WHAT VALUES DID DESCARTES DEFEND IN HIS DISPUTE WITH VOETIUS?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22394/1996-0522-2024-4-70-79Keywords:
политические и моральные ценности, Voetius, (political) authority, passions, political and moral valuesAbstract
For the first time in Russian philosophy, an attempt is made to explicate Descartes’ political and moral values from his treatise “Epistola ad Voetium” (1643), which has not been translated into Russian. In modern Russian philosophy, this work is considered theological, since Descartes himself admitted that the reason that prompted him to write “Epistola ad Voetium” was a theological dispute with Gisbert Voetius (1589–1676). When interpreting Descartes’ political and moral values, the author takes into account not only the discursive context, but also the historical background. This approach is partly based on the method of the Cambridge School of Intellectual History as a heuristic tool for analyzing the author’s intent. Descartes’ political values become obvious when Descartes exposes Voetius’s false scholarship, destroys his political and moral authority, and specifies the conditions for the formation of a genuine (political) authority for a public figure: a special type of scholarship — eruditio, and special personal characteristics — humility and free will. The paper shows Descartes’ moral values in development (J. Rodis-Lewis’ approach). A comparative analysis of the Cartesian treatises “Epistola ad Voetium” (1643) and “The Passions of the Soul” (1649) allows us to reveal the reasons for Descartes’ replacement of the concept of “magnanimity” in “Epistola ad Voetium” with the concept of “generosity” in “The Passions of the Soul”. The author of the article is convinced that the transition from listing Voetius’s actions to the assertion that personal and social interactions between people are determined by emotions (passions) allows Descartes to discover many dimensions of the philosophical analysis of power.Downloads
References
1. Асмус, В. Ф. Декарт / В. Ф. Асмус. — М. : Наука, 1956. — 372 с.
2. Бубнов, Е. С. Радикальное сомнение как феномен религиозного сознания в творчестве Рене Декарта / Е. С. Бубнов // Омский научный
вестник. — 2012. — № 4(111). — С. 148-151. — EDN PDVDCP.
3. Гайденко, П. П. История новоевропейской философии в ее связи с наукой / П. П. Гайденко. — М. : Университетская книга, 2000. — 456 с.
4. Игнатова, Н. Ю. Спор Воэция и Декарта о соотношении теологии и философии / Н. Ю. Игнатова // Вестник Вятского государственного университета. — 2023. — № 4 (150). — С. 7-14. — EDN HGPVSY.
5. Декарт, Р. Соч.: в 2 тт. — М. : Политиздат, 1989–1994.
6. Кротов, А. А. Политические идеи картезианской школы / А. А. Кротов // Философия и общество. — 2010. — № 1(57). — С. 156–166. — EDN MBCWWZ.
7. Мамардашвили, М. Картезианские размышления / М. Мамардашвили. — М. : Прогресс. Культура, 1993. — 372 с.
8. Сартр, Ж. П. Картезианская свобода / Ж. П. Сартр // Логос. — 1996. — № 8. — С. 17–31.
9. Фокин, С. Цена истины: взаимность, дар и щедрость в философии Рене Декарта / С. Фокин // Логос. — 2019. — Т. 29, № 6 (133). — С. 147–170. — DOI 10.22394/0869-5377-2019-6-147-168. — EDN
QWGUBX.
10. Goudriaan, A. Descartes, Cartesianism, and Early Modern Theology / A. Goudriaan // The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800
/ ed. by U. L. Lehner, R. A. Muller, A. G. Roeber. — Oxford, 2016. — Р. 533–549. — DOI 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199937943.013.37.
11. Descartes, R. Œuvres de Descartes / eds. C. Adam, Р. Tannery. — 2nd ed. — Paris: J. Vrin. — 1964–1974, 11 vols.
12. Kambouchner, D. Geneviève Rodis-Lewis et la sagesse cartésienne / D.Kambouchner // Revue philosophique de la France et de l’étranger. —
2007. Vol. 132 (3). — P. 357–372. — DOI 10.3917/rphi.073.0357.
13. Kaposi, D. Indifférence et liberté humaine chez Descartes / D. Kaposi // Revue de métaphysique et de morale. — 2004. — Vol 1 (41). — P. 73–99. — DOI 10.3917/rmm.041.0073.
14. Rorty, A. Descartes on Thinking with the Body / A. Rorty // Descartes / ed. by J. Cottingham. — Cambridge, 1992. — Р. 371–392. — DOI 10.1017/
CCOL0521366232.013.
15. Rorty, A. The Functional Logic of Cartesian Passions / A. Rorty // Emotional Minds: The Passions and the Limits of Pure Enquiry in Early Modern Philosophy / ed. by S. Ebbersmeyer. — Berlin, 2012. — Р. 3–18. — DOI 10.1515/9783110260922.3.
16. Rodis-Lewis, G. La morale de Descartes / G. Rodis-Lewis. — Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1957. — 132 р.
17. Van Ruler, J. A. The Crisis of Causality: Voetius and Descartes on God, Nature and Change / J. A. Van Ruler. — Leiden, 1995. — 353 р. — DOI
10.1163/9789004247208.
18. Verbeek, T. Generosity / T. Verbeek // Emotional Minds: The Passions and the Limits of Pure Enquiry in Early Modern Philosophy / ed. by
S. Ebbersmeyer. — Berlin, 2012. — Р. 19–31. — DOI
10.1515/9783110260922.19.
19. Verbeek, T. Descartes and the Dutch: Early Reactions to Cartesian Philosophy, 1637–1650 / T. Verbeek. — Carbondale, IL : Southern Illinois
University Press. 1992. — 332 p.
20. Verbeek, T. Descartes’s Letter to Voetius. The Method of Philosophy and Morality / T. Verbeek // Church History and Religious Culture. — 2020. — Vol. 100 (2–3 ) . — Р. 145–156 . — DOI 10.1163/18712428-10002010.
1. Asmus, V. F. (1956) Decartes. Moscow, Science, 372 р. [in Rus].
2. Bubnov, E. S. (2012) Radical doubt as a phenomenon of the religious consciousness in the work of Rene Descartes. Omsk scientific bulletin, no.
4 (111), рр. 148–153 [in Rus].
3. Gajdenko, P. P. (2000) History of modern European philosophy in its connection with science. Moscow, University book, 456 р. [in Rus].
4. Ignatova, N. YU. (2023) The dispute between Voetius and Descartes on the relationship between theology and philosophy. Herald of Vyatka State
University, no. 4 (150), рр. 7–17 [in Rus].
5. Dekart, R. (1989–1994). Soch.: v 2 tt. Moscow, Politizdat [in Rus].
6. Krotov, A.A. (2010) Political ideas of the Cartesian school. Philosophy and society, no. 1 (150), pp. 156–166. [in Rus].
7. Mamardashvili, M. (1993) Cartesian Meditations. Moscow, Progress. Kul’tura. [in Rus].
8. Sartr, ZH. P. (1996) Descartes (1596-1650). Introduction et choix par J.-P. Sartre, Logos. Philosophical and literary journal, no. 8, рр.17–31 [in
Rus].
9. Fokin, S. (2019) The price of truth: reciprocity, giving, and generosity in the philosophy of René Descartes. Logos. Philosophical and literary journal, no. 29 (6), pp. 148–169. https://doi.org/10.22394/0869-
5377-2019-6-147-168 [in Rus].
10. Goudriaan, A. (2016) Descartes, Cartesianism, and Early Modern Theology. The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800. (eds.) U. L. Lehner, R. A. Muller, and A.G. Roeber. Oxford, рp. 533–549. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199937943.013.37 [in Eng].
11. Descartes, R. (1964–1974) Œuvres de Descartes, eds. C. Adam, Р. Tannery. 2nd ed. Paris, J. Vrin, 11 vols.
12. Kambouchner, D. (2007) Geneviève RodisLewis et la sagesse cartésienne. Revue philosophique de la France et de l’étranger. no 132 (3), pp. 357–372. https://doi.org/10.3917/rphi.073.0357 [in Fr].
13. Kaposi, D. (2004) Indifférence et liberté humaine chez Descartes. Revue de métaphysique et de morale, no 1 (41), pp. 73–99. https://doi.org/10.3917/rmm.041.0073 [in Fr].
14. Rorty, A. (1991) Descartes on Thinking with the Body. Descartes, (ed.) J. Cottingham, New York, Oxford University Press, рp. 371–392. https://doi.
org/10.1017/CCOL0521366232.013 [in Eng].
15. Rorty, A. (2012) The Functional Logic of Cartesian Passions. Emotional Minds: The Passions and the Limits of Pure Enquiry in Early Modern Philosophy, (ed.) S. Ebbersmeyer. Berlin, De Gruyter, рp. 3–18.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110260922.3 [in Eng].
16. Rodis-Lewis, G. (1957) La morale de Descartes. Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 132 р. [in Fr].
17. Van Ruler, J. A. The Crisis of Causality: Voetius and Descartes on God, Nature and Change. — Leiden, 1995 Brill Academic Publ. — 353 р. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004247208 [in Eng].
18. Verbeek, T. (2012) Generosity. (ed.). S. Ebbersmeyer. Emotional Minds: The Passions and the Limits of Pure Enquiry in Early Modern Philosophy.
Berlin, De Gruyter Publ, рp. 19–31. https://doi.
org/10.1515/9783110260922.19 [in Eng].
19. Verbeek, T. (1992) Descartes and the Dutch: Early Reactions to Cartesian Philosophy, 1637–1650. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 332 p. [in Eng].
20. Verbeek, T. (2020) Descartes’s Letter to Voetius. The Method of Philosophy and Morality. Church History and Religious Culture, Vol. 100. Issue 2–3, рp. 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1163/18712428-
10002010 [in Eng].
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.