Abstract
In 1922, Alexandre Koyré writes that Descartes’ doctrine of theological voluntarism – according to which God creates and controls logic and normativity – is incompatible with every bit of his philosophy. We agree and explain how voluntarism undermines the major arguments (including the cogito) in the Meditations by making them logically or normatively circular. Thus clear and distinct ideas are not useful as premises in an argument for God’s existence except on the assumption that God exists and has already made them “true.” However, Koyré also claims that Descartes protected his system from disaster by abandoning voluntarism toward the end of his life. We argue that this is not correct, as an exhaustive look at the texts shows Descartes affirming voluntarism unambiguously from 1630 right to the end of his life. We point out the flaws in other attempts to save Descartes from himself and some theological and philosophical reasons which may have led Descartes to hold the doctrine. We claim that, while voluntarism will have to be ignored in an overall understanding of Descartes’ thought, it has genuine philosophical significance because a “voluntarist demon” represents the most formidable skeptical threat possible.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Note that the logical circle undercuts the traditional one. For on voluntarism God must “first” make circularity a flaw in argumentation. The fact that the traditional circle is an objection depends on the assumption that God exists.
- 2.
Of course, the problems are compounded when one notes that some of the same arguments appear in the Principles, so parts of that work are also beset by the circularities.
References
Descartes R (1964–1976) = abbreviated ‘AT’
Descartes R ([1985] 1991) = abbreviated ‘CSM’
Bennett J (1994) Descartes’s theory of modality. The Philosophical Review 103:639–67.
Broughton J, Carriero J (2008) A Companion to Descartes. Blackwell, Oxford.
Cottingham J (1993) A Descartes dictionary. Blackwell, Oxford.
Cottingham J (2008) The role of God in Descartes’s philosophy. In Broughton 2008, pp. 288–301.
Curley EM (1984) Descartes on the creation of the eternal truths. The Philosophical Review 93:569–97.
Descartes R (1964–1976). Œuvres de Descartes. 12 Vols. Adam C, Tannery P (eds). Vrin–C.N.R.S, Paris.
Descartes R ([1985] 1991) The philosophical writings of Descartes. 3 Vols. Translated by Cottingham J, Stoothoff R, Murdoch D [for Vol. 3, also Kenny A). The Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Frankfurt H (1977) Descartes on the creation of the eternal truths. The Philosophical Review 86:36–57.
Gasparri G (2007) La création des vérités éternelles dan la postérité de Descartes. Revue philosophique de la France et de l’étranger 132:323–36.
Gassendi P (1658–1964) Opera Omnia. 6 Vols. Anisson L & Devenet JB, Lyon [reprint: Friedrich Fromman Verlag, Stuttgart–Bad Cannstatt].
Gaukroger S (1995) Descartes: an intellectual biography. Clarendon Press. Oxford.
Hartz GA, Lewtas, PK (2014) Descartes’ metaphysical scepticism. Revue Roumaine de Philosophie 58:79–89.
Huet PD (2003 [1689, 1694]). Against Cartesian Philosophy. Censura Philosophiae Cartesianae. Translated by Lennon TM. Humanity Books, Amherst.
Janowski Z (2000) Cartesian theodicy: Descartes’ quest for certitude. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Koyré A (1922) Essai sur l’idée de dieu et les preuves de son existence chez Descartes. Éditions Ernest Leroux, Paris.
Leibniz GW (1985 [1710]) Theodicy. Open Court, LaSalle.
Lennon TM (2008) The plain truth: Descartes, Huet, and skepticism. Brill, Leiden.
Ockham W (1957) Philosophical writings. Boehner P (ed). Nelson, Edinburgh.
Osler M (1994) Divine will and the mechanical philosophy. The Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Regis PS (1691) Réponse au livre qui a pour titre P. Danielis Huetii […] Censura philosophiae cartesianae, servant d’éclaircissement à toutes les parties de la philosophie, surtout à la métaphysique. Par Pierre–Sylvain Regis. Jean Cusson, Paris.
Acknowledgments
We warmly thank readers of earlier drafts of this paper, including Rick Groshong, Mogens Laerke, Cody Baith, Maddie Collins, and audiences at two American Philosophical Association meetings and at Syracuse University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hartz, G.A., Lewtas, P.K. (2018). Is Descartes’ Theological Voluntarism Compatible with His Philosophy?. In: Pisano, R., Agassi, J., Drozdova, D. (eds) Hypotheses and Perspectives in the History and Philosophy of Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61712-1_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61712-1_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-61710-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-61712-1
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)