Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T18:22:23.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - The intellectual setting

from I - The context of seventeenth-century philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

Daniel Garber
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Michael Ayers
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

The seventeenth century saw the emergence of the corpuscularian, or ‘mechanical’, philosophy, which succeeded far beyond any previous science or philosophy in explaining particular phenomena of nature, and which, as a general framework for thought about the physical world, has continued to guide philosophical and scientific investigation down to the present day. Modern scholars have often sought to understand the emergence of this new philosophy by placing it within the context of some previous tradition of thought. In the words of J. H. Randall:

We are confronted by many scholars, each of whom has been exploring some one of these traditions, and each of whom has not unnaturally come to be a vigorous partisan of the basic importance of the particular body of ideas he has investigated. It is well to have each of these intellectual currents carefully explored by men vitally interested in it. For if one thing at least has now grown clear, it is that ‘the emergence of modern science’ was a very complicated affair, and involved a great variety of factors. The central problem, however, is that of the judicious appraisal of the relative importance of a number of ‘necessary conditions’, and for such a wise balancing and weighing we seem hardly ready yet. Each of us may have his own suspicions, but they have certainly not as yet produced agreement.

Two generations later, there is still no agreement. In what follows I will not attempt to assess the relative importance of the different intellectual traditions leading up to the seventeenth century (in any case, the relative importance of these different traditions as background will vary widely, depending on which seventeenth-century figure we wish to study), but I will try to indicate the broad range of intellectual traditions in terms of which the various seventeenth-century figures defined their attempts to establish a new philosophy.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2000

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

Agrippa, CorneliusDe occulta philosophia (Agrippa 1533))Google Scholar
Aristotle, in his Examen vanitatis docrinae gentium et veritatis christianae disciplinae, Pico, G. F. 1972, vol. I.
Averroes, De substantia orbis (Pomponazzi 1966))Google Scholar
Cajetan, De anima cited by Cassirer, , Kristeller, , and Randall, 1948
Ficino, Theologiam platonica, Ficino 1964, vol. I.
Gassendi, PierreExercitationes paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos (edited with French translation in Gassendi 1959).Google Scholar
Hobbes, , Lev. (Hobbes 1968))Google Scholar
Juan, Luis VivesAdversus pseudodialecticos (reprinted with English translation in Vives, 1979).
Milton, John posthumously published Christian Doctrine (in Milton, 1931–8, vol. 15).
Nizolio, MarioDe veris principiis et vera ratione philosophandi contra pseudophilosophos (Nizolio 1956)Google Scholar
Overton, RichardMans Mortallitie (Overton 1644)Google Scholar
Patrizi, Discussiones peripateticae (Patrizi 1581))Google Scholar
Patrizi, FrancescoDiscussiones peripateticae (Patrizi 1581).Google Scholar
Patrizi, Nova de universis philosophia (Patrizi 1591))Google Scholar
Pico, De ente et uno, in Pico, G. 1971, vol. I.
Pico, G. F.Examen vanitatis, 1972, vol. I.
Pico, GianfrancescoExamen vanitatis doctrinae gentium et véritatis christianae disciplinae (in Pico, G. F. 1972. vol. I.)
Pico, Giovanni, Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem, in Pico, G. 1971, vol. I.
Pico, Heptaplus (Pico, G. 1971, vol. 1).
Pompnazzi, De fato (Pomponazzi 1957))Google Scholar
Pomponazzi, De immortalitate animae (in Pomponazzi, 1938; and in Cassirer, , Kristeller, , and Randall, 1948), chaps. 8–9.
Ramus, PeterAristotelicae animadversiones (later called Scholae dialecticae, and supplemented by Scholae physicae and Scholae metaphysicae, all collected in Ramus, 1569).Google Scholar
Telesio, De rerum natura, with Italian translation, Telesio 1965–76.Google Scholar
Vaughan, ThomasAnthroposophia theomagica (1650)
Wolfson, A. Harry, Crescas' Critique of Aristotle (Wolfson, 1929).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×