Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-vmclg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-15T15:42:00.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does Berkeley's Immaterialism Support Toland's Spinozism? The Posidonian Argument and the Eleventh Objection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2020

Eric Schliesser
Eric Schliesser*
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam & Chapman University
*
nescio2@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper argues that a debate between Toland and Clarke is the intellectual context to help understand the motive behind the critic and the significance of Berkeley's response to the critic in PHK 60-66. These, in turn, are responding to Boyle's adaptation of a neglected design argument by Cicero. The paper shows that there is an intimate connection between these claims of natural science and a once famous design argument. In particular, that in the early modern period the connection between the scientific revolution and a certain commitment to final causes, and god's design, is more than merely contingent. The details of PHK 60-66 support the idea that the critic is responding to concerns that by echoing features of Toland's argument Berkeley undermines the Newtonian edifice Clarke has constructed.

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 88: Irish Philosophy in the Age of Berkeley , October 2020 , pp. 33 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albury, W.R., ‘Halley's Ode on the Principia of Newton and the Epicurean Revival in England,’ Journal of the History of Ideas 39.1 (1978), 24–43.10.2307/2709070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atherton, Margaret, Berkeley (Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2020).Google Scholar
Battersby, Christine, ‘The *Dialogues* as Original Imitation: Cicero and the Nature of Hume's Scepticism,’ in McGill Hume Studies, ed. Norton, D.F., Capaldi, N. & Robison, W.L. (San Diego: Austin Hill Press, 1979), 239–252.Google Scholar
Bentley, Richard [7th, enlarged edition] Remarks on a Late Discourse of Freethinking: in a Letter to N.N. by Lipsiensis, Phileleutherus, (London: Knaptons, 1734 [1713]).Google Scholar
Berkeley, George, The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, 9 vols. (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1948–1957).Google Scholar
Berryman, Sylvia, The Mechanical Hypothesis in Ancient Greek Natural Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).Google Scholar
Bobzien, Susanne, Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
Boyle, Robert, Selected Philosophical Papers of Robert Boyle, ed. Stewart, M.A. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1991).Google Scholar
Boyle, Robert, The Works of Robert Boyle, Vol. 10: Notion of Nature and other publications of 1684–6 Hunter, Michael and Davis, Edward B. (eds) (London: Pickering & Chatto. 2000).Google Scholar
Brooke, Christopher, ‘How the Stoics Became Atheists,’ The Historical Journal 49.2 (2006), 387–402.10.1017/S0018246X06005255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, Rene, ‘The Stoics on Luck,’ in The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy and Psychology of Luck, ed. Church, Ian M. & Hartman, Robert J. (London: Routledge, 2019), 34–44.Google Scholar
Cicero, De Senectute De Amicitia De Divinatione. With An English Translation. Falconer, William Armistead. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1923).Google Scholar
Cicero, , The Nature of the Gods, trans. Walsh, P.G. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978).Google Scholar
Cicero The Letters of Cicero; the whole extant correspondence in chronological order, in four volumes. Shuckburgh, Evelyn S.. (London: George Bell and Sons, 1908-1909).Google Scholar
Clarke, Samuel, ‘A Discourse concerning the Unalterable Obligations of Natural Religion and the Truth and Certainty of the Christian Revelation’ in A discourse concerning the being and attributes of God: the obligations of natural religion, and the truth and certainty of the Christian revelation (London: Knapton, 1732).Google Scholar
Ciceronis, M. Tvlli De natvra deorvm: bimillenial edition. 2. Libri secundus et tertius. Edited by Pease, A.S., (Cambridge MA.: Harvard University Press, 1958).Google Scholar
Chen, Elliott D, ‘Newton's early metaphysics of body: Impenetrability, action at a distance, and essential gravity.’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics (2020).10.1016/j.shpsb.2020.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dagron, Tristan, Toland et Leibniz: l'invention du néo-spinozisme (Paris: Vrin, 2009).Google Scholar
Daniel, Stephen H., John Toland: His Methods, Manners, and Mind, vol. 7 (Kingston: McGill-Queen's Press-MQUP, 1984).Google Scholar
Demeter, Tamás & Schliesser, Eric (eds.) ‘The Use and Abuse of Mathematics in Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Natural Philosophy,’ Synthese (special issue) 196.9 (2019), 3461–64.Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C., ‘Descartes's Argument from Design.’ The Journal of Philosophy 105.7 (2008), 333–45.10.5840/jphil2008105735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C., From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds (New York: WW Norton & Company, 2017).Google Scholar
Descartes, Rene, Descartes: Selected Philosophical Writings, trans. Cottingham, John, Stoothoff, Robert, & Murdoch, Dugald (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).10.1017/CBO9780511805059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, Lisa, ‘Berkeley's Natural Philosophy and Philosophy of Science,’ The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley, ed. Winkler, Kenneth M. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 230–265.10.1017/CCOL0521450330.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducheyne, Steffen, ‘Reid's Adaptation and Radicalization of Newton's Natural Philosophy.’ History of European Ideas 32.2 (2006), 173–89.10.1016/j.histeuroideas.2006.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducheyne, Steffen & Weber, Eric, ‘The Concept of Causation in Newton's Mechanical and Optical Work,’ Logic and Logical Philosophy 16.4 (2008), 265–88.10.12775/LLP.2007.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducheyne, Steffen, ‘Newton on Action at a Distance,’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 52.4 (2014), 675–702.10.1353/hph.2014.0081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garber, Daniel, ‘Locke, Berkeley, and corpuscular skepticism,’ in Berkeley: Critical and Interpretive Essays, ed. Turbayne, Colin Murray (Mineapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1982).Google Scholar
Glacken, Clarence J., Traces on the Rhodian Shore: Nature and Culture in Western Thought from Ancient Times to the End of the Eighteenth Century, vol. 170 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967).Google Scholar
Gibbon, Edward, Miscellaneous Works of Edward Gibbon (Dublin, 1797).Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter, ‘Voluntarism and Early Modern Science,’ History of Science 40.1 (2002), 63–89.10.1177/007327530204000103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, John, ‘Voluntarist Theology at the Origins of Modern Science: A Response to Peter Harrison.’ History of Science 47.1 (2009), 79–113.10.1177/007327530904700105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, Lewis Ezra, A Critique of Design-arguments: A Historical Review and Free Examination of the Methods of Reasoning in Natural Theology (New York: Scribner, 1883).Google Scholar
Hunter, Graeme, ‘Cicero's Neglected Argument from Design.’ British Journal for the History of Philosophy 17.2 (2009), 235–245.10.1080/09608780902761661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurlbutt, Robert H., Hume, Newton, and the Design Argument (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1985).Google Scholar
Huygens, Christiaan, Oeuvres complètes, Tome XXI, Cosmologie, ed. Vollgraff, J.A. (Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1944).Google Scholar
Jacob, Margaret Candee, ‘John Toland and the Newtonian Ideology,’ Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969), 307–331.10.2307/750616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, Margaret, The Radical Enlightenment (London: Allen & Unwin, 1981).Google Scholar
Jantzen, Bernard C., An Introduction to Design Arguments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).10.1017/CBO9780511793882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, I.G., Posidonius II. The commentary: (i) Testimonia and Fragments 1–149 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).Google Scholar
Kochiras, Hylarie, ‘Gravity and Newton's Substance Counting Problem,’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40.3 (2009), 267–280.10.1016/j.shpsa.2009.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriloff, A.N., ‘On Sir Isaac Newton's Method of Determining the Parabolic Orbit of a Comet,’ Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 85 (1925), 640.10.1093/mnras/85.7.640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leask, Ian, ‘Unholy Force: Toland's Leibnizian “Consummation” of Spinozism.’ British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20.3 (2012), 499–537.10.1080/09608788.2012.670840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lessius, Leonard, De prouidentia numinis (1612), 25, in Ravvleigh his ghost. Or a feigned apparition of Syr VValter Rawleigh to a friend of his, for the translating into English, the booke of Leonard Lessius (that most learned man) entituled, De prouidentia numinis, & animi immortalitate: written against atheists, and politi- tians of these dayes. Translated by Knott, Edward in 1631, https://quod.lib. umich.edu/e/eebo/A05370.0001.001/1:6?rgn=div1;submit=Go;subview= detail;type=simple;view=fulltext;q1=Cicero, accessed 10 January, 2019.Google Scholar
Lin, Martin, ‘Spinoza's Metaphysics of Desire: The Demonstration of IIIP6.’ Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 86.1 (2004), 21–55.10.1515/agph.2004.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Lucr.+1.150&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0130, accessed 9 January, 2019.Google Scholar
Manson, Neil A., ed., God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science (London: Routledge, 2003).10.4324/9780203398265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, Jeffrey K., ‘Berkeley, Human Agency and Divine Concurrentism,’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 46.4 (2008), 567–90.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan, ‘The impact of Newton's Principia on the Philosophy of Science,’ Philosophy of Science 68.3 (2001), 279–310.Google Scholar
Mercer, Christia, ‘The Contextualist Revolution in Early Modern Philosophy,’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 57.3 (2019), 529–48.10.1353/hph.2019.0057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Alan, ‘Descartes on the Limited Usefulness of Mathematics,’ Synthese 196.9 (2019), 3483–504.10.1007/s11229-017-1328-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieuwentyt, Bernard, The Religious Philosopher (London, 1719, second corrected edition, trans. Chamberlayne, John).Google Scholar
Ott, Walter, ‘Berkeley's Best System: An Alternative Approach to Laws of Nature,’ Journal of Modern Philosophy 1.1 (2019), 1–13.10.32881/jomp.10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osler, Margaret J., ‘From immanent natures to nature as artifice: The reinterpretation of final causes in seventeenth-century natural philosophy.’ The Monist 79.3 (1996), 388–407.10.5840/monist199679318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paley, William, Natural theology: Or, evidence of the existence and attributes of the deity. [14th edition] (London, 1813 [1802]).Google Scholar
Parker, Adwait A., ‘Newton on active and passive quantities of matter’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.03.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutarch. Plutarch's Lives. with an English Translation by Bernadotte Perrin. (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1919).Google Scholar
Ratzch, Del & Koperski, Jeffrey, ‘Teleological Arguments for God's Existence,’ The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/teleological-arguments/.Google Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘On the Origin of Modern Naturalism: the Significance of Berkeley's Response to a Newtonian Indispensability Argument.’ Philosophica 76 (2005), 45–66.Google Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘Wonder in the Face of Scientific Revolutions: Adam Smith on Newton's “Proof” of Copernicanism,’ British Journal for the History of Philosophy 13.4 (2005), 697–732.10.1080/09608780500293042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘Newton's Challenge to Philosophy: A Programmatic Essay.’ HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1.1 (2011), 101–128.Google Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘Newton's Substance Monism, Distant Action, and the Nature of Newton's Empiricism,’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42.1 (2011), 160–166.10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘Newton and Spinoza: on Motion and Matter (and God, of Course),’ The Southern Journal of Philosophy 50.3 (2012), 436–458.10.1111/j.2041-6962.2012.00132.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘On Reading Newton as an Epicurean: Kant, Spinozism and the Changes to the Principia.’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44.3 (2013), 416–428.10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.10.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, Adam Smith: Systematic philosopher and public thinker (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017).10.1093/oso/9780190690120.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘Spinoza and the Philosophy of Science.’ The Oxford Handbook of Spinoza Rocca, Michael Della (ed.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), 155–89.Google Scholar
Schliesser, Eric, ‘Newton's Polemics with Spinozists in The General Scholium,’ (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Sedley, David, Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007).10.1525/9780520934368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sessions, William Lad, Reading Hume's Dialogues: A Veneration for True Religion (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
Smith, Adam, The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith: III: Essays on Philosophical Subjects (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980 [1795]).Google Scholar
Smeenk, Christopher & Schliesser, Eric, ‘Newton's Principia,’ in The Oxford Handbook of the History of Physics, ed. Buchwald, Jed Z. & Fox, Robert (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 109–165.Google Scholar
Smith, G.E., ‘Comments on Ernan McMullin's “The Impact of Newton's Principia on the Philosophy of Science”,’ Philosophy of Science 68.3 (2001), 327–38.10.1086/392886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuart-Buttle, Tim, From Moral Theology to Moral Philosophy: Cicero and Visions of Humanity from Locke to Hume (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).10.1093/oso/9780198835585.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarantino, Giovanni, ‘Collins's Cicero, Freethinker,’ in Atheism and Deism Revalued: Heterodox Religious Identities in Britain, 1650–1800, ed. Hudson, Wayne, Lucci, Diego, & Wigelsworth, Jeffrey R. (London: Routledge, 2016).Google Scholar
Toland, John, Letters to Serena, ed. Leask, Ian (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Wigelsworth, Jeffrey R., ‘Lockean Essences, Political Posturing, and John Toland's Reading of Isaac Newton's Principia,’ Canadian Journal of History 38.3 (2003), 521–35.10.3138/cjh.38.3.521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Margaret Dauer, ‘Berkeley and the essences of the corpuscularians,’ in Foster, John & Robinson, Howard (eds.), Essays on Berkeley: A Tercentennial Celebration (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985); reprinted in her Ideas and Mechanism: Essays on Early Modern Philosophy. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), 243–56.Google Scholar
Winkler, Kenneth P., Berkeley: An Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989).Google Scholar
Wolfe, C.T., ‘The Materialist Denial of Monsters,’ in Monsters and Philosophy, ed. Wolfe, C.T. (London: King's College Publications, 2005).Google Scholar
Wolfe, C.T., ‘Endowed Molecules and Emergent Organization: the Maupertuis-Diderot Debate,’ Early Science and Medicine 15.1–2 (2010), 1–2.10.1163/138374210X12589831573063CrossRefGoogle Scholar