Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T09:35:13.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does Continuous Creation Entail Occasionalism? Malebranche (and Descartes)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Andrew Pessin
Andrew Pessin*
Affiliation:
Kenyon College, Gambier, OH43022-9623, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

‘God needs no instruments to act,’ Malebranche writes in Search 6.2.3; “it suffices that He wills in order that a thing be, because it is a contradiction that He should will and that what He wills should not happen. Therefore, His power is His will” (450). After nearly identical language in Treatise 1.12, Malebranche writes that “[God's] wills are necessarily efficacious … His power differs not at all from His will” (116). God exercises His causal power, here, via His volitions; what He causes depends not merely on the fact that He wills, but specifically (since volitions are intentional states) on the content of His volitions, on “what He wills.” Yet despite the obviously key role the ordinary notion of volitional content plays for Malebranche, recent writers have paid surprisingly little attention either to it or its exegetical implications. I hope partly to rectify this situation here.

The plan of this paper is this:

  • (I) to borrow current work in the philosophy of mind to sketch the notion of an incomplete volition, i.e. one whose content is ‘incomplete’ in a sense to be explained;

  • (II) to note that Malebranche accepts and uses something like this notion;

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , September 2000 , pp. 413 - 439
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 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

Where translations exist, I use them; otherwise any translations are mine.Google Scholar
Malebranche:Google Scholar
OC =Oeuvres Complètes de Malebranche, Robinet, Directeur A. 20 volumes (Paris: J. Vrin 1958-1967).Google Scholar
Dialogues= Dialogues on Metaphysics and Religion, Scott, David trans., Jolley, Nicholas ed. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1997).Google Scholar
Elucidations= Elucidations of The Search After Truth, Thomas Lennon, trans. and ed., in Search.Google Scholar
Méditations Chrétiennes = Méditations Chrétiennes et Métaphysiques, OC 10.Google Scholar
Recueil = Recueil de Toutes les Réponses à Monsieur Arnauld, OC 6-9.Google Scholar
Réflexions = Réflexions Sur La Prémotion Physique, OC 16.Google Scholar
Search = The Search after Truth, Lennon, Thomas and Olscamp, Paul trans. and eds. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1997).Google Scholar
TE = Treatise on Ethics, Walton, Craig trans. (Dordrecht: Kluwer 1993).Google Scholar
Treatise = Treatise on Nature and Grace, Riley, Patrick trans. (Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press 1992).Google Scholar
Arnauld:Google Scholar
True/False = On True and False Ideas, Gaukroger, Stephen trans. (Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press 1990).Google Scholar
Descartes:Google Scholar
CSM =The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, v. 1, 2, Cottingham, J. Stoothoff, R. and Murdoch, D. trans. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1984-85).Google Scholar
Meditations =Meditations on First Philosophy, in CSM2.Google Scholar
Objections = Objections and Replies, in CSM2.Google Scholar
Principles = Principles of Philosophy, in CSM1.Google Scholar
World = The World, in CSM1.Google Scholar
La Forge:Google Scholar
Treatise = Treatise on the Human Mind, Clarke, D. trans. (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997).Google Scholar
Leibniz:Google Scholar
Causa Dei= ‘A Vindication of God's Justice Reconciled With His Other Perfections and All His Actions,’ in Monadology and Other Philosophical Essays, Schrecker, P. and Schrecker, A. trans. (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill 1965).Google Scholar
Wallace, Anderson. 1976. ‘Cartesian Motion.’ In Motion and Time, Space and Matter, Machamer, P. and Turnbull, R. eds. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Richard, Arthur. 1988. ‘Continuous Creation, Continuous Time: A Refutation of the Alleged Discontinuity of Cartesian Time.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 26.3, 349–75.Google Scholar
Andrew, Black. 1997. ‘Malebranche's Theodicy.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 35.1, 27–44.Google Scholar
Kenneth, Clatterbaugh. 1995. ‘Cartesian Causality, Explanation, and Divine Concurrence.’ History of Philosophy Quarterly 12.2, 195–207.Google Scholar
Monte, Cook. 1991. ‘Malebranche Versus Arnauld.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 24, 183–99.Google Scholar
Monte, Cook. 1998. ‘The Ontological Status of Malebranchean Ideas.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 36.4, 525–44.Google Scholar
William, Craig. 1998. ‘Creation and Conservation Once More.’ Religious Studies 34, 177–88.Google Scholar
Donald, Davidson. 1980. Essays on Actions & Events. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Harry, Frankfurt. 1987. ‘Continuous Creation, Ontological Inertia, and the Discontinuity of Time.’ Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale 92.4, 455–72.Google Scholar
Daniel, Garber. 1983. ‘Mind, Body, and the Laws of Nature in Descartes and Leibniz.’ In Midwest Studies in Philosophy, v. 8, French, P. Uehling, T. and Wettstein, H. eds. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Daniel, Garber. 1987. ‘How God Causes Motion: Descartes, Divine Sustenance, and Occasionalism.’ Journal of Philosophy 84, 567–580.Google Scholar
Daniel, Garber. 1992. Descartes’ Metaphysical Physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Daniel, Garber. 1993. ‘Descartes and Occasionalism.’ In Causation in Early Modern Philosophy, Nadler, S. ed. University Park, P A: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Daniel, Garber & Ayers, Michael eds. 1998. The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daniel, Garber Henry, John Joy, Lynn and Gabbey, Alan. 1998. ‘New Doctrines of Body and its Powers, Place, and Space.’ In Garber & Ayers 1998, chapter 18.Google Scholar
Stephen, Gaukroger. 1995. Descartes: An Intellectual Biography. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sanford, Goldberg & Pessin, Andrew. 1997. Gray Matters: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Geoff, Gorham. 1999. ‘Descartes on Continuous Creation and Simultaneous Causation.’ Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Gary, Hatfield. 1979. ‘Force (God) in Descartes's Physics.’ Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 10. Reprinted in Rene Descartes: Critical Assessments, Vol. 4, Moyal, G. ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nicholas, Jolley. 1997. ‘Introduction’ to Dialogues, viii-xxxiv.Google Scholar
Theodore, Kondoleon. 1982. ‘Oakes’ New Argument for God's Existence.’ New Scholasticism 56, 100–9.Google Scholar
Saul, Kripke. 1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jonathan, Kvanvig & McCann, Hugh. 1988. ‘Divine Conservation and the Persistence of the World.’ In Divine and Human Action, Morris, T. ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Lennon. 1980. ‘Philosophical Commentary on Malebranche's The Search After Truth.’ In The Search After Truth, Lennon, T. & Olscamp, P. trans. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Lennon. 1993. The Battle of the Gods and Giants. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Louis, Loeb. 1981. From Descartes to Hume: Continental Metaphysics and the Development of Modern Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hugh, McCann. 1997. ‘Creation and Conservation.’ In A Companion to Philosophy of Religion, Quinn, P. and Taliaferro, C. eds. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Hugh, McCann & Kvanvig, Jonathan. 1991. ‘The Occasionalist Proselytizer: A Modified Catechism.’ In Philosophical Perspectives, 5: Philosophy of Religion, Tomberlin, J. ed. Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.Google Scholar
Peter, McLaughlin. 1993. ‘Descartes on Mind-Body Interaction and the Conservation of Motion.’ Philosophical Review 102.2, 155–82.Google Scholar
Steven, Nadler. 1993. ‘Occasionalism and General Will in Malebranche.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 31.1, 31-46.Google Scholar
Steven, Nadler. 1997. ‘Occasionalism and the Mind-Body Problem.’ In Studies in European Philosophy, Stewart, M.A.. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Steven, Nadler. 1998. ‘Louis de La Forge and the Development of Occasionalism: Continuous Creation and the Activity of the Soul.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 3.2, 215–31.Google Scholar
Robert, Oakes. 1977. ‘Classical Theism and Pantheism: Victory for Process Theism?’ Religious Studies 13, 167–73.Google Scholar
Robert, Oakes. 1980. ‘A New Argument for the Existence of God.’ New Scholasticism 54.2, 213–23.Google Scholar
Eileen, O'Neill. 1987. ‘Mind-Body Interaction and Metaphysical Consistency: A Defense of Descartes.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 25.2, 227–45.Google Scholar
Pessin, Andrew. 2000a. ‘Malebranche's Natural Theodicy and the Incompleteness of God's Volitions.’ Religious Studies 36, 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pessin, Andrew. 2000b. ‘Malebranche's Doctrine of Freedom/Consent and the Incompleteness of God's Volitions.’ British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 8.1, 21–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pessin, Andrew.Forthcoming. ‘Malebranche's Distinction Between General and Particular Volitions.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy.Google Scholar
Pessin, Andrew. In preparation. ‘Descartes's Nomic Concurrentism: Finite Causation and Divine Concurrence.’Google Scholar
Pessin, Andrew & Goldberg, Sanford eds. 1996. The Twin Earth Chronicles: Twenty Years of Reflection on Hilary Putnam's ‘The Meaning of “Meaning”’. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Philip, Quinn. 1979. ‘Divine Conservation and Spinozistic Pantheism.’ Religious Studies 15, 289–302.Google Scholar
Philip, Quinn. 1983. ‘Divine Conservation, Continous Creation, and Human Action.’ In The Existence and Nature of God, Freddoso, A. ed. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Philip, Quinn. 1988. ‘Divine Conservation, Secondary Causes, and Occasionalism.’ In Divine and Human Action, Morris, T. ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Philip, Quinn. 1993. ‘Creation, Conservation, and the Big Bang.’ In Philosophical Problems of the Internal and External Worlds: Essays on the Philosophy of Adolf Grünbaum. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Daisie, Radner. 1978. Malebranche: A Study of a Cartesian System. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum Assen.Google Scholar
Richardson, R.C. 1982. ‘The “Scandal” of Cartesian Interactionism.’ Mind 91, 20–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secada, J.E.K. 1990. ‘Descartes on Time and Causality.’ Philosophical Review 99.1, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tad, Schmaltz. 1992a. ‘Descartes and Malebranche on Mind and Mind-Body Union.’ The Philosophical Review 101.2, 283–325.Google Scholar
Tad, Schmaltz. 1992b. ‘Sensation, Occasionalism, and Descartes’ Causal Principles.’ In Minds, Ideas, and Objects: Essays on the Theory of Representation in Modern Philosophy, Cummins, P. and Zoeller, G. eds. Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.Google Scholar
Tad, Schmaltz. 1996. Malebranche's Theory of the Soul. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Robert, Sleigh. 1990a. Leibniz & Arnauld: A Commentary on Their Correspondence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Robert, Sleigh. 1990b. ‘Leibniz on Malebranche on Causality.’ In Central Themes in Early Modern Philosophy, Cover, J. and Kulstad, M. eds. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Udo, Thiel. 1998a. ‘Individuation.’ In Garber & Ayers 1998, chapter 9.Google Scholar
Udo, Thiel. 1998b. ‘Personal Identity.’ In Garber & Ayers 1998, chapter 26.Google Scholar