenot exile in the Dutch Republic, all contemporaries in the second half of the seventeenth century, possibly have in common? The answer is not too difficult to find. François Fénelon, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Nicolas Malebranche, Antoine Arnauld and Pierre Bayle—like so many others in the period—all suffered from Spinozaphobia (although Bayle, at least, had some admiration for the “atheist” Spinoza’s virtuous life). Just as the specter of communism united Democrats and Republicans in the rough and tumble world of American politics in the 1940s and 50s, so the specter of Spinozism made room for strange bedfellows in the equally rough and tumble world of the early modern Republic of Letters. One of the topics which accounts for a good deal of the backlash against Spinoza, and which led some thinkers to accuse others of being—willingly or in spite of themselves—Spinozists, was the perceived materialism of Spinoza's theology. If one of the attributes of God is extension, as Spinoza claimed, then, it was argued by his critics, matter itself must belong to the essence of God, thereby making God material or body.1 And anyone whose philosophy even looks like it places extension or body (in whatever form) in God must be a Spinozist. Thus, Arnauld explicitly invokes Spinoza (a philosopher “who believed that the matter from which God made the world was uncreated”) as he insists that Malebranche's claim, in the Vision in God doctrine, that something called "intelligible extension" is in God—which is why we are able to cognize 1 material bodies by apprehending their ideas or intelligible archtypes in God—is tantamout to making God Himself extended.2 Arnauld was certainly not alone in claiming that Malebranche’s theory of “intelligible extension” implies a kind of Spinozism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Heresy and the Debates on Descartes's Philosophy
    Church History Church History and and Religious Culture 100 (2020) 172–186 Religious Culture brill.com/chrc The Concept of Heresy and the Debates on Descartes’s Philosophy Aza Goudriaan Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and ETF Leuven, Leuven, Belgium [email protected] Abstract This article explores connotations of ‘heresy’ in theological traditions before and dur- ing Descartes’s life. Lutheran and Reformed Protestants, themselves considered heretics by the Church of Rome, adopted the patristic heresiology while designat- ing sixteenth-century antitrinitarian and Anabaptist teachings as heresies. Francisco Suárez and Gisbertus Voetius knew the late medieval conceptuality (e.g., Council of Konstanz, 1418). Voetius possibly thought of Descartes when describing certain philo- sophical views as “smacking of heresy.” This was not, however, an outright charge of heresy. In fact, Descartes’s readiness to be corrected contradicted the traditional hereti- cal quality of “stubbornness.” Plempius’s expression “Cartesian heresy” seems to have been rare. For anti-Cartesians, the rich vocabulary of error made the complex term ‘heresy’ easily avoidable. Keywords heresy – René Descartes – confessions of faith – Francisco Suárez – Gisbertus Voetius – Vopiscus Fortunatus Plempius – Jacques Bénigne Bossuet 1 Introduction In modern historiography,the concept of heresy is occasionally being used with regard to representatives of the new philosophies of the early modern period. Steven Nadler, for example, published a study of Spinoza’s Heresy: Immortality and the Jewish Mind and, more recently, together with Ben Nadler he wrote a © aza goudriaan, 2020 | doi:10.1163/18712428-10002001 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NCDownloaded4.0 license.
    [Show full text]
  • Controversies on Nature As Universal Legality (1680-1710) Sophie Roux
    Controversies on Nature as universal Legality (1680-1710) Sophie Roux To cite this version: Sophie Roux. Controversies on Nature as universal Legality (1680-1710). Natural Law and Laws of Nature in Early Modern Europe„ Ashgate Publishing Ltd, pp.199-214, 2009. halshs-00806472 HAL Id: halshs-00806472 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00806472 Submitted on 7 Apr 2013 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. CONTROVERSIES ON NATURE AS UNIVERSAL LEGALITY (1680-1710) (SOPHIE ROUX) Introduction1 Two distinct interests can justify a study of the emergence and the development of the notion of Nature's law. This notion is omnipresent in moral and political texts in the 18th century, so its origin can perhaps be sought by supposing, as is suggested by these texts, that this notion was in fact developed in the field of physical science from which it was later exported2. It is clear that this direction is rich in illusions if we do not maintain sufficient distance from the object studied, which in this case is particularly ideological. Ill-controlled retrospection has also paved the way of the second direction, that taken by historians working on the origins of modern science.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Philosophy Seventeenth-Century Philosophy PHIL 360; 2017 Prof
    Department of Philosophy Seventeenth-century Philosophy PHIL 360; 2017 Prof. Emily Carson Leacock 936 [email protected] Office hours: W 10-11:30 The purpose of this course is to introduce students to important texts and issues of seventeenth-century philosophy. We will focus on the development of early modern metaphysics and epistemology through the works of René Descartes (1596-1650), Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618-1680), Nicolas Malebranche (1638-1715), Margaret Lucas Cavendish (1623-1673), Anne Conway (1631-1679), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), and John Locke (1632-1704). The early modern period in philosophy can be characterized by a shift away from Scholastic Aristotelianism towards a conception of the world compatible with the new mechanistic science. The interplay between science and philosophy is hinted at in a comment from Descartes to Mersenne: “These six Meditations contain all the foundations of my physics. But please do not tell people this, for that might make it harder for supporters of Aristotle to approve the Meditations. I hope that readers will gradually get used to my principles, and recognise their truth, before noticing that they destroy the principles of Aristotle.” We will begin by considering various ways in which the ‘new science’ forces a reconsideration of basic metaphysical and epistemological questions. This will take us to topics ranging from materialism, dualism, mind-body interaction, causation, to the possibility and limits of knowledge about the nature of the world. Texts: Descartes’ Meditations, Leibniz’s Philosophical Essays and Locke’s Essay concerning human understanding are available at The Word bookstore on Milton Street.
    [Show full text]
  • An Interview with Steven Nadler
    An Interview with Steven Nadler LUCIO BIASIORI Università degli Studi di Padova Steven Nadler (Columbia, Ph.D. 1986) is William H. Hay II Professor & Evjue-Bascom Professor in Humanities at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has also been a visiting professor at Stanford University, the University of Chicago, the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (Paris), the École Normale Supérieure (Paris), and the University of Amsterdam (where he was the holder of the Spinoza Chair in 2007). Most of his research has been devoted to the study of philosophy in the seventeenth century, including Descartes and Cartesianism, Spinoza, and Leibniz. He has also examined antecedents of early modern thought in medieval Latin philosophy and (especially with respect to Spinoza) medieval Jewish philosophy, and has written on medieval Jewish rationalism (especially Saadya ben Joseph, Maimonides, and Gersonides). His publications include Spinoza: A Life (Cambridge, 1999; second edition, 2018); The Best of All Possible Worlds: A Story of Philosophers, God, and Evil (Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, 2008; paperback, Princeton 2010); The Cambridge History of Jewish Philosophy: From Antiquity through the Seventeenth Century (2009), co-edited with Tamar Rudavsky; A Book Forged in Hell: Spinoza’s Scandalous Treatise and the Birth of the Secular Age (Princeton, 2011) and The Philosopher, the Priest, and the Painter: A Portrait of Descartes (Princeton, 2013). Heretics: The Wondrous (and Dangerous) Beginnings of Modern Philosophy (Princeton University Press), a graphic book (with Ben Nadler), was published in 2017. His most recent books are Menasseh ben Israel: Rabbi of Amsterdam (“Jewish Lives”, Yale, 2018) and, as co-editor, The Oxford Handbook to Descartes and Cartesianism.
    [Show full text]
  • Sylvia's Mathematical Family Tree
    Mathematical Family Tree of Sylvia Wiegand Desiderius Erasmus Collège de Montaigu / University of Turin Jakob Milich Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg im Breisgau / Universität Wien (1520) Bonifazius Erasmi Erasmus Reinhold Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg (1509) Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg (1535) Johannes Volmar Nicolaus (Mikołaj Kopernik) Copernicus Valentine Naibod Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg (1515) (1499) Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg / Universität Erfurt Georg Joachim von Leuchen Rheticus Rudolph (Snel van Royen) Snellius Ludolph van Ceulen Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg (1535) Universität zu Köln / Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg (1572) Moritz Valentin Steinmetz Willebrord (Snel van Royen) Snellius Universität Leipzig (1550) Universiteit Leiden (1607) Christoph Meurer Jacobus Golius Marin Mersenne Universität Leipzig (1582) Universiteit Leiden (1612) Université Paris IV-Sorbonne (1611) Philipp Müller Frans van Schooten, Jr. Jan Jansz Stampioen, Jr. Universität Leipzig (1604) Universiteit Leiden (1635) Erhard Weigel Christiaan Huygens Petrus Ryff Universität Leipzig (1650) Universiteit Leiden / Université d'Angers (1647) Universität Basel (1584) Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Emmanuel Stupanus Académie royale des sciences de Paris (1676) Universität Basel (1613) Nicolas Malebranche Johann Caspar Bauhin (1672) Universität Basel (1649) Jacob Bernoulli Nikolaus Eglinger Universität Basel (1684) Universität Basel (1660) Johann Bernoulli Universität Basel (1690) Leonhard Euler Giovanni Battista (Giambattista) Beccaria Jean Le Rond d'Alembert Universität Basel (1726) Joseph Louis Lagrange Pierre-Simon Laplace Università di Torino (1754) Simeon Denis Poisson École Polytechnique (1800) Michel Chasles École Polytechnique (1814) H. A. (Hubert Anson) Newton Yale University (1850) E. H. (Eliakim Hastings) Moore Yale University (1885) Leonard Eugene Dickson The University of Chicago (1896) Burton Wadsworth Jones The University of Chicago (1928) Irving Reiner Cornell University (1947) Lawrence S.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Washington Modern Philosophy
    University of Washington Mer P (PHIL322) Spring 2020 C: Instructor: MW 2:30pm-4:20pm, classes will be Anthony Fisher [email protected] conducted on Zoom. office SAV M382; office hours on Zoom only: There are no in-person classes. Friday 2-3pm and by appointment. C : This course surveys the history of philosophy in the Early Modern period, starting with Ren Descartes and the rise of mechanist philosophy. We will examine criticisms of Descartes’s philosophy by Prince Elisabeth of Bohemia and study Nicolas Malebranche’s developments of the Cartesian system. We will explore further reactions to Descartes by Anne Conway and Margaret Cavendish and proceed to study Gottfried Leibniz’s philosophical system and developments by Emilie Du Chtelet. Then we will venture into the empiricist tradition with a close reading of George Berkeley and David Hume, finishing with Immanuel Kant’s major contributions to the larger debate of the period. We will focus mostly on metaphysical and epistemological themes in these thinkers but with a sensitivity to the scientific considerations that helped motivate these thinkers to offer original and ground-breaking systems of nature. Along the way we will cultivate an appreciation for the importance of the history of philosophy and the value in investigating what thinkers of previous eras argued for and how it relates to philosophy today. Rr tbooks: (1) Descartes, 1998. D M M F P, Fourth Edition. Trans. Donald A. Cress (Hackett) (2) Berkeley, 1982. A T C Pin H Knowledge. Ed. Kenneth Winkler (Hackett) (3) Hume, 1993. A E C H Utanding, Second Edition.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Schrecker Papers Ms
    Paul Schrecker papers Ms. Coll. 987 Finding aid prepared by Megan Evans and Chase Markee (2014) and Alexandra M. Wilder (2017). Last updated on May 30, 2017. University of Pennsylvania, Kislak Center for Special Collections, Rare Books and Manuscripts 2014 May 14 and 2017 May 4 Paul Schrecker papers Table of Contents Summary Information....................................................................................................................................3 Biography/History..........................................................................................................................................4 Scope and Contents....................................................................................................................................... 4 Administrative Information........................................................................................................................... 6 Related Materials........................................................................................................................................... 7 Controlled Access Headings..........................................................................................................................7 Collection Inventory...................................................................................................................................... 9 I. Teaching and lectures.......................................................................................................................... 9 II. Writings
    [Show full text]