The-Philosophy-Book-DK_345

ANCE
AGE

ON

100 INTRODUCTION

Niccolò Nicolaus Copernicus proposes Francis Bacon’s René Descartes
Machiavelli that Earth orbits the Sun, New Organon is writes his Meditations.
in opposition to the Christian published, proposing
publishes view that Earth lies at the a new approach to
The Prince. center of the universe. investigating nature.

1513 1543 1620 1641
1517 1593 1633 1644

Martin Luther nails his The Edict of Nantes Galileo Galilei is The last ruling
95 Theses to the door of is issued by Henri IV, excommunicated by the dynasty of
granting Protestants rights Church and imprisoned
Castle Church in within Catholic France. China, the Qing
Wittenberg, triggering for life, for upholding (Manchu) dynasty,
the theory that Earth
the Reformation. revolves around the Sun. takes power.

The Renaissance—a cultural By the end of the 15th century, Ptolemaic model of the universe
“rebirth” of extraordinary Renaissance ideas had spread with Earth at its center was
creativity in Europe—began across Europe and virtually eclipsed mistaken, and their demonstrations
in 14th-century Florence. It was to the Church’s monopoly of learning. overturned centuries of Christian
spread across Europe, lasting until Although Christian philosophers teaching. The Church fought back,
the 17th century, and it is now such as Erasmus and Thomas More ultimately imprisoning Galileo for
viewed as the bridge between the had contributed to the arguments heresy, but advances in all the
medieval and modern periods. within the Church that had sparked sciences soon followed those in
Marked by a renewed interest in the the Reformation, a purely secular astronomy, providing alternative
whole of Greek and Latin Classical philosophy had yet to emerge. explanations for the workings of
culture—not just the philosophical Unsurprisingly, the first truly the universe, and a basis for a new
and mathematical texts assimilated Renaissance philosopher was a kind of philosophy.
by medieval Scholasticism—it was Florentine – Niccolò Machiavelli –
a movement that viewed humans, and his philosophy marked a The victory of rational, scientific
not God, at its center. This new definitive movement from the discovery over Christian dogma
humanism was reflected first in the theological to the political. epitomized the thinking of the
art and then the political and social 17th century. British philosophers,
structure of Italian society; republics The Age of Reason notably Francis Bacon and Thomas
such as Florence and Venice soon The final nail in the coffin of the Hobbes, took the lead in integrating
abandoned medieval feudalism Church’s authority came from scientific and philosophical
in favor of plutocracies where science. First Nicolaus Copernicus, reasoning. It was the beginning
commerce flourished alongside then Johannes Kepler, and finally of a period that became known as
the new scientific discoveries. Galileo Galilei showed that the the Age of Reason, which produced
the first great “modern” philosophers

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 101

The execution of King Isaac Newton John Locke publishes George Berkeley
Charles I brings an begins compiling his An Essay concerning publishes A Treatise
end to the English Human Understanding. Concerning the Principles
Civil War. notes on “Certain of Human Knowledge.
Philosophical
Questions.”

1649 1664 1690 1710
1651 1670 1704 1721

Thomas Hobbes’ great Blaise Pascal’s Gottfried Leibniz Britain’s first factory
political work, Leviathan, Pensées are published writes New Essays on opens, accelerating
Human Understanding.
is published. posthumously. the Industrial
Revolution.

and revived the connection between century. At the same time, a very being answered by scientists such
philosophy and science, especially different philosophical tradition as Isaac Newton—to questioning
mathematics, that dated back to was being established in Britain. how we can know what we know,
pre-Socratic Greece. Following the scientific reasoning and they now began to investigate
espoused by Francis Bacon, John the nature of the human mind and
The birth of rationalism Locke came to the conclusion that self. But these new philosophical
In the 17th century, many of the our knowledge of the world comes strands had moral and political
most significant philosophers in not from reason, but experience. implications. Just as the Church’s
Europe were also accomplished This view, known as empiricism, authority had been undermined by
mathematicians. In France, René characterized British philosophy the ideas of the Renaissance, so the
Descartes and Blaise Pascal made during the 17th and 18th centuries. aristocracies and monarchies were
major contributions to mathematics, threatened by the new ideas of the
as did Gottfried Leibniz in Germany. Despite the division between Enlightenment, as this period came
They believed that its reasoning continental rationalism and British to be known. If the old rulers were
process provided the best model for empiricism (the same division that removed from power, what sort of
how to acquire all our knowledge of had separated the philosophies of society was to replace them?
the world. Descartes’s investigation Plato and Aristotle), both had in
of the question “What can I know?” common the placing of the human In Britain, Hobbes and Locke
led him to a position of rationalism, at their centers: it is this being had laid the foundations for
which is the belief that knowledge whose reason or experience leads democratic thinking during the
comes from reason alone. This to knowledge. Philosophers on both turbulent 17th century, but it was
became the predominant belief in sides of the Channel had moved another 100 years before a
continental Europe for the next from asking questions about the questioning of the status quo
nature of the universe—which were began in earnest elsewhere. ■

THE END

JUSTIFIES

THE MEANS

NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI (1469–1527)



104 NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI The success of a state
or nation is paramount.
IN CONTEXT
Whoever governs the
BRANCH state or nation must
Political philosophy strive to secure...

APPROACH ...his or her own glory. ...the success of the state.
Realism
In order to do this, they
BEFORE cannot be bound by morality.
1st century BCE Plato argues
in his Republic that the state The end justifies
should be governed by a the means.
philosopher-king.

1st century BCE The Roman
writer Cicero argues that the
Roman Republic is the best
form of government.

AFTER
16th century Machiavelli’s
peers begin to use the adjective
“Machiavellian” to describe
acts of devious cunning.

1762 Jean-Jacques Rousseau
argues that people should hold
on to their liberty and resist
the rule of princes.

1928 Italian dictator Benito
Mussolini describes The
Prince as “the statesman’s
supreme guide.”

I n order fully to understand Piero the Unfortunate), whose and burnt as a heretic. This led
Machiavelli’s views on power, reign was short-lived. The French to Machiavelli’s first known
it is necessary to understand under Charles VIII invaded Italy in involvement in Florentine politics,
the background to his political considerable force in 1494, and and he became Secretary to the
concerns. Machiavelli was born in Piero was forced to surrender and second Chancery in 1498.
Florence, Italy, during a time of then flee the city, as the citizens
almost constant upheaval. The rebelled against him. Florence was Career and influences
Medici family had been in open but declared a republic that same year. The invasion by Charles VIII in
unofficial control of the city-state 1494 had sparked a turbulent period
for some 35 years, and the year of The Dominican prior of the in the history of Italy, which at the
Machiavelli’s birth saw Lorenzo de’ San Marco monastery, Girolamo time was divided into five powers:
Medici (Lorenzo the Magnificent) Savonarola, then came to dominate the papacy, Naples, Venice, Milan,
succeed his father as ruler, ushering Florentine political life. The city- and Florence. The country was
in a period of great artistic activity state entered a democratic period fought over by various foreign
in Florence. Lorenzo was succeeded under his guidance, but after powers, mainly France, Spain, and
in 1492 by his son Piero (known as accusing the pope of corruption the Holy Roman Empire. Florence
Savonarola was eventually arrested

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 105

See also: Plato 50–55 ■ Francis Bacon 110–11 ■ Jean-Jacques Rousseau 154–59 ■ Karl Marx 196–203

Lorenzo the Magnificent (1449–1492)
effectively ruled Florence from the
death of his father in 1469 until his
death. Though he ruled as a despot, the
republic flourished under his guidance.

Machiavelli was released from
prison within a month, but his
chances of re-employment were
slim, and his attempts to find a new
political position came to nothing.
He decided to present the head of
the de’ Medici family in Florence,
Giuliano, with a book. By the time
it was ready Giuliano had died, so
Machiavelli changed the dedication
to Giuliano’s successor, Lorenzo.
The book was of a type popular at
the time: advice to a prince.

was weak in the face of their armies, man who impressed Machiavelli The Prince
and Machiavelli spent 14 years with both his military ability and Machiavelli’s book The Prince was
travelling between various cities his cunning. But tension between witty and cynical, and showed a
on diplomatic missions, trying to France and the papacy led to great understanding of Italy in
shore up the struggling republic. Florence fighting with the French general and Florence in particular.
against the pope and his allies, In it, Machiavelli sets out his
In the course of his diplomatic the Spanish. The French lost, and argument that the goals of a ruler
activities, Machiavelli met Cesare Florence with them. In 1512 the justify the means used to obtain
Borgia, the illegitimate son of Pope Spanish dissolved the city-state’s them. The Prince differed markedly
Alexander VI. The pope was a government, the Medicis returned, from other books of its type in its
powerful figure in northern Italy, and what was in effect a tyranny resolute setting aside of Christian
and a significant threat to Florence. under Cardinal de’ Medici was morality. Machiavelli wanted to ❯❯
Although Cesare was Florence’s installed. Machiavelli was fired
enemy, Machiavelli—despite his from his political office and exiled How difficult it is
republican views—was impressed to his farm in Florence. His political for a people accustomed
by his vigor, intelligence, and career might have revived under to live under a prince to
ability. Here we see one of the the rule of the Medicis, but in
sources for Machiavelli’s famous February 1513 he was falsely preserve their liberty!
work, The Prince. implicated in a plot against the Niccolò Machiavelli
family, and he was tortured,
Pope Alexander VI died in 1503, fined, and imprisoned.
and his successor Pope Julius II
was another strong and successful

106 NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI

give ruthlessly practical advice to a sometimes virtù is used to mean prince to be feared than to be
prince and, as his experience with “success”, and describes a state loved. But the people must not
extremely successful popes and that is to be admired and imitated. hate him, for this is likely to lead
cardinals had shown him, Christian to rebellion. Also, a prince who
values should be cast aside if they Part of Machiavelli’s point is mistreats his people unnecessarily
got in the way. that a ruler cannot be bound by will be despised—a prince should
morality, but must do what it takes have a reputation for compassion,
Machiavelli’s approach centers to secure his own glory and the not for cruelty. This might involve
on the notion of virtù, but this is not success of the state over which he harsh punishment of a few in order
the modern notion of moral virtue. rules—an approach that became to achieve general social order,
It shares more similarities with the known as realism. But Machiavelli which benefits more people in
medieval notion of virtues as the does not argue that the end justifies the long run.
powers or functions of things, such the means in all cases. There are
as the healing powers of plants or certain means that a wise prince In cases where Machiavelli
minerals. Machiavelli is writing must avoid, for though they might does think that the end justifies
about the virtues of princes, and achieve the desired ends, they lay the means, this rule applies only
these were the powers and functions him open to future dangers. to princes. The proper conduct of
that concerned rule. The Latin root citizens of the state is not at all the
of virtù also relates it to manliness The main means to be avoided same as that of the prince. But even
(as in “virile”), and this feeds into consist of those that would make for ordinary citizens, Machiavelli
what Machiavelli has to say in the people hate their prince. They generally disdains conventional
its application both to the prince may love him, they may fear him— Christian morality as being weak
himself and to the state—where preferably both, Machiavelli says, and unsuitable for a strong city.
though it is more important for a

A ruler needs to know how to act Prince or republic
like a beast, Machiavelli says in The There are reasons to suspect that
Prince, and must imitate the qualities The Prince does not represent
of the fox as well as the lion. Machiavelli’s own views. Perhaps
the most important is the disparity
between the ideas it contains and
those expressed in his other main
work, Discourses on the Ten Books
of Titus Livy. In the Discourses
Machiavelli argues that a republic
is the ideal regime, and that it

A ruler must have the A ruler must have the It must be understood
ferocity of the lion to cunning of the fox that a prince cannot
frighten those who seek to recognize snares observe all those things
which are considered
to depose him. and traps.
good in men.
Niccolò Machiavelli

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 107

should be instituted whenever a Ruthlessness has been a virtue of
reasonable degree of equality leadership throughout history. In the
exists or can be established. A 20th century, the fascist dictator Benito
princedom is only suitable when Mussolini used a mixture of fear and
equality does not exist in a state, love to hold on to power in Italy.
and cannot be introduced. However,
it can be argued that The Prince The world has become more
represents Machiavelli’s genuine like that of Machiavelli.
ideas about how the ruler should Bertrand Russell
rule in such cases; if princedoms
are sometimes a necessary evil, it
is best that they be ruled as well as
possible. Moreover, Machiavelli did
believe that Florence was in such
political turmoil that it needed a
strong ruler to get it into shape.

Pleasing the readers The problem lies in discerning Latin, the language of the elite, but
The fact that The Prince was which parts are his actual beliefs in Italian, the language of the people.
written by Machiavelli in order to and which are not. It is tempting to Certainly, The Prince at times reads
ingratiate himself with the Medicis divide them according to how well satirically, as though the audience
is another reason to treat its they fit with the intended reader’s is expected to conclude: “if that is
contents with caution. However, he own beliefs, but that is unlikely to how a good prince should behave,
also dedicated the Discourses to give an accurate result. we should at all costs avoid being
members of Florence’s republican ruled by one!” If Machiavelli was
government. Machiavelli, it could It has also been suggested that also satirizing the idea that “the
be argued, would have written Machiavelli was attempting satire, end justifies the means”, then the
what the dedicatee wanted to read. and his real intended audience was purpose of this small, deceptively
the republicans, not the ruling elite. simple book is far more intriguing
The Prince, however, contains This idea is supported by the fact than one might originally assume. ■
much that Machiavelli is thought to that Machiavelli did not write it in
have genuinely believed, such as
the need for a citizens’ militia
rather than reliance on mercenaries.

Niccolò Machiavelli Machiavelli was born in Florence as persistent attempts to return
in 1469. Little is known of the first to the political arena. Eventually
28 years of his life; apart from a he regained the trust of the
few inconclusive mentions in his Medicis, and Cardinal Giulio
father’s diary, the first direct de’ Medici commissioned him to
evidence is a business letter write a history of Florence. The
written in 1497. From his writings, book was finished in 1525, after
though, it is clear that he received the cardinal had become Pope
a good education, perhaps at the Clement VII. Machiavelli died
University of Florence. in 1527, without achieving his
ambition to return to public life.
By 1498, Machiavelli had
become a politician and diplomat Key works
of the Florentine Republic. After
his enforced retirement on the 1513 The Prince
return of the Medicis to Florence 1517 Discourses on the Ten
in 1512, he devoted himself to Books of Titus Livy
various literary activities, as well

108

FAME AND
TRANQUILLITY
CAN NEVER BE
BEDFELLOWS

MICHEL DE MONTAIGNE (1533–1592)

IN CONTEXT Tranquillity depends I n his essay “On Solitude”
upon detachment (from the first volume of his
BRANCH Essays), Montaigne takes up a
Ethics from the opinion of others. theme that has been popular since
ancient times: the intellectual and
APPROACH If we seek fame—which moral dangers of living among
Humanism is glory in the eyes of others, and the value of solitude.
others—we must seek Montaigne is not stressing the
BEFORE importance of physical solitude, but
4th century BCE Aristotle, their good opinion. rather of developing the ability to
in his Nicomachean Ethics, resist the temptation to mindlessly
argues that to be virtuous, a If we seek fame fall in with the opinion and actions
person must be sociable and we cannot of the mob. He compares our desire
form close relationships with for the approval of our fellow humans
others; only a bestial man or reach detachment. to being overly attached to material
a god can flourish alone. wealth and possessions. Both
Fame and passions diminish us, Montaigne
AFTER tranquillity can claims, but he does not conclude
Late 18th century Anglican never be bedfellows. that we should relinquish either,
evangelical clergyman Richard only that we should cultivate a
Cecil states, “Solitude shows detachment from them. By doing so,
us what we should be; society we may enjoy them—and even
shows us what we are.” benefit from them—but we will not
become emotionally enslaved to
Late 19th century Friedrich them, or devastated if we lose them.
Nietzsche describes solitude
as necessary to the task of “On Solitude” then considers
self-examination, which he how our desire for mass approval
claims can alone free humans is linked to the pursuit of glory, or
from the temptation just to fame. Contrary to thinkers such
thoughtlessly follow the mob. as Niccolò Machiavelli, who see
glory as a worthy goal, Montaigne
believes that constant striving
for fame is the greatest barrier to
peace of mind, or tranquility. He

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 109

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Niccolò Machiavelli 102–07 ■
Friedrich Nietzsche 214–21

says of those who present glory as a of those around us will corrupt us, Michel de Montaigne
desirable goal that they “only have either because we end up imitating
their arms and legs out of the those who are evil, or become so Michel Eyquem de Montaigne
crowd; their souls, their wills, are consumed by hatred for them that was born and brought up in
more engaged with it than ever.” we lose our reason. his wealthy family’s chateau
near Bordeaux. However, he
Montaigne is not concerned Glory’s pitfalls was sent to live with a poor
with whether or not we achieve Montaigne returns to his attack peasant family until the age
glory. His point is that we should on the pursuit of glory in his later of three, so that he would be
shake off the desire for glory in the writings, pointing out that the familiar with the life led by
eyes of other people—that we acquisition of glory is often so the ordinary workers. He
should not always think of other much a matter of mere chance received all his education at
people’s approval and admiration that it makes little sense to hold it home, and was allowed to
as being valuable. He goes on to in such reverence. “Many times I’ve speak only Latin until the age
recommend that instead of looking seen [fortune] stepping out ahead of six. French was effectively
for the approbation of those around of merit, and often a long way his second language.
us, we should imagine that some ahead,” he writes. He also points
truly great and noble being is out that encouraging statesmen From 1557, Montaigne
constantly with us, able to observe and political leaders to value glory spent 13 years as a member
our most private thoughts, a being above all things, as Machiavelli of his local parliament, but
in whose presence even the mad does, merely teaches them never resigned in 1571, on inheriting
would hide their failings. By doing to attempt any endeavor unless the family estates.
this, we will learn to think clearly an approving audience is on hand,
and objectively and behave in a ready and eager to bear witness to Montaigne published his
more thoughtful and rational the remarkable nature of their first volume of Essays in 1580,
manner. Montaigne claims that powers and achievements. ■ going on to write two more
caring too much about the opinion volumes before his death in
1592. In 1580, he also set out
Contagion is very on an extensive tour of Europe,
dangerous in crowds. You partly to seek a cure for kidney
stones. He returned to politics
must either imitate the in 1581, when he was elected
vicious or hate them. Mayor of Bordeaux, an office
Michel de Montaigne he held until 1585.

Montaigne experienced the results Key works
of mindless mob violence during the
French Wars of Religion (1562–98), 1569 In Defence of
including the atrocities of the St. Raymond Sebond
Bartholomew Day Massacre of 1572. 1580–1581 Travel Journal
1580, 1588, 1595 Essays
(3 volumes)

110

KNOWLEDGE
IS POWER

FRANCIS BACON (1561–1626)

IN CONTEXT B acon is often credited with the Scientific Revolution—produced
being the first in a tradition an astonishing number of scientific
BRANCH of thought known as British thinkers, including Galileo Galilei,
Philosophy of science empiricism, which is characterized William Harvey, Robert Boyle,
by the view that all knowledge Robert Hooke, and Isaac Newton.
APPROACH must come ultimately from sensory
Empiricism experience. He was born at a time Although the Church had been
when there was a shift from the broadly welcoming to science for
BEFORE Renaissance preoccupation with much of the medieval period, this
4th century BCE Aristotle the rediscovered achievements of was halted by the rise of opposition
sets observation and inductive the ancient world toward a more to the Vatican’s authority during
reasoning at the center of scientific approach to knowledge. the Renaissance. Several religious
scientific thinking. There had already been some reformers, such as Martin Luther,
innovative work by Renaissance had complained that the Church
13th century English scholars scientists such as the astronomer had been too lax in countering
Robert Grosseteste and Roger Nicolaus Copernicus and the scientific challenges to accounts
Bacon add experimentation to anatomist Andreas Vesalius, but of the world based on the Bible.
Aristotle’s inductive approach this new period—sometimes called In response, the Catholic Church,
to scientific knowledge. which had already lost adherents to

AFTER Scientific knowledge It advances steadily and
1739 David Hume’s Treatise builds upon itself. cumulatively, discovering
of Human Nature argues new laws and making new
against the rationality of
inductive thinking. inventions possible.

1843 John Stuart Mill’s Knowledge is It enables people to do
System of Logic outlines the power. things that otherwise
five inductive principles that could not be done.
together regulate the sciences.

1934 Karl Popper states that
falsification, not induction,
defines the scientific method.

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 111

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Robert Grosseteste 333 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■
John Stuart Mill 190–93 ■ Karl Popper 262–65

preconceptions on nature rather Francis Bacon
than to see what is really there;
the “idols of the marketplace”, our Born in London, Francis Bacon
tendency to let social conventions was educated privately, before
distort our experience; and the being sent to Trinity College,
“idols of the theater”, the distorting Cambridge, at the age of 12.
influence of prevailing philosophical After graduation, he started
and scientific dogma. The scientist, training as a lawyer, but
according to Bacon, must battle abandoned his studies to
against all these handicaps to gain take up a diplomatic post in
knowledge of the world. France. His father’s death in
1579 left him impoverished,
Science, not religion, was regarded Scientific method forcing him to return to the
increasingly as the key to knowledge Bacon goes on to argue that the legal profession.
from the 16th century onward. This 1598 advancement of science depends on
print depicts the observatory of Danish formulating laws of ever-increasing Bacon was elected to
astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546–1601). generality. He proposes a scientific parliament in 1584, but his
method that includes a variation of friendship with the treasonous
Luther’s new form of Christianity, this approach. Instead of making Earl of Essex held back his
changed its stance and turned a series of observations, such as political career until the
against scientific endeavor. This instances of metals that expand accession of James I in 1603.
opposition, from both sides of the when heated, and then concluding In 1618, he was appointed Lord
religious divide, hampered the that heat must cause all metals to Chancellor, but was dismissed
development of the sciences. expand, he stresses the need to two years later, when he was
test a new theory by going on to convicted of accepting bribes.
Bacon claims to accept the look for negative instances—such
teachings of the Christian Church. as metals not expanding when Bacon spent the rest of his
But he also argues that science they are heated. life writing and carrying out
must be separated from religion, his scientific work. He died
in order to make the acquisition of Bacon’s influence led to a focus from bronchitis, contracted
knowledge quicker and easier, so on practical experimentation in while stuffing a chicken with
that it can be used to improve the science. He was, however, criticized snow, as part of an experiment
quality of people’s lives. Bacon for neglecting the importance of in food preservation.
stresses this transforming role for the imaginative leaps that drive all
science. One of his complaints is scientific progress. ■ Key works
that science’s ability to enhance
human existence had previously By far the best proof 1597 Essays
been ignored, in favor of a focus on is experience. 1605 The Advancement
academic and personal glory. of Learning
Francis Bacon 1620 Novum Organum
Bacon presents a list of the 1624 Nova Atlantis
psychological barriers to pursuing
scientific knowledge in terms that
he calls collectively the “idols of
the mind.” These are the “idols of
the tribe”, the tendency of human
beings as a species (or “tribe”) to
generalize; the “idols of the cave”,
the human tendency to impose

112 IN CONTEXT

MAN IS A BRANCH
MACHINE Metaphysics

THOMAS HOBBES (1588–1679) APPROACH
Physicalism

BEFORE
4th century BCE Aristotle
disagrees with Plato’s theory
of a distinct human soul and
argues that the soul is a form
or function of the body.

1641 René Descartes
publishes his Meditations on
First Philosophy, arguing that
mind and body are completely
different and distinct entities.

AFTER
1748 Julien Offray de la
Mettrie’s The Man Machine
presents a mechanistic view
of human beings.

1949 Gilbert Ryle states that
Descartes’ idea that mind and
body are separate “substances”
is a “category mistake.”

A lthough he is best known
for his political philosophy,
Thomas Hobbes wrote on a
wide range of subjects. Many of his
views are controversial, not least
his defence of physicalism—the
theory that everything in the world
is exclusively physical in nature,
allowing no room for the existence
of other natural entities, such as the
mind, or for supernatural beings.
According to Hobbes, all animals,
including humans, are nothing more
than flesh-and-blood machines.

The kind of metaphysical theory
that Hobbes favors was becoming
increasingly popular at the time of
his writing, in the mid-17th century.
Knowledge in the physical sciences

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 113

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Francis Bacon 110–11 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■
Julien Offray de la Mettrie 335 ■ Gilbert Ryle 337

Nothing without So everything in the
substance can exist. universe is physical.

Man is a A human Thomas Hobbes
machine. being is therefore
entirely physical. Orphaned in infancy, Thomas
Hobbes was fortunately taken
was growing rapidly, bringing that is to say, body.” He goes on to in by a wealthy uncle, who
clearer explanations of phenomena say that each of these bodies has offered him a good education.
that had long been obscure or “length, breadth, and depth”, and A degree from the University
misunderstood. Hobbes had met “that which is not body is no part of Oxford earned him the post
the Italian astronomer Galileo, of the universe.” Although Hobbes of tutor to the sons of the Earl
frequently regarded as the “father is stating that the nature of of Devonshire. This job gave
of modern science”, and had been everything is purely physical, he Hobbes the opportunity to
closely associated with Francis is not claiming that because of travel widely throughout
Bacon, whose thinking had helped this physicality everything can be Europe, where he met noted
to revolutionize scientific practice. perceived by us. Some bodies or scientists and thinkers, such
objects, Hobbes declares, are as the Italian astronomer
In science and mathematics, imperceptible, even though they Galileo Galilei as well as the
Hobbes saw the perfect counter to occupy physical space and have French philosophers Marin
the medieval Scholastic philosophy physical dimensions. These, he Mersenne, Pierre Gassendi,
that had sought to reconcile the calls “spirits.” Some of them, ❯❯ and René Descartes.
apparent contradictions between
reason and faith. In common with Life is but In 1640, Hobbes fled to
many thinkers of his time, he a motion of limbs. France to escape the English
believed there was no limit to what Thomas Hobbes Civil War, staying there for
science could achieve, taking it as 11 years. His first book, De
a matter of fact that any question Cive, was published in Paris in
about the nature of the world could 1642. But it was his ideas on
be answered with a scientifically morality, politics, and the
formulated explanation. functions of society and the
state, set out in Leviathan,
Hobbes’ theory that made him famous.
In Leviathan, his major political
work, Hobbes proclaims: “The Also respected as a skilled
universe—that is, the whole mass translator and mathematician,
of things that are—is corporeal, Hobbes continued to write until
his death at the age of 91.

Key works

1642 De Cive
1651 Leviathan
1656 De Corpore
1658 De Homine

114 THOMAS HOBBES

Hobbes believed that “spirits” carried
information needed to function around
the body. We now know that this is done
by electrical signals, travelling along
the neurons of the nervous system.

labelled “animal spirits” (in line beyond our comprehension. All it is consciousness.” Chalmers points
with a common view at the time) possible for human beings to know out that certain functions of
are responsible for most animal, about God is that he exists, and consciousness—such as the use
and especially human, activity. that he is the first cause, or creator, of language and the processing
These animal spirits move around of everything in the universe. of information—can be explained
the body, carrying with them and relatively easily in terms of the
passing on information, in much What is consciousness? mechanisms that perform those
the same way as we now think of Because Hobbes considers that functions, and that physicalist
the nervous system doing. human beings are purely physical, philosophers have been offering
and are therefore no more than variants of this approach for
Sometimes, Hobbes seems to biological machines, he is then centuries. However, the harder
apply his concept of physical spirits faced with the problem of how to problem of explaining the nature of
to God and other entities found in account for our mental nature. He subjective, first-person experience
religion, such as angels. However, makes no attempt to give an of consciousness remains unsolved
he does state that God himself, account of how the mind can be by them. There seems to be a
but not other physical spirits, should explained. He simply offers a built-in mismatch between the
be described as “incorporeal.” For general and rather sketchy account objects of the physical sciences
Hobbes, the divine nature of God’s of what he thought science would on the one hand and the subjects
attributes is not something that eventually reveal to be the case. of conscious experience on the
the human mind is capable of fully Even then, he only covers the other—something that Hobbes
understanding, therefore the term mental activities such as voluntary does not seem to be aware of.
“incorporeal” is the only one that motion, appetite, and aversion—all
recognizes and also honors the phenomena that can be studied Hobbes’ account of his belief
unknowable substance of God. and explained from a mechanistic offers very little argument for his
Hobbes does make clear, however, point of view. Hobbes has nothing conviction that everything in the
that he believes the existence and to say about what the modern-day world, including human beings,
nature of all religious entities are Australian philosopher David is wholly physical. He appears not
matters for faith, not science, and Chalmers calls “the hard problem of to notice that his grounds for the
that God, in particular, will remain
For what is the
heart, but a spring; and
the nerves, but so many
strings; and the joints,

but so many wheels,
giving motion to the

whole body.
Thomas Hobbes

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 115

existence of imperceptible material argument for his position that Besides sense, and
spirits could equally be grounds for there can be no incorporeal minds, thoughts, and the train
a belief in nonmaterial substances. in fact depends upon his inaccurate of thoughts, the mind
To most people, something being assumption that the only form of
imperceptible is more consistent substance is body, and that there of man has no
with a mental than with a physical is no possibility of incorporeal other motion.
concept. In addition, because things existing at all. Thomas Hobbes
Hobbes’ material spirits can only
ever possess the same properties A simple prejudice unphilosophical—prejudice against
as other types of physical thing, As Hobbes’ definition of physical the mental. But his mechanistic
they fail to offer any assistance spirits indicates, it is ultimately theories about the nature of our
toward an explanation of the unclear exactly what he took world were very much in keeping
mental nature of human beings. “physical” or “corporeal” to mean. with the spirit of an age that was
If it was meant to be simply to radically challenge most of the
Descartes’ dualism anything that had three spatial prevailing views on human nature
Hobbes also had to contend with dimensions, then he would be and social order, as well as those
the very different thinking about excluding much of what we, at concerned with the substance and
mind and body that Descartes set the beginning of the 21st century, workings of the universe that we
out in his Meditations of 1641. might regard as being “physical.” inhabit. It was this revolution in
Descartes argues for the “Real For example, his theories about the thinking that laid the foundations
Distinction” between mind and nature of the world would rule out of our modern world. ■
body—the notion that they are the science of sub-atomic physics.
utterly distinct sorts of substance.
In objections to Descartes’ ideas In the absence of any truly clear
that he expressed at the time, notion of what his key term means,
Hobbes makes no comment on this Hobbes’ insistence that everything
distinction. However, 14 years later, in the world can be explained in
he addressed the problem again in physical terms begins to look less
a passage in his book De Corpore, and less like a statement of scientific
presenting and criticizing what principle. Instead, it starts to appear
seems to be a muddled form of part to be merely an unscientific—and
of Descartes’ argument. Here he
rejects the conclusion Descartes
came to—that mind and body are
two distinct substances—on the
basis that Descartes’ use of the
phrase “incorporeal substance”
is an example of insignificant or
empty language. Hobbes takes it
to mean “a body without body”,
which appears to be nonsense.
However, this definition must be
based upon his own view that all
substances are bodies; so what
Hobbes appears to present as an

While Hobbes was formulating his
mechanistic ideas, scientists such as
the physician William Harvey were
using empirical techniques to explore
the workings of the human body.

I THINK

THEREFORE I AM

RENE DESCARTES (1596–1650)



118 RENE DESCARTES R ené Descartes lived in the In the Meditations on First
early 17th century, during Philosophy, Descartes’ most
IN CONTEXT a period sometimes called accomplished and rigorous work
the Scientific Revolution, an era on metaphysics (the study of being
BRANCH of rapid advances in the sciences. and reality) and epistemology (the
Epistemology The British scientist and philosopher study of the nature and limits of
Francis Bacon had established a knowledge), he seeks to demonstrate
APPROACH new method for conducting scientific the possibility of knowledge even
Rationalism experiments, based on detailed from the most skeptical of positions,
observations and deductive and from this, to establish a firm
BEFORE reasoning, and his methodologies foundation for the sciences. The
4th century BCE Aristotle had provided a new framework for
argues that whenever we investigating the world. Descartes Descartes’ book De Homine Figuris
perform any action, including shared his excitement and optimism, takes a biological look at the causes
thinking, we are conscious but for different reasons. Bacon of knowledge. In it, he suggests that
that we perform it, and in considered the practical applications the pineal gland is the link between
this way we are conscious of scientific discoveries to be their vision and conscious action.
that we exist. whole purpose and point, whereas
Descartes was more fascinated by
c.420 CE St. Augustine writes the project of extending knowledge
in The City of God that he is and understanding of the world.
certain he exists, because if he
is mistaken, this itself proves During the Renaissance—the
his existence—in order to be preceding historical era—people
mistaken, one must exist. had become more skeptical about
science and the possibility of
AFTER genuine knowledge in general, and
1781 In his Critique of Pure this view continued to exert an
Reason, Immanuel Kant argues influence in Descartes’ time. So a
against Descartes, but adopts major motivation of his “project of
the First Certainty—“I think pure enquiry”, as his work has
therefore I exist”—as the heart become known, was the desire to
and starting point of his rid the sciences of the annoyance
idealist philosophy. of skepticism once and for all.

An evil demon may There is nothing But when I say “I am;
be making me believe of which I can I exist”, I cannot be
be certain. wrong about this.
things that are false.

I am thinking, An evil demon could
therefore I exist. try to make me believe this
only if I really do exist.

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 119

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ St. Augustine of Hippo 72–73 ■ Thomas Hobbes 112–15 ■ Blaise Pascal 124–25 ■
Benedictus Spinoza 126–29 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ Gottfried Leibniz 134–37 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71

Meditations is written in the first- knowledge. Perhaps, he says, we It is necessary that
person form—“I think…”—because are dreaming, and the apparently at least once in your life
he is not presenting arguments in real world is no more than a dream
order to prove or disprove certain world. He notes that this is possible, you doubt, as far as
statements, but instead wishes to as there are no sure signs between possible, all things.
lead the reader along the path that being awake or asleep. But even so, René Descartes
he himself has taken. In this way this situation would leave open the
the reader is forced to adopt the possibility that some truths, such
standpoint of the meditator, thinking as mathematical axioms, could be
things through and discovering the known, though not through the
truth just as Descartes had done. senses. But even these “truths”
This approach is reminiscent of might not in fact be true, because
the Socratic method, in which the God, who is all-powerful, could
philosopher gradually draws out a deceive us even at this level. Even
person’s understanding rather than though we believe that God is
presenting it already packaged and good, it is possible that he made ❯❯
ready to take away.

The illusory world An optical illusion of parallel lines that are made
In order to establish that his beliefs to look bent can fool our senses. Descartes thinks
have stability and endurance, which we must accept nothing as true or given, but must
Descartes takes to be two important instead strip away all preconceptions before we can
marks of knowledge, he uses what proceed to a position of knowledge.
is known as “the method of doubt.”
This starts with the meditator
setting aside any belief whose truth
can be doubted, whether slightly
or completely. Descartes’ aim is
to show that, even if we start from
the strongest possible skeptical
position, doubting everything, we
can still reach knowledge. The
doubt is “hyperbolic” (exaggerated),
and used only as a philosophical
tool; as Descartes points out: “no
sane person has ever seriously
doubted these things.”

Descartes starts by subjecting
his beliefs to a series of increasingly
rigorous skeptical arguments,
questioning how we can be sure
of the existence of anything at all.
Could it be that the world we know
is just an illusion? We cannot trust
our senses, as we have all been
“deceived” by them at one time or
another, and so we cannot rely on
them as a sure footing for

120 RENE DESCARTES

I shall suppose that some
malicious demon of the
utmost power and cunning
has employed all his energies
in order to deceive me.

René Descartes

An evil demon capable of deceiving he can ask: “Could the demon be think or say: “I am, I exist”, and
humankind about everything cannot making me believe this even while we are thinking or saying it
make me doubt my existence; if he though it was false?” and if the we cannot be wrong about it. When
tries, and I am forced to question my answer is “yes” he must set aside Descartes tries to apply the evil
own existence, this only confirms it. the belief as open to doubt. demon test to this belief, he
realizes that the demon could only
us in such a way that we are prone At this point, it seems as though make him believe that he exists if
to errors in our reasoning. Or perhaps Descartes has put himself into an he does in fact exist; how can he
there is no God—in which case we impossible position—nothing doubt his existence unless he
are even more likely to be imperfect seems beyond doubt, so he has no exists in order to do the doubting?
beings (having arisen only by solid ground on which to stand.
chance) that are capable of being He describes himself as feeling This axiom—“I am, I exist”—
deceived all the time. helplessly tumbled around by a forms Descartes’ First Certainty.
whirlpool of universal doubt, unable In his earlier work, the Discourse
Having reached a position in to find his footing. Skepticism on the Method, he presented it
which there seems to be nothing seems to have made it impossible as: “I think therefore I am”, but he
at all of which he can be certain, for him even to begin his journey abandoned this wording when
Descartes then devises a vivid tool back to knowledge and truth. he wrote the Meditations, as the
to help him to avoid slipping back inclusion of “therefore” makes the
into preconceived opinion: he The First Certainty statement read like a premise and
supposes that there is a powerful It is at this point that Descartes conclusion. Descartes wants the
and evil demon who can deceive realizes that there is one belief that reader—the meditating “I”—to
him about anything. When he he surely cannot doubt: his belief in realize that as soon as I consider
finds himself considering a belief, his own existence. Each of us can the fact that I exist, I know it to be
true. This truth is instantly grasped.
The realization that I exist is a
direct intuition, not the conclusion
of an argument.

Despite Descartes’ move to a
clearer expression of his position,
the earlier formulation was so
catchy that it stuck in people’s
minds, and to this day the First
Certainty is generally known as
“the cogito”, from the Latin cogito

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 121

This proposition, I am, What use, though, is a single belief? Descartes realizes that we might
I exist, is necessarily true The simplest logical argument is a also be able to gain knowledge
whenever it is put forward syllogism, which has two premises from the certainty itself. This is
and a conclusion—such as: all because the knowledge that I am
by me or conceived birds have wings; a robin is a bird; thinking is bound up with the
in my mind. therefore all robins have wings. We knowledge of my existence. So
surely cannot get anywhere from “thinking” is also something that
René Descartes the starting point of just one true I cannot rationally doubt, for
belief. But Descartes was not doubting is a kind of thinking, so
ergo sum, meaning “I think looking to reach these kinds of to doubt that I am thinking is to
therefore I am.” St. Augustine of conclusions from his First Certainty. be thinking. As Descartes now
Hippo had used a very similar As he explained: “Archimedes knows that he exists and that he
argument in The City of God, when used to demand just one firm and is thinking, then he—and every
he said: “For if I am mistaken, I immovable point in order to shift other meditator—also knows
exist”; meaning that if he did not the entire Earth.” For Descartes, the that he is a thinking thing.
exist, he could not be mistaken. certainty of his own existence gives
Augustine, however, made little him the equivalent; it saves him Descartes makes clear, though,
use of this in his thinking, and from that whirlpool of doubt, gives that this is as far as he can reason
certainly did not reach it in the him a firm foothold, and so allows from the First Certainty. He is
way that Descartes did. him to start on the journey back from certainly not entitled to say that he
skepticism to knowledge. It is crucial is only a thinking thing—a mind—
to his project of enquiry, but it is not as he has no way of knowing what
the foundation of his epistemology. more he might be. He might be a
physical thing that also has the
What is this “I”? ability to think, or he might be
Despite the fact that the First something else, something that he
Certainty’s main function is to has not even conceived yet. The
provide a firm footing for knowledge, point is that at this stage of his
meditations he knows only that ❯❯

The only question that Descartes is definitely DO I HAVE A BODY? AM I THINKING?
able to answer using his method of doubt is whether
he is thinking. He cannot prove the existence of his
body or of the external world.

IS THERE AN OUTSIDE WORLD?

122 RENE DESCARTES

When someone says from the start. One of the main Patrick has the thought “all men
‘I am thinking, therefore arguments against it takes issue are mortal” and Patricia has the
with the very use of the term “I” in thought “Socrates is a man”,
I am’, he recognizes “I am, I exist.” Although Descartes neither can conclude anything.
it as something self-evident cannot be wrong in saying that But if Paula has both thoughts, she
thinking is occurring, how does he can conclude that “Socrates is
by a simple intuition know that there is “a thinker”—a mortal.” Merely having the thoughts
of the mind. single, unified consciousness doing “all men are mortal” and “Socrates
that thinking? What gives him the is a man” floating around is like
René Descartes right to assert the existence of two separate people having them;
anything beyond the thoughts? On in order for reason to be possible
he is a thinking thing; as he puts the other hand, can we make sense we need to make these thoughts
it, he knows only that he is, “in of the notion of thoughts floating relative to one another, to link them
the strict sense only” a thinking around without a thinker? in the right way. It turns out that
thing. Later, in the sixth book of the making thoughts relative to
Meditations, Descartes presents an It is difficult to imagine detached, anything other than a thinker
argument that mind and body are coherent thoughts, and Descartes (for example, to a place or to a
different sorts of thing—that they argues that it is impossible to time) fails to do the job. And since
are distinct substances—but he is conceive of such a state of affairs. reasoning is possible, Descartes
not yet in a position to do so. However, if one were to disagree, can conclude that there is a thinker.
and believe that a world of thoughts
Doubting Descartes with no thinkers is genuinely Some modern philosophers have
This First Certainty has been the possible, Descartes would not be denied that Descartes’ certainty of
target of criticism from many entitled to the belief that he exists, his own existence can do the job he
writers who hold that Descartes’ and would thus fail to reach his requires of it; they argue that “I
approach to skepticism is doomed First Certainty. The existence of exist” has no content, as it merely
thoughts would not give him the refers to its subject but says nothing
solid ground he needed. meaningful or important about it;
it is simply pointing at the subject.
The problem with this notion For this reason nothing can follow
of thoughts floating around with from it, and Descartes’ project fails
no thinker is that reasoning would at the beginning. This seems to
be impossible. In order to reason, miss Descartes’ point; as we have
it is necessary to relate ideas in seen, he does not use the First
a particular way. For example, if

René Descartes René Descartes was born near he was invited to Sweden by
Tours, France, and was educated Queen Christina to discuss
at the Jesuit Collège Royale, in philosophy; he was expected to
La Flèche. Due to ill-health, he was get up very early, much against
allowed to stay in bed until late in his normal practice. He believed
the mornings, and he formed the that this new regime—and the
habit of meditating. From the age Swedish climate—caused him
of 16 he concentrated on studying to contract pneumonia, of which
mathematics, breaking off his he died a year later.
studies for four years to volunteer
as a soldier in Europe’s Thirty Key works
Years War. During this time he
found his philosophical calling, 1637 Discourse on the Method
and after leaving the army, he 1641 Meditations on First
settled first in Paris and then in Philosophy
the Netherlands, where he spent 1644 Principles of Philosophy
most of the rest of his life. In 1649 1662 De Homine Fuguris

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 123

Certainty as a premise from which also clearly true that he did not and to establish a firm, rational
to derive further knowledge—all exist; so it is not true that anything foundation for knowledge. He is
he needs is that there be a self for that thinks exists. also well known for proposing that
him to point to. So even if “I exist” the mind and the body are two
only succeeds in pointing to the We might say that in so far as distinct substances—one material
meditator, then he has an escape Hamlet thought, he thought in the (the body) and the other immaterial
from the whirlpool of doubt. fictional world of a play, but he also (the mind)—which are nonetheless
existed in that fictional world; in so capable of interaction. This famous
An unreal thinker far as he did not exist, he did not distinction, which he explains in
For those who have misunderstood exist in the real world. His “reality” the Sixth Meditation, became
Descartes to have been offering and thinking are linked to the same known as Cartesian dualism.
an argument from the fact of his world. But Descartes’ critics might
thinking to the fact of his existence, respond that that is precisely the However, it is the rigor of
we can point out that the First point: knowing that someone called Descartes’ thought and his rejection
Certainty is a direct intuition, not Hamlet was thinking—and no more of any reliance on authority that are
a logical argument. Why, though, than this—does not assure us that perhaps his most important legacy.
would it be a problem if Descartes this person exists in the real world; The centuries after his death were
had been offering an argument? for that, we should have to know dominated by philosophers who
that he was thinking in the real either developed his ideas or those
As it stands, the apparent world. Knowing that something or who took as their main task the
inference “I am thinking, therefore I someone—like Descartes—is refutation of his thoughts, such as
exist” is missing a major premise; thinking, is not enough to prove Thomas Hobbes, Benedictus
that is, in order for the argument to their reality in this world. Spinoza, and Gottfried Leibniz. ■
work it needs another premise,
such as “anything that is thinking The answer to this dilemma lies The separation of mind and body
exists.” Sometimes an obvious in the first-person nature of the theorized by Descartes leaves open the
premise is not actually stated in an Meditations, and the reasons for following question: since all we can see
argument, in which case it is Descartes’ use of the “I” throughout of ourselves is our bodies, how could
known as a suppressed premise. now becomes clear. Because while we prove that a robot is not conscious?
But some of Descartes’ critics I might be unsure whether Hamlet
complain that this suppressed was thinking, and therefore existed,
premise is not at all obvious. For in a fictional world or the real world,
example, Hamlet, in Shakespeare’s I cannot be unsure about myself.
play, thought a great deal, but it is
Modern philosophy
We ought to enquire In the “Preface to the Reader” of the
as to what sort of Meditations, Descartes accurately
predicted that many readers would
knowledge human reason approach his work in such a way
is capable of attaining, that most would “not bother to grasp
before we set about the proper order of my arguments
acquiring knowledge and the connection between them,
of things in particular. but merely try to carp at individual
René Descartes sentences, as is the fashion.” On
the other hand, he also wrote that
“I do not expect any popular approval,
or indeed any wide audience”, and
in this he was much mistaken. He
is often described as the father of
modern philosophy. He sought to
give philosophy the certainty of
mathematics without recourse to
any kind of dogma or authority,

124

IMAGINATION
DECIDES
EVERYTHING

BLAISE PASCAL (1623–1662)

IN CONTEXT Imagination is a Pascal’s best-known book,
powerful force in Pensées, is not primarily a
BRANCH philosophical work. Rather,
Philosophy of mind human beings. it is a compilation of fragments from
his notes for a projected book on
APPROACH It can override our reason. Christian theology. His ideas were
Voluntarism aimed primarily at what he called
But it can lead either to libertins—ex-Catholics who had
BEFORE truths or falsehoods. left religion as a result of the sort
c.350 BCE Aristotle says that of free thinking encouraged by
“imagination is the process by We may see beauty, justice, or skeptical writers such as Montaigne.
which we say that an image happiness where it does not In one of the longer fragments,
is presented to us,” and that Pascal discusses imagination. He
“the soul never thinks without really exist. offers little or no argument for his
a mental image.” claims, being concerned merely to
Imagination leads set down his thoughts on the matter.
1641 René Descartes claims us astray.
that the philosopher must Pascal’s point is that imagination
train his imagination for the is the most powerful force in human
sake of gaining knowledge. beings, and one of our chief sources
of error. Imagination, he says,
AFTER causes us to trust people despite
1740 In his Treatise of Human what reason tells us. For example,
Nature, David Hume argues because lawyers and doctors dress
that “nothing we imagine is up in special clothes, we tend to
absolutely impossible.” trust them more. Conversely, we
pay less attention to someone who
1787 Immanuel Kant claims looks shabby or odd, even if he is
that we synthesize the talking good sense.
incoherent messages from
our senses into images, and What makes things worse is that,
then into concepts, using though it usually leads to falsehood,
the imagination. imagination occasionally leads to
truth; if it were always false, then we
could use it as a source of certainty
by simply accepting its negation.

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 125

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Michel de Montaigne 108–09 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■
Immanuel Kant 164–71

After presenting the case against In the wider context of a work of According to Pascal, we are
imagination in some detail, Pascal Christian theology, and especially constantly tricked by the imagination
suddenly ends his discussion of it in light of Pascal’s emphasis on the into making the wrong judgments—
by writing: “Imagination decides use of reason to bring people to including judgements about people
everything: it produces beauty, religious belief, we can see that his based on how they are dressed.
justice, and happiness, which is the aim is to show the libertins that
greatest thing in the world.” Out of the life of pleasure that they have of God. Pascal argues that betting
context, it might seem that he is chosen is not what they think it is. that God does not exist risks losing
praising imagination, but we can Although they believe that they a great deal (infinite happiness in
see from what preceded this have chosenthe path of reason, Heaven), while only gaining a little
passage that his intention is very they have in fact been misled by (a finite sense of independence in
different. As imagination usually the power of the imagination. this world)—but betting that God
leads to error, then the beauty, exists risks little while gaining a
justice, and happiness that it Pascal’s Wager great deal. It is more rational, on
produces will usually be false. This view is relevant to one of the this basis, to believe in God. ■
most complete notes in the Pensées,
Man is but a reed, the famous argument known as
the weakest nature; Pascal’s Wager. The wager was
yet he is a thinking reed. designed to give the libertins a
reason to return to the Church, and
Blaise Pascal it is a good example of “voluntarism”,
the idea that belief is a matter of
decision. Pascal accepts that it is
not possible to give good rational
grounds for religious belief, but
tries to offer rational grounds for
wanting to have such beliefs.
These consist of weighing up
the possible profit and loss of
making a bet on the existence

Blaise Pascal Blaise Pascal was born in Clermont- that was later declared heretical),
Ferrand, France. He was the son and then to Christianity proper.
of a government functionary who This led him to abandon his
had a keen interest in science and mathematical and scientific
mathematics and who educated work in favor of religious
Pascal and his two sisters. Pascal writings, including the Pensées.
published his first mathematical In 1660–62 he instituted the
paper at the age of 16, and had world’s first public transport
invented the first digital calculator service, giving all profits to the
by the time he was 18. He also poor, despite suffering from
corresponded with the famous severe ill health from the 1650s
mathematician Pierre Fermat, with until his death in 1662.
whom he laid the foundations of
probability theory. Key works

Pascal underwent two religious 1657 Lettres Provinciales
conversions, first to Jansenism 1670 Pensées
(an approach to Christian teaching

126 IN CONTEXT

GOD IS THE CAUSE BRANCH
OF ALL THINGS, Metaphysics
WHICH ARE IN HIM
APPROACH
BENEDICTUS SPINOZA (1632–1677) Substance monism

BEFORE
c.1190 Jewish philosopher
Moses Maimonides invents
a demythologized version
of religion which later
inspires Spinoza.

16th century Italian scientist
Giordano Bruno develops a
form of pantheism.

1640 René Descartes publishes
his Meditations, another of
Spinoza’s influences.

AFTER
Late 20th century
Philosophers Stuart Hampshire,
Donald Davidson, and Thomas
Nagel all develop approaches
to the philosophy of mind that
have similarities to Spinoza’s
monist thought.

L ike most philosophies of the
17th century, Spinoza’s
philosophical system has the
notion of “substance” at its heart.
This concept can be traced back to
Aristotle, who asked “What is it
about an object that stays the same
when it undergoes change?” Wax,
for example, can melt and change
its shape, size, color, smell, and
texture, and yet still remain “wax”,
prompting the question: what are
we referring to when we speak of
“the wax”? Since it can change in
every way that we can perceive, the
wax must also be something beyond
its perceptible properties, and for
Aristotle this unchanging thing is
the wax’s “substance.” More

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 127

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Moses Maimonides 84–85 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■ Donald Davidson 338

There is only Everything that This substance is
one substance. exists is made of this “God” or “nature.”

one substance.

It provides everything
in our universe with its…

...process of ... its purpose, ... its shape, ... and its matter.
formation,

In these four ways, God
“causes” everything.

generally, substance is anything definition of substance. Furthermore, attributes. He does not specify
that has properties—or that which he argues, since there is only one how many attributes substance
underlies the world of appearance. such substance, there can, in fact, has, but he says that human
be nothing but that substance, and beings, at least, can conceive of
Spinoza employs “substance” in a everything else is in some sense a two—namely, the attribute of
similar way, defining it as that which part of it. Spinoza’s position is extension (physicality) and the
is self-explanatory—or that which known as “substance monism”, attribute of thought (mentality). For
can be understood by knowing its which claims that all things are this reason, Spinoza is also known
nature alone, as opposed to all other ultimately aspects of a single thing, as an “attribute dualist”, and he
things that can be known only by as opposed to “substance dualism”, claims that these two attributes
their relationships with other things. which claims that there are cannot be explained by each other,
For example, the concept “cart” can ultimately two kinds of things in and so must be included in any
only be understood with reference the universe, most commonly complete account of the world. As
to other concepts, such as “motion”, defined as “mind” and “matter.” for substance itself, Spinoza says
“transport”, and so on. Moreover, for that we are right to call it “God” or
Spinoza, there can only be one such Substance as God or nature “nature” (Deus sive natura)—that
substance, for if there were two, For Spinoza, then, substance self-explaining thing which, in
understanding one would entail underlies our experience, but it human form, sees itself under the
understanding its relationship with can also be known by its various attributes of body and mind. ❯❯
the other, which contradicts the

128 BENEDICTUS SPINOZA

All changes, from a change of mood and a mental thing (in so far as it Mind and body
to a change in a candle’s shape, are, is conceived under the attribute are one.
for Spinoza, alterations that occur to of thought). In particular, a human
a single substance that has both mind is a modification of substance Benedictus Spinoza
mental and physical attributes. conceived under the attribute of
thought, and the human brain is that God is the world, and that the
At the level of individual things, the same modification of substance world is God. Pantheism is often
including human beings, Spinoza’s conceived under the attribute of criticized by theists (people who
attribute dualism is intended in extension. In this way, Spinoza believe in God), who argue that
part to deal with the question of avoids any question about the it is little more than atheism by
how minds and bodies interact. interaction between mind and another name. However, Spinoza’s
The things that we experience as body: there is no interaction, only theory is in fact much closer to
individual bodies or minds are in a one-to-one correspondence. panentheism—the view that the
fact modifications of the single world is God, but that God is more
substance as conceived under However, Spinoza’s theory than the world. For in Spinoza’s
one of the attributes. Each commits him to the view that it is system, the world is not a mass of
modification is both a physical not only human beings that are material and mental stuff—rather,
thing (in so far as it is conceived minds as well as bodies, but the world of material things is a
under the attribute of extension) everything else too. Tables, rocks, form of God as conceived under
trees—all of these are modifications the attribute of extension, and the
of the one substance under the world of mental things is that same
attributes of thought and extension. form of God as conceived under the
So, they are all both physical and attribute of thought. Therefore the
mental things, although their
mentality is very simple and they
are not what we should call minds.
This aspect of Spinoza’s theory is
difficult for many people either to
accept or to understand.

The world is God
Spinoza’s theory, which he explains
fully in Ethics, is often referred to
as a form of pantheism—the belief

Benedictus Spinoza Benedictus (or Baruch) Spinoza Spinoza was a modest, intensely
was born in Amsterdam, the moral man who turned down
Netherlands, in 1632. At the age numerous lucrative teaching
of 23 he was excommunicated positions for the sake of his
by the synagogue of Portuguese intellectual freedom. Instead
Jews in Amsterdam, who probably he lived a frugal life in various
wished to distance themselves places in the Netherlands,
from Spinoza’s teachings. Spinoza’s making a living by private
Theological-Political Treatise philosophy teaching and as
was later attacked by Christian a lens grinder. He died from
theologians and banned in tuberculosis in 1677.
1674—a fate that had already
befallen the work of the French Key works
philosopher René Descartes. The
furore caused him to withhold 1670 Theological-Political
publication of his greatest work, Treatise
the Ethics, until after his death. 1677 Ethics

The human mind RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 129
is part of the infinite
According to Spinoza, all objects, whether animal,
intellect of God. vegetable, or mineral, have a mentality. Both their
Benedictus Spinoza bodies and their mentalities are a part of God,
who is greater than all the world’s physical and
mental attributes. God, for Spinoza, is the
“substance” that underlies reality.

Every object in Body and mind
the universe, even are attributes of
a rock, has a body
substance.
and a mind.

one substance or God is more than Substance is God,
the world, but the world itself is in whom all is
entirely substance or God. explained.

However, Spinoza’s God is clearly
different from the God of standard
Judaeo-Christian theology. Not
only is it not a person, it cannot be
regarded as being the creator of
the world in the sense found in the
Book of Genesis. Spinoza’s God
does not exist alone before creation,
and then bring it into existence.

God as the cause an efficient cause, or that which being the cause of all things, he
What can Spinoza mean, then, brings a thing into being (the means that all things find their
when he says that God is the cause sculpting process); and a final cause, explanation in God.
of everything? The one substance or the purpose for which a thing
is “God or nature”—so even if exists (the creation of a work of art, God, therefore, is not what
there is more to God than those the desire for money, and so on). Spinoza calls a “transitive” cause of
modifications of substance that the world—something external that
make up our world, how can the For Aristotle and Spinoza, brings the world into being. Rather,
relationship between God and these together define “cause”, and God is the “immanent” cause of the
nature be causal? provide a complete explanation of a world. This means that God is in
thing—unlike today’s usage, which the world, that the world is in God,
First, we should note that tends to relate to the “efficient” and that the existence and essence
Spinoza, in common with most or “final” causes only. Therefore, of the world are explained by God’s
philosophers before him, uses when Spinoza speaks of God or existence and essence. For Spinoza,
the word “cause” in a much richer substance being “self-caused” he to fully appreciate this fact is to
sense than we do now—a sense means that it is self-explanatory, attain the highest state of freedom
that originates in Aristotle’s rather than that it is simply self- and salvation possible—a state
definition of four types of cause. generating. When he talks of God he calls “blessedness.” ■
These are (using a statue as an
example): a formal cause, or the
relationship between a thing’s
parts (its shape or form); a material
cause, or the matter a thing is made
of (the bronze, marble, and so on);

130 IN CONTEXT

NO MAN’S BRANCH
KNOWLEDGE HERE Epistemology
CAN GO BEYOND
HIS EXPERIENCE APPROACH
Empiricism
JOHN LOCKE (1632–1704)
BEFORE
c.380 BCE In his dialogue,
Meno, Plato argues that we
remember knowledge from
previous lives.

Mid-13th century Thomas
Aquinas puts forward the
principle that “whatever is
in our intellect must have
previously been in the senses.”

AFTER
Late 17th century Gottfried
Leibniz argues that the mind
may seem to be a tabula rasa
at birth, but contains innate,
underlying knowledge, which
experience gradually uncovers.

1966 Noam Chomsky, in
Cartesian Linguistics, sets out
his theory of innate grammar.

J ohn Locke is traditionally
included in the group of
philosophers known as the
British Empiricists, together with
two later philosophers, George
Berkeley and David Hume. The
empiricists are generally thought
to hold the view that all human
knowledge must come directly or
indirectly from the experience of
the world that we acquire through
the use of our senses alone. This
contrasts with the thinking of the
rationalist philosophers, such
as René Descartes, Benedictus
Spinoza, and Gottfried Leibniz,
who hold that in principle, at least,
it is possible to acquire knowledge
solely through the use of reason.

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 131

See also: Plato 50–55 ■ Thomas Aquinas 88–95 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■ Benedictus Spinoza 126–29 ■
Gottfried Leibniz 134–37 ■ George Berkeley 138–41 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■ Noam Chomsky 304–05

Rationalists believe that we are If we attentively consider
born with some ideas and concepts; newborn children, we
shall have little reason
that they are “innate.” to think that they bring
many ideas into
But this is not borne the world with them.
out by the fact that... John Locke

...there are no truths ...there are no universal Understanding, against the theory
that are found in ideas found in people of proposed by the rationalists to
everyone at birth. all cultures at all times. explain how knowledge could be
accessed without experience. This
Everything we is the theory of innate ideas.
know is gained from
The concept that human beings
experience. are born with innate ideas, and that
these can give us knowledge about
In fact, the division between these up of submicroscopic particles, or the nature of the world around us,
two groups is not as clear-cut as corpuscles, which we can have no independently of anything we may
is often assumed. The rationalists direct knowledge of, but which, by experience, dates back to the dawn
all accept that in practice our their very existence, make sense of of philosophy. Plato had developed
knowledge of the world ultimately phenomena that would otherwise a concept, according to which all
stems from our experience, and be difficult or impossible to explain. genuine knowledge is essentially
most notably from scientific enquiry. Corpuscular theory was becoming located within us, but that when
Locke reaches his distinctive views popular in 17th-century scientific we die our souls are reincarnated
concerning the nature of the world thinking and is fundamental to into new bodies and the shock of
by applying a process of reasoning Locke’s view of the physical world. birth causes us to forget it all.
later known as abduction (inference Education is therefore not about
to the best explanation from the Innate ideas learning new facts, but about
available evidence) to the facts of The claim that man’s knowledge “unforgetting”, and the educator
sensory experience. For example, cannot go beyond his experience is not a teacher but a midwife.
Locke sets out to demonstrate that may therefore seem inappropriate,
the best explanation of the world or at least an exaggeration, when However, many later thinkers
as we experience it is corpuscular attributed to Locke. However, countered Plato’s theory, proposing
theory. This is the theory that Locke does argue at some length, that all knowledge cannot be innate
everything in the world is made in his Essay Concerning Human and that only a limited number of
concepts can be. These include the
concept of God and also that of a
perfect geometric structure, such
as an equilateral triangle. This ❯❯

132 JOHN LOCKE

type of knowledge, in their view, our senses. He argues that there is It seems to me a
can be gained without any direct not the slightest empirical evidence near contradiction to
sensory experience, in the way to suggest that the minds of infants say that there are truths
that it is possible to devise a are other than blank at birth, and imprinted on the soul,
mathematical formula by using adds that this is also true of the which it perceives or
nothing more than the powers of minds of the mentally deficient,
reason and logic. René Descartes, stating that “they have not the least understands not.
for example, declares that although apprehension or thought of them.” John Locke
he believes that we all have an idea Locke, therefore, declares that any
of God imprinted in us—like the doctrine supporting the existence somewhere, before the presence
mark that a craftsman makes in of innate ideas must be false. of any sort of mechanism that is
the clay of a pot—this knowledge capable of conceiving them and
of God’s existence can only be Locke also goes on to attack bringing them into consciousness.
brought into our conscious mind the very notion of innate ideas by
through a process of reasoning. arguing that it is incoherent. In The supporters of the existence
order for something to be an idea of innate ideas often also argue
Locke’s objections at all, he states that it has to have that as such ideas are present in
Locke was against the idea that been present at some point in all human beings at birth, they
human beings possess any kind somebody’s mind. But, as Locke must be by nature universal,
of innate knowledge. He takes points out, any idea that claims which means that they are found
the view that the mind at birth to be truly innate must also be in all human societies at all points
is a tabula rasa—a blank tablet or claiming to precede any form of in history. Plato, for example,
a new sheet of paper upon which human experience. Locke accepts claims that everyone potentially
experience writes, in the same that it is true, as Gottfried Leibniz has access to the same basic
way that light can create images states, that an idea may exist so body of knowledge, denying any
on photographic film. According deep in a person’s memory that difference in that respect between
to Locke, we bring nothing to the for a time it is difficult or even men and women, or between
process except the basic human impossible to recall, and so is not slaves and freemen. Similarly,
ability to apply reason to the accessible to the conscious mind. in Locke’s time, the theory was
information that we gather through Innate ideas, on the other hand, frequently put forward that because
are believed to somehow exist innate ideas can only be placed in
us by God, they must be universal,
Locke believed the human mind is Theory as God is not capable of being so
like a blank canvas, or tabula rasa, at unfair as to hand them out only
birth. He states that all our knowledge to a select group of people.
of the world can only come from our Locke counters the argument
experience, conveyed to us by our for universal ideas by once again
senses. We can then rationalize this bringing to our attention that a
knowledge to formulate new ideas. simple examination of the world
around us will readily show that
Experience they do no exist. Even if there
Tabula Rasa were concepts, or ideas, which
absolutely every human being in

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 133

Let us then suppose the Human Understanding. Leibniz
the mind to be white declares that innate ideas are the
one clear way that we can gain
paper, void of all knowledge that is not based upon
characters, without any sensory experience, and that Locke
is wrong to deny their possibility.
ideas; how comes it The debate about whether human
to be furnished? beings can know anything beyond
John Locke what they perceive through their
five basic senses continues.
the world held in common, Locke
argues that we would have no firm Language as innate As the mind is a blank canvas, or
grounds for concluding that they Although Locke may reject the tabula rasa, at birth, Locke believes
were also innate. He declares that doctrine of innate ideas, he does that anybody can be transformed by
it would always be possible to not reject the concept that human a good education, one that encourages
discover other explanations for beings have innate capacities. rational thought and individual talents.
their universality, such as the fact Indeed, the possession of capacities
that they stem from the most basic such as perception and reasoning Locke played an important role in
ways in which a human being are central to his accounts of the questioning how human beings
experiences the world around him, mechanism of human knowledge acquire knowledge, at a time when
which is something that we all and understanding. In the late man’s understanding of the world
must share. 20th century, the American was expanding at an unprecedented
philosophy Noam Chomsky took rate. Earlier philosophers—notably
In 1704, Gottfried Leibniz wrote this idea further when he put the medieval Scholastic thinkers
a rebuttal of Locke’s empiricist forward his theory that there is an such as Thomas Aquinas—had
arguments in his New Essays on innate process of thinking in every concluded that some aspects of
human mind, which is capable reality were beyond the grasp of
of generating a universal “deep the human mind. But Locke took
structure” of language. Chomsky this a stage further. By detailed
believes that regardless of their analysis of man’s mental faculties,
apparent structural differences, he sought to set down the exact
all human languages have been limits of what is knowable. ■
generated from this common basis.

John Locke John Locke was born in 1632, the property. Locke fled England
son of an English country lawyer. twice, as a political exile, but
Thanks to wealthy patrons, he returned in 1688, after the
received a good education, first accession to the throne of
at Westminster School in London, William and Mary. He remained
then at Oxford. He was impressed in England, writing as well as
with the empirical approach to holding various government
science adopted by the pioneering positions, until his death in 1704.
chemist Robert Boyle, and he
both promoted Boyle’s ideas and Key works
assisted in his experimental work.
1689 A Letter Concerning
Though Locke’s empiricist ideas Toleration
are important, it was his political 1690 An Essay Concerning
writing that made him famous. He Human Understanding
proposed a social-contract theory of 1690 Two Treatises of
the legitimacy of government and Government
the idea of natural rights to private

134 IN CONTEXT

THERE ARE TWO BRANCH
KINDS OF TRUTHS: Epistemology
TRUTHS OF
REASONING AND APPROACH
TRUTHS OF FACT Rationalism

GOTTFRIED LEIBNIZ (1646–1716) BEFORE
1340 Nicolaus of Autrecourt
argues that there are no
necessary truths about the
world, only contingent truths.

1600s René Descartes claims
that ideas come to us in three
ways; they can be derived from
experience, drawn from reason,
or known innately (being
created in the mind by God).

AFTER
1748 David Hume explores the
distinction between necessary
and contingent truths.

1927 Alfred North Whitehead
postulates “actual entities”,
similar to Leibniz’s monads,
which reflect the whole
universe in themselves.

E arly modern philosophy
is often presented as being
divided into two schools—
that of the rationalists (including
René Descartes, Benedictus
Spinoza, and Immanuel Kant) and
that of the empiricists (including
John Locke, George Berkeley, and
David Hume). In fact, the various
philosophers did not easily fall into
two clear groups, each being like
and unlike each of the others in
complex and overlapping ways.
The essential difference between
the two schools, however, was
epistemological—that is, they
differed in their opinions about
what we can know, and how we
know what we know. Put simply,

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 135

See also: Nicolaus of Autrecourt 334 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■ David Hume
148–53 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■ Alfred North Whitehead 336

Every thing in the world This notion contains every
has a distinct notion. truth about that thing,
including its connections

to other things.

We can analyze these Gottfried Leibniz
connections through
rational reflection. Gottfried Leibniz was a
German philosopher and
When the analysis is When the analysis is mathematician. He was born
finite, we can reach infinite, we cannot reach the in Leipzig, and after university
final truth through reasoning— he took public service with
the final truth. the Elector of Mainz for five
only through experience. years, during which time he
concentrated mainly on
These are truths These are truths political writings. After a
of reasoning. of fact. period spent travelling, he
took up the post of librarian
the empiricists held that knowledge We know hardly anything to the Duke of Brunswick, in
is derived from experience, while adequately, few things Hanover, and remained there
the rationalists claimed that a priori, and most things until his death. It was during
knowledge can be gained through through experience. this last period of his life that
rational reflection alone. Gottfried Wilhelm he did most of the work on
Leibniz the development of his unique
Leibniz was a rationalist, and philosophical system.
his distinction between truths
of reasoning and truths of fact Leibniz is famous in
marks an interesting twist in the mathematics for his invention
debate between rationalism and of the so-called “infinitesimal
empiricism. His claim, which he calculus” and the argument
makes in most famous work, the that followed this, as both
Monadology, is that in principle Leibniz and Newton claimed
all knowledge can be accessed by the discovery as their own. It
rational reflection. However, due seems clear that they had in
to shortcomings in our rational ❯❯ fact reached it independently,
but Leibniz developed a much
more usable notation which
is still used today.

Key works

1673 A Philosopher’s Creed
1685 Discourse on Metaphysics
1695 The New System
1710 Theodicy
1714 Monadology

136 GOTTFRIED LEIBNIZ

A map of the internet shows the
innumerable connections between
internet users. Leibniz’s theory of
monads suggests that all our minds
are similarly connected.

faculties, human beings must rational reflection alone. Such According to Leibniz, this is how
also rely on experience as a reflection leads to Leibniz’s “truths God created things—in a state of
means of acquiring knowledge. of reasoning.” However, the human “pre-established harmony.”
mind can grasp only a small number
A universe in our minds of such truths (such as those of Leibniz claims that every
To see how Leibniz arrives at this mathematics), and so it has to human mind is a monad, and so
conclusion, we need to understand rely on experience, which yields contains a complete representation
a little of his metaphysics—his “truths of fact.” of the universe. It is therefore
view of how the universe is possible in principle for us to learn
constructed. He holds that every So how is it possible to progress everything that there is to know
part of the world, every individual from knowing that it is snowing, about our world and beyond simply
thing, has a distinct concept or for example, to knowing what will by exploring our own minds.
“notion” associated with it, and that happen tomorrow somewhere on the Simply by analyzing my notion of
every such notion contains within other side of the world? For Leibniz, the star Betelgeuse, for example, I
it everything that is true about the answer lies in the fact that the will eventually be able to determine
itself, including its relations to other universe is composed of individual, the temperature on the surface
things. Because everything in the simple substances called “monads.” of the actual star Betelgeuse.
universe is connected, he argues, Each monad is isolated from other However, in practice, the analysis
it follows that every notion is monads, and each contains a that is required for me reach this
connected to every other notion, complete representation of the information is impossibly
and so it is possible—at least whole universe in its past, complex—Leibniz calls it “infinite”
in principle—to follow these present, and future states. This —and because I cannot complete
connections and to discover truths representation is synchronized it, the only way that I can discover
about the entire universe through between all the monads, so that the temperature of Betelgeuse is by
each one has the same content. measuring it empirically using
astronomical equipment.

Is the temperature of the surface
of Betelgeuse a truth of reasoning
or a truth of fact? It may be true
that I had to resort to empirical

Each singular substance
expresses the whole

universe in its own way.
Gottfried Wilhelm
Leibniz

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 137

methods to discover the answer, of reasoning, which we would have The mechanical calculator was
but had my rational faculties been access to if we could finish our one of Leibniz’s many inventions. Its
better I could also have discovered it rational analysis. But as a truth of creation is a testament to his interest
through rational reflection. Whether reasoning is a necessary truth, in in mathematics and logic—fields in
it is a truth of reasoning or a truth what way is it impossible for the which he was a great innovator.
of fact, therefore, seems to depend temperature on Betelgeuse to be
on how I arrive at the answer—but 2,401 Kelvin rather than 2,400 distinction between truths whose
is this what Leibniz is claiming? Kelvin? Certainly not impossible necessity we can discover, and
in the sense that the proposition truths whose necessity only God
Necessary truths 2 + 2 = 5 is impossible, for the latter can see. We know (if we accept
The trouble for Leibniz is that he is simply a logical contradiction. Leibniz’s theory) that the future of
holds that truths of reasoning are the world is set by an omniscient
“necessary”, meaning that it is Likewise, if we follow Leibniz and benevolent god, who therefore
impossible to contradict them, and separate neccesary and has created the best of all possible
while truths of fact are “contingent”; contingent truths, we end up with worlds. But we call the future
they can be denied without logical the following problem: I can contingent, or undetermined,
contradiction. A mathematical discover Pythagoras’s theorem because as limited human beings
truth is a necessary truth, because simply by reflecting on the idea of we cannot see its content.
denying its conclusions contradicts triangles, so Pythagoras’s theorem
the meanings of its own terms. must be a truth of reasoning. But Leibniz’s legacy
But the proposition “it is raining Betelgeuse’s temperature and In spite of the difficulties inherent
in Spain” is contingent, because Pythagoras’s theorem are both just in Leibniz’s theory, his ideas went
denying it does not involve a as true, and just as much part of on to shape the work of numerous
contradiction in terms—although the monad that is my mind—so philosophers, including David Hume
it may still be factually incorrect. why should one be considered and Immanuel Kant. Kant refined
contingent and the other necessary? Leibniz’s truths of reasoning and
Leibniz’s distinction between truths of fact into the distinction
truths of reasoning and truths of Moreover, Leibniz tells us that between “analytic” and “synthetic”
fact is not simply an epistemological whereas no-one can reach the end of statements—a division that has
one (about the limits of knowledge), an infinite analysis, God can grasp remained central to European
but also a metaphysical one (about the whole universe at once, and so philosophy ever since.
the nature of the world), and it is for him all truths are neccessary
not clear that his arguments truths. The difference between a Liebniz’s theory of monads
support his metaphysical claim. truth of reasoning and a truth of fact, fared less well, and was criticized
Leibniz’s theory of monads seems therefore, does seem to be a matter for its metaphysical extravagance.
to suggest that all truths are truths of how one comes to know it—and In the 20th century, however, the
in that case it is difficult to see why idea was rediscovered by scientists
God understands the former should always be seen who were intrigued by Leibniz’s
everything through eternal to be necessarily true, while the description of space and time as
latter may or may not be true. a system of relationships, rather
truth, since he does not than the absolutes of traditional
need experience. An uncertain future Newtonian physics. ■
In setting out a scheme in which an
Gottfried Wilhelm omnipotent, omniscient God creates
Leibniz the universe, Leibniz inevitably
faces the problem of accounting for
the notion of freedom of will. How
can I choose to act in a certain way
if God already knows how I am
going to act? But the problem runs
deeper—there seems to be no room
for genuine contingency at all.
Leibniz’s theory only allows for a

138 IN CONTEXT

TO BE IS TO BRANCH
BE PERCEIVED Metaphysics

GEORGE BERKELEY (1685–1753) APPROACH
Idealism

BEFORE
c.380 BCE In The Republic,
Plato presents his theory of
Forms, which states that the
world of our experience is an
imperfect shadow of reality.

AFTER
1781 Immanuel Kant develops
Berkeley’s theory into
“transcendental idealism”,
according to which the
world that we experience
is only appearance.

1807 Georg Hegel replaces
Kant’s idealism with “absolute
idealism”—the theory that
absolute reality is Spirit.

1982 In his book The Case
for Idealism, the British
philosopher John Foster
argues for a version of
Berkeley’s idealism.

L ike John Locke before him,
George Berkeley was an
empiricist, meaning that
he saw experience as the primary
source of knowledge. This view,
which can be traced back to
Aristotle, stands in contrast to the
rationalist view that, in principle, all
knowledge can be gained through
rational reflection alone. Berkeley
shared the same assumptions as
Locke, but reached very different
conclusions. According to Berkeley,
Locke’s empiricism was moderate;
it still allowed for the existence of
a world independent of the senses,
and followed René Descartes in

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 139

See also: Plato 50–55 ■ Aristotle 56–63 ■ René Descartes 116–23 ■
John Locke 130–33 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■ Georg Hegel 178–85

from perception. What we perceive
are ideas, not things

in themselves.

So the world A thing in George Berkeley
consists only itself must lie
outside experience. George Berkeley was born and
of ideas... brought up at Dysart Castle,
near the town of Kilkenny,
... and minds that A thing only exists in Ireland. He was educated first
perceive those ideas. so far as it perceives at Kilkenny College, then at
Trinity College, Dublin. In
or is perceived. 1707 he was elected a Fellow
of Trinity, and was ordained
seeing humans as being made There is no an Anglican priest. In 1714,
up of two distinct substances, such thing as having written all his major
namely mind and body. what philosophers call philosophical works, he left
material substance. Ireland to travel around
Berkeley’s empiricism, on the George Berkeley Europe, spending most
other hand, was far more extreme, of his time in London.
and led him to a position known
as “immaterialist idealism.” This When he returned to
means that he was a monist, Ireland he became Dean of
believing that there is only one Derry. His main concern,
kind of substance in the universe, however, had become a
and an idealist, believing that project to found a seminary
this single substance is mind, college in Bermuda. In 1728
or thought, rather than matter. he sailed to Newport, Rhode
Island, with his wife, Anne
Berkeley’s position is often Foster, and spent three years
summarized by the Latin phrase trying to raise money for the
esse est percipi (“to be is to be seminary. In 1731, when it
perceived”), but it is perhaps ❯❯ became clear that funds were
not forthcoming, he returned
to London. Three years later
he became Bishop of Cloyne,
Dublin, where he lived for
the rest of his life.

Key works

1710 Treatise Concerning the
Principles of Human Knowledge
1713 Three Dialogues Between
Hylas and Philonous

140 GEORGE BERKELEY

If there were An idea can be like nothing mistake it for a physical thing itself.
external bodies, it is but an idea; a color or Ideas, then, can only resemble
impossible we should other ideas. And as our only
ever come to know it. figure can be like nothing experience of the world comes
George Berkeley but another color or figure. through our ideas, any claim that
we can even understand the notion
George Berkeley of “physical things” is mistaken.
What we are really understanding
are mental things. The world is
constructed purely of thought, and
whatever is not itself perceiving,
exists only as one of our perceptions.

better represented by esse est aut Berkeley has two main objections to The cause of perception
perciperi aut percipi (“to be is to this view. First, he argues that our If things that are not perceivers
perceive or to be perceived”). For understanding of causality (the fact only exist in so far as they are
according to Berkeley, the world that certain events cause other perceived, however, this seems to
consists only of perceiving minds events) is based entirely on our mean that when I leave the room,
and their ideas. This is not to say experience of our own volitions (the my desk, computer, books, and so
that he denies the existence of way we cause events to happen on all cease to exist, for they are no
the external world, or claims that through the action of our wills). longer being perceived. Berkeley’s
it is in any way different from what His point is not simply that it is response to this is that nothing is
we perceive. His claim is rather wrong for us to project our own ever unperceived, for when I am
that all knowledge must come experience of volitional action onto not in my room, it is still perceived
from experience, and that all we the world—which we do when we by God. His theory, therefore, not
ever have access to are our say that the world causes us to only depends on the existence
perceptions. And since these have ideas about the world. His of God, but of a particular type of
perceptions are simply “ideas” point is that there is in fact no God—one who is constantly
(or mental representations), we such thing as a “physical cause”, involved in the world.
have no grounds for believing that because there is no such thing as
anything exists other than ideas a physical world beyond the world For Berkeley, God’s involvement
and the perceivers of ideas. of ideas that could possibly be the in the world runs deeper than this.
cause of our ideas. The only type As we have seen, he claims that
Causation and volition of cause that there is in the world, there are no physical causes, but
Berkeley’s target was Descartes’ according to Berkeley, is precisely
view of the world as elaborated the volitional kind of cause that is Optical illusions are impossible, for
by Locke and the scientist Robert the exercise of the will. Berkeley, since an object is always as
Boyle. In this view, the physical it appears to be. A straw submerged
world is made up of a vast number Berkeley’s second objection is in water, for example, really is bent,
of physical particles, or “corpuscles”, that because ideas are mental and a magnified object really is larger.
whose nature and interactions give entities, they cannot resemble
rise to the world as we understand physical entities, because the two
it. More controversially, for Berkeley, types of thing have completely
this view also maintains that the different properties. A painting or a
world causes the perceptual photograph can resemble a physical
ideas we have of it by the way object because it is itself a physical
it interacts with our senses. thing, but to think of an idea as
resembling a physical object is to

RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 141

only “volitions”, or acts of will, and Can a tree fall over if there is nobody possibility that the only thing I
it follows that only an act of will can present to observe it? Objects only exist can be certain of existing—or
produce the ideas that we have while they are perceived, according that may in fact exist—is myself.
about the world. However, I am not to Berkeley. However, the tree
in control of my experience of the can fall over—because the One possible solution to
world, and cannot choose what I tree, and the rest of the solipsism runs as follows: since I
experience—the world simply world, is always can cause changes in the world,
presents itself to me the way it does, perceived by God. such as raising my own hand, and
whether I like it or not. Therefore, since I notice similar changes in
the volitions that cause my ideas the oar cannot be both straight and the bodies of other people, I can
about the world are not mine; they bent at the same time, there must infer that those bodies are also
are God’s. So for Berkeley, God not in fact be two oars—one that I changed by a “consciousness”
only creates us as perceivers, he is see and one that I feel. Even more inside them. The problem for
the cause and constant generator problematic for Berkeley, however, Berkeley, though, is that there is no
of all our perceptions. This raises is the fact that two different people “real” hand being lifted—the most
a number of questions, the most seeing the same oar must in fact be a person can do is be the cause of
urgent being: how is it that we seeing two different oars, for there the idea of his own hand rising—
sometimes perceive things is no single, “real” oar “out there” and only their idea, not another
incorrectly? Why would God that their perceptions converge on. person’s. I, in other words, must
want to deceive us? still rely on God to supply me with
The problem of solipsism my idea of another person’s hand
Berkeley tries to answer this An inescapable fact of Berkeley’s rising. Far from supplying us with
question by claiming that our system, therefore, seems to be that empirical certainty, therefore,
perceptions are never, in fact, in we never perceive the same things. Berkeley leaves us depending
error, and that where we go wrong is Each of us is locked in his own for our knowledge of the world,
in the judgements we make about world, cut off from the worlds of and of the existence of other
what we perceive. For example, if other people. The fact that God has minds, upon our faith in a God
an oar half-submerged in water an idea of an oar cannot help us that would never deceive us. ■
looks bent to me, then it really is here, for that is a third idea, and
bent—where I go wrong is thinking therefore a third oar. God caused
that it only appears to be bent. my idea and your idea, but unless
we share a single mind with each
However, what happens if I reach other and with God, there are still
into the water and feel the oar? It three different ideas, so there are
certainly feels straight. And since three different oars. This leads us
to the problem of solipsism—the
All the choir of heaven and
furniture of earth—in a word,

all those bodies which
compose the frame of the

world—have not any
subsistence without a mind.

George Berkeley

THE AGE

REVOLU

1750–1900

OF

TION

144 INTRODUCTION

Volume one of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s The American Immanuel Kant
Denis Diderot’s groundbreaking political Declaration of publishes his Critique
work, The Social Contract, Independence
Encyclopédie is published. of Pure Reason.
is published. is signed.

1751 1762 1776 1781
1759 1763 1780 1789

Voltaire publishes Candide, The Treaty of Paris Jeremy Bentham develops The storming of
a novel that satirizes Liebniz’s makes Britain the the theory of utilitarianism the Bastille in Paris
notion that “all is for the best in
the best of all possible worlds.” main colonial power in his Introduction to the marks the start
in North America. Principles of Morals and of the French
Legislation, eventually Revolution.

published in 1789.

D uring the Renaissance, growing urban middle-class with The situation in France, however,
Europe had evolved into unprecedented prosperity. The was less stable. The rationalism
a collection of separate richest nations, such as Britain, of René Descartes gave way to a
nation states, having previously France, Spain, Portugal, and the generation of philosophes, radical
been a continent unified under the Netherlands, established colonies political philosophers who were to
control of the Church. As power and empires around the world. popularize the new scientific way
devolved to separate countries, of thinking. They included the
distinctive national cultures formed, France and Britain literary satirist Voltaire and the
which were most obvious in arts Philosophy increasingly focused on encyclopedist Denis Diderot, but
and literature, but could also be social and political issues, also along the most revolutionary was Jean-
seen in the philosophical styles that national lines. In Britain, where a Jacques Rousseau. His vision of a
emerged during the 17th century. revolution had already come and society governed on the principles
gone, empiricism reached a peak of liberté, egalité, and fraternité
During the Age of Reason there in the works of David Hume, while (liberty, equality, and fraternity)
was a very clear difference between the new utilitarianism dominated provided the battle cry of the
the rationalism of continental political philosophy. This evolved French Revolution in 1789, and has
Europe and the empiricism of alongside the Industrial Revolution inspired radical thinkers ever since.
British philosophers, and in the that had started in the 1730s, as Rousseau believed that civilization
18th century philosophy continued thinkers such as John Stuart Mill was a corrupting influence on
to center on France and Britain, as refined the utilitarianism of Jeremy people, who are instinctively good,
the Enlightenment period unfolded. Bentham and helped to establish and it was this part of his thinking
Old values and feudal systems both a liberal democracy and a set the tone for Romanticism, the
crumbled as the new nations framework for modern civil rights. movement that followed.
founded on trade gave rise to a

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 145

Napoleon Søren Kierkegaard Charles Darwin European powers
Bonaparte writes Either/Or and publishes the Origin of begin large-scale
proclaims himself Fear and Trembling. Species, explaining his colonization of the
Emperor of France. African continent.
theory of evolution.

1802 1843–46 1859 188OS

1807 1848 1861 1890

Georg Hegel publishes Karl Marx publishes his John Stuart Mill The leading
Phenomenology of Spirit. Communist Manifesto. publishes pragmatist
William James
Revolutionary movements Utilitarianism. publishes The
sweep across Europe. Principles of
Psychology.

In the Romantic period, European than Hume and Rousseau, Kant writing the Communist Manifesto
literature, painting, and music belonged to the next generation: with Friedrich Engels, he wrote Das
became preoccupied with an his major philosophical works were Kapital, arguably one of the most
idealized view of nature, in marked written after their deaths, and his influential philosophical works of all
contrast to the sophisticated urban new explanation of the universe time. Within decades of his death,
elegance of the Enlightenment. and our knowledge of it managed countries across the world had set
Perhaps the key difference was the to integrate the approaches of up revolutionary states on the
way in which the Romantics valued rationalism and empiricism in a way principles that he had proposed.
feeling and intuition above reason. more suited both to Romanticism
The movement took hold throughout and to Germanic culture. Meanwhile in the US, which
Europe, continuing until the end of had overthrown British colonial rule
the 19th century. Kant’s followers included Fichte, and established a republic based
Schelling, and Hegel, who together on Enlightenment values, an
German Idealism became known as the German American culture independent
German philosophy came to Idealists, but also Schopenhauer, of its European roots began to
dominate the 19th century, largely whose idiosyncratic interpretation develop. At first Romantic, by the
due to the work of Immanuel Kant. of Kant’s philosophy incorporated end of the 19th century it had
His idealist philosophy, which ideas from Eastern philosophy. produced a homegrown strand
claimed that we can never know of philosophy, pragmatism, which
anything about things that exist Among the followers of Hegel’s examines the nature of truth.
beyond our selves, radically altered rigid Idealism was Karl Marx, who This was in keeping with the
the course of philosophical thought. brilliantly brought together German country’s democratic roots and
Although only a few years younger philosophical methods, French well suited to the culture of
revolutionary political philosophy, the new century. ■
and British economic theory. After

146

DOUBT IS NOT A
PLEASANT CONDITION,
BUT CERTAINTY
IS ABSURD

VOLTAIRE (1694–1778)

IN CONTEXT V oltaire was a French of what, why, and how things
intellectual who lived in existed, but both scientists and
BRANCH the Age of Enlightenment. philosophers had begun to
Epistemology This period was characterized by demonstrate different approaches
an intense questioning of the world to establishing the truth. In 1690
APPROACH and how people live in it. European the philosopher John Locke had
Scepticism philosophers and writers turned argued that no ideas were innate
their attention to the acknowledged (known at birth), and that all ideas
BEFORE authorities—such as the Church arise from experience alone. His
350 BCE Aristotle makes and state—to question their validity argument was given further weight
the first reference to a child’s and their ideas, while also searching by scientist Isaac Newton whose
mind as a “blank slate”, for new perspectives. Until the 17th experiments provided new ways of
which later became known century, Europeans had largely discovering truths about the world.
as a tabula rasa. accepted the Church’s explanations It was against this background of

1690S John Locke argues that Every fact and theory We are not born with
sense experience allows both in history has been ideas and concepts
children and adults to acquire revised at some point. already in our heads.
reliable knowledge about the
external world. Every idea and theory
can be challenged.
AFTER
1859 John Stuart Mill argues Doubt is not a
against assuming our own pleasant condition, but
infallibility in On Liberty.
certainty is absurd.
1900S Hans-Georg Gadamer
and the postmodernists apply
sceptical reasoning to all
forms of knowledge, even that
gained through empirical
(sense-based) information.

THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 147

See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■ John Stuart Mill 190–93 ■
Hans-Georg Gadamer 260–61 ■ Karl Popper 262–65

Scientific experiments during the
Age of Enlightenment seemed to
Voltaire to lead the way toward a
better world, based on empirical
evidence and unabashed curiosity.

rebellion against the accepted only logical standpoint. Given that for yourself. But Voltaire believes
traditions that Voltaire pronounced endless disagreement is therefore it is vitally important to doubt
that certainty is absurd. inevitable, Voltaire says that it is every “fact” and to challenge all
important to develop a system, such authority. He holds that government
Voltaire refutes the idea of as science, to establish agreement. should be limited but speech
certainty in two ways. First, he uncensored, and that science and
points out that apart from a few In claiming that certainty is education lead to material and
necessary truths of mathematics more pleasant than doubt, Voltaire moral progress. These were
and logic, nearly every fact and hints at how much easier it is fundamental ideals of both the
theory in history has been revised simply to accept authoritative Enlightenment and the French
at some point in time. So what statements—such as those issued Revolution, which took place
appears to be “fact” is actually little by the monarchy or Church—than 11 years after Voltaire’s death. ■
more than a working hypothesis. it is to challenge them and think
Second, he agrees with Locke that
there is no such thing as an innate
idea, and points out that ideas we
seem to know as true from birth
may be only cultural, as these
change from country to country.

Revolutionary doubt
Voltaire does not assert that there
are no absolute truths, but he sees
no means of reaching them. For
this reason he thinks doubt is the

Voltaire Voltaire was the pseudonym of wealthy through speculation,
the French writer and thinker, and was thereafter able to
François Marie Arouet. He was devote himself to writing. He
born into a middle-class family in had several long and scandalous
Paris, and was the youngest of affairs, and travelled widely
three children. He studied law throughout Europe. In later life
at university, but always preferred Voltaire campaigned vigorously
writing, and by 1715 was famous for legal reform and against
as a great literary wit. His satirical religious intolerance, in France
writing often landed him in trouble: and further afield.
he was imprisoned several times
for insulting nobility, and was Key works
once exiled from France. This led
to a stay in England, where he fell 1733 Philosophical Letters
under the influence of English 1734 Treatise on Metaphysics
philosophy and science. After 1759 Candide
returning to France he became 1764 Philosophical Dictionary

CUSTOM

LIFEIS THE GREAT GUIDE OF HUMAN

DAVID HUME (1711–1776)