In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 487 61oign6 de Locke, qui a fait entrer les math6matiques dans la logique, il est leur successeur attitr6. II a 6pous6 une doctrine pacifiste encore plus imp6rative que celle de Voltaire. N'a-t-il pas lui aussi cherch6 a cultiver son jardin pour en faire un paradis terrestre, et ce n'est certes pas sa faute ni celle de la raison humaine sice paradis s'estompe darts un avenir toujours plus (...) 61oign6 pour n'~tre en d6finitive qu'un mirage. P. Gay qui est ~t sa fa~on un bon disciple de Locke est un pragmatiste plus qu'un rationaliste. Le programme des philosophes n'Stait pas seulement raisonnable, il ~tait pratique. MSme si ceux-ci se sonl: paffois montr6s, ridicules pour avoir m~connu la grande part de l'irrationnel daus l'esprit humain, ils ont du moins le m~rite d'avoir fair appel au bon sens de la collectivit6, ce bon sens qui fondait route la m6thode de Descartes. Pour P. Gay, comme pour les hommes du xvm e sidle, le philosophe est avant tout le sage et le savant, l'homme de bien et le citoyen, tel qu'il est dit daus l'Encyclopddie. C'est le "militaire phflosophe" dont l'auteur est inconnu, le "philosophe ignorant" de Voltaire, le "philosophe sans le savoir" de Sedaine. Une nouvelle conception de l'homme se fait jour, celle d'un 8tre ~ la lois rationnel et sensible. Par derriere de nombreux avatars se retrouve une philosophic g6n~rale commune: celle de Locke et de Condillac, de Hume, d'Helv6tius et de Diderot, celle-l~t m6me qu'E. C.assirer a su mettre en lumi~re en insistant sur son c6t6 formel, et que le philosophe sovi6tique J. Luppol a quelque peu fauss6e par une interpr6tation marxiste et par trop dogrnatique de l'histoire. Elle s'exprime clairement dans le Discours pr~lirninaire de d'Alembert. Le sensationnalisme a promu l'id~e de la souverainet~ de l'esprit critique et par l~t m~me a r6pudi6 la toute-puissance de la Raison. La nouvelle m6thode pr6conis ~e permet une dialectique nouvelle, qui est pr~cis6ment celle de l'homme moderne. EUe entraine une conception diff6rente du monde et de l'homme, une interpretation nouvelle de leurs rapports. La psychologie est amen~e ~ faire ses premiers pas en tant que science; mais c'est une analyse impitoyable du moi profond en marge d'une exploration de la vie sociale et du monde ext~rieur qui a fray6 la voie ~t la modernitY, et nous a donn~ le sentiment de notre libertY. C'est ainsi qu'il convient de faire entrer le Rousseau des Confessions aussi bien que du Contrat social dans la grande famille d~sunie qui fait le sujet du livre de P. Gay. Pour nous, en nous pla~ant ~t un point de rue quelque peu different de celui de notre auteur, et tout en reconnaissant avec lui que le dix-huiti~me si~cle a port~ une atteinte mortelle ~ la m~taphysique, nous croyons pouvoir dire que le dix-huiti~me si~cle n'est pas tant le si~cle qui a reni~ Dieu, mais le si~cle qui s'en est fait une conception plus moderne en le repoussant darts un pass~ lointain et t~n~breux ou en le situant, non sans ivresse, darts un avenir tr~s incertain. R. NIKLAUS Exeter, England La Filosofia Politica di Schelling. By Claudio Cesa. (Bari, Laterza, 1969. Pp. 252. n.p.) Was Schelling an original political philosopher? This does not seem to be the opinion of the author of this very careful research, which is beyond any doubt the 488 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY most extensive study of this aspect of Schelling's thought, at least until 1806. However, even if Schelling was not, as it is frequently stated, indifferent to the problems and the vicissitudes of politics, his theoretical thinking on this subject never went beyond temporary systematizations, to be given up, or modified, after a while. The author shows how Schelling, especially in this fieM, was influenced either by his environment in general, or by some personalities he happened to contact: first... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.4 (2003) 561-562 [Access article in PDF] Gianni Paganini, Miguel Benítez, and James Dybikowski, editors. Scepticisme, Clandestinité et Libre Pensée. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2002. Pp. 382. Cloth, €60.00. This book consists of papers from two Tables rondes held in Dublin in 1999 on the occasion of the Tenth International Congress on the Enlightenment. The contributors are: Paganini, Benítez, Dybikowski, Alan Charles Kors, Winfried (...) Schröder, José R. Maia Neto, Adam Sutcliffe, Justin Champion, Antony McKenna, Lorenzo Bianchi, Christine Berkvens-Stevelinck, Pierre Lurbe, Stephen David Snobelen, Nigel Aston, and Stuart Brown. There is remarkably little overlap among the papers and Paganini has clearly insisted on very [End Page 561] high standards. Because of space limitations, I shall focus on several of the general themes which run through the book rather than on individual contributions.Despite the phenomenal success Richard Popkin and collaborators like the late Charles B. Schmitt, Giorgio Tonelli, and Ezequiel de Olaso have had in documenting the amazing impact of skepticism in the Renaissance and in the years up to the Enlightenment, this volume demonstrates that skepticism, that many-faceted force, continued throughout the eighteenth-century Enlightenment. After Bayle, and the application of his special forms of skepticism to theological topics—forms which were often employed, contrary to Bayle's probable intentions, in defense of atheism—skepticism went "underground." A large variety of literature was circulated in manuscript form, the clandestine literature of the period. The lesson which this conference celebrates is that skepticism did not cease being a major cultural force. Thus there is, thanks to the philosophical dimension of the clandestine literature in the eighteenth century, a transition from Christian rationalism to an anti-Christian rationalism.Major figures of the Enlightenment were, of course, well-acquainted with skepticism, e.g., Berkeley, Voltaire, Hume, Crousaz, Condillac, Reid, and Kant. Not surprisingly, the major topics discussed in these papers center around skepticism, fideism and atheism, proofs for the existence of God, and the status of the "preambles" to the faith. These all receive careful attention. The tension between the arguments for Christian Pyrrhonism versus anti-Christian rationalism runs through many of these papers. And of course Bayle's points of view on both sides of the Christian debate appear in much of the clandestine literature. The matter of the immortality of the soul is carefully discussed. What is the status of this doctrine? Is it a question of Church dogma or is it another belief to be discarded in the light of reason?The connection perceived to hold between atheism and political legitimacy are explored in several papers. In the seventeenth century, Locke would exclude atheists from the body politic, in part because they were unable to truthfully swear an oath. Atheists were perceived as a danger for many eighteenth-century figures and the political need to suppress atheism was widely understood and accepted by those in the various religious establishments. Bayle's two-century-old attempt to break the putative logical tie between morality and religion failed in his own day, and despite the efforts of the authors of clandestine philosophical literature, the intimate link Bayle tried to break seems to be stronger than ever in much of the world today. It is interesting that the United States is virtually the only industrial and democratic society in which atheists are virtually precluded from being political candidates in federal, and probably most local, elections. Among other things, the papers in this volume help one to understand just how difficult breaking free from theological constraints in the interest of political freedom has proved to be. Harry McFarland Bracken Arizona State University, Tempe... (shrink)

Conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists have been accused of a great many sins, but are the conspiracy theories conspiracy theorists believe epistemically problematic? Well, according to some recent work, yes, they are. Yet a number of other philosophers like Brian L. Keeley, Charles Pigden, Kurtis Hagen, Lee Basham, and the like have argued ‘No!’ I will argue that there are features of certain conspiracy theories which license suspicion of such theories. I will also argue that these features only license a (...) limited suspicion of these conspiracy theories, and thus we need to be careful about generalising from such suspicions to a view of the warrant of conspiracy theories more generally. To understand why, we need to get to the bottom of what exactly makes us suspicious of certain conspiracy theories, and how being suspicious of a conspiracy theory does not always tell us anything about how likely the theory in question is to be false. (shrink)

This volume offers the first-ever complete English translation of Leibniz’s Dissertatio De Arte Combinatoria together with a critical edition of the original Latin text on fa...

In this paper I both summarise the recent volume "Taking Conspiracy Theories Seriously" (Rowman and Littlefield, 2018) and argue as to why we should investigate conspiracy theories rather than assume they are false or irrational by definition.

Basham and Dentith argue that the danger of condemning both conspiracy theorists and their conspiracy theories in a democracy has grave consequences. They argue that we should encourage research into public concerns about influential institutions, especially in cases where a conspiracy has been alleged. Rather than dismiss conspiracy theorising, we should, encourage the politically crucial, historically proven gift of watchfulness in the citizen, and its sometimes necessary, proper and correct expression, conspiracy theory.

M. R. Ayers; V*—Some Thoughts, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 73, Issue 1, 1 June 1973, Pages 69–86, https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/73.1.