Advertisement

Abstract

“I think continually of those who were truly great.”1 Stephen Spender, as a poet, may be indulged; but it is hardly permissible to write the history of thought in such Carlylean terms.2 The problem is, of course, to identify the heroes, those “truly great”, who alone allegedly deserve our worship or our thought. Certainly at first sight, Thomas White fails to qualify: relegated for years to the role of a ‘minor’ figure, he has been virtually excluded from the canon of intellectual history. But it will be argued here that, following perhaps some re-definition of true greatness, he justifies, if not continual thoughts, at least some serious attention.

Keywords

Intellectual History Alternative Perception Sceptical Challenge Autonomous Discipline Educational Reformer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Stephen Spender, ‘I think continually’, in Poems (London, 1933), p. 45.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    R.H. Popkin, ‘The Third Force in 17th Century Philosophy: Scepticism, Science and Biblical Prophecy’, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, 1983,I.59f.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    C.S. Lewis, Christian Reflections (Glasgow, 1981), p. 203.Google Scholar
  4. 4a.
    M. Midgeley, Wisdom, Information, and Wonder: What is knowledge for? (London, 1989), p. 103.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R.H. Popkin, ‘Berkeley and Pyrrhonism’, reprinted in M. Burnyeat ed., The Skeptical Tradition (London, 1983), p. 394 n. 21 (my emphasis).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R.H. Popkin, ‘Joseph Glanvill: A Precursor of David Hume’, reprinted in R.A. Watson and J.E. Force eds. The High Road to Pyrrhonism (San Diego, 1980), p. 182.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H.W. Jones ed., Thomas Hobbes: Thomas White’s De Mundo Examined (London, 1976).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H.W. Jones, ‘A Seventeenth-Century Geometrical Debate’, Annals of Science 31, 1974, 307–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 8a.
    J.L. Russell, ‘Action and Reaction before Newton’, British Journal for the History of Science 11, 1976, 25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 8b.
    J. Henry, ‘Atomism and Eschatology: Catholicism and natural philosophy in the interregnum’, British Journal for the History of Science 15, 1982, 211–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 9.
    G.H. Tavard, The Seventeenth Century Tradition: A Study in Recusant Thought (Leiden, 1978), ch. VIIGoogle Scholar
  12. 9a.
    J. Bossy, The English Catholic Community, 1570–1850 (London, 1975), p. 62Google Scholar
  13. 9b.
    H. Paul ed., Letters of Lord Acton to Mary, Daughter of the Rt. Hon. W.E. Gladstone (London, 1904), p. 140.Google Scholar
  14. 9c.
    D. Shanahan: “White’s exposition of Scripture and Tradition is so close in thought and word to the decree of the Vatican Council, that one would think the Fathers had read his books... Thomas White has stood still, and we have caught up with him.” The Essex Recusant 7–8, 1966, p. 34.Google Scholar
  15. 10.
    Q. Skinner, ‘History and Ideology in the English Revolution’, Historical Journal 8, 1965, 151–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 10a.
    P. Zagorin, A History of Political Thought in the English Revolution (London, 1965)Google Scholar
  17. 10b.
    J.A.W. Gunn, Politics and the Public Interest in the Seventeenth Century (London, 1969).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beverley C. Southgate
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HertfordshireUK

Personalised recommendations