Daniel Schulthess

Summary The correspondence in this issue of History of European Ideas has not previously been published. It is the surviving part of the epistolary exchange between Dugald Stewart and the Genevan professor and man of letters Pierre Prevost (1751?1839) from the 1790s to the 1820s. To this are added several closely connected letters to and from their associates. This correspondence is striking evidence of the republic of letters continuing to flourish in the aftermath of the French Revolution, illustrating the transmission of works, the role of go-betweens, the provision of letters of introduction and the formation of intellectual and personal alliances. Not least, the letters tell us much about the ideas of those involved, and about the formation, development, and relation of these ideas to published works. This is particularly significant for Stewart, most of whose letters and papers are lost

Henri Bergson (1859-1941) was one of the main exponents of evolutionary thinking in the later nineteenth and early twentieth century. He gave that kind of thinking an unprecedented metaphysical turn. In consequence of his versatility he also encountered the notion of truth-making, which he connected with his ever-present concerns about time and duration. Eager to stress the dimension of radical change and of novelty in the nature of things, he rejected (in one form) what he called “the retrograde movement of the true” while championing it – with undeniable delight in the air of paradox – in a derivative form. In the paper I explain what “the retrograde movement of the true” consists in – in its two forms.

The contrast between Thomas Reid's epistemological concerns and a common core of the classical approach to epistemology is the following one: Reid abandons the classical use for criteria of knowledge and pushes the problem of the justification of beliefs to the level of the mental faculties from which the beliefs arise. A similar shift plays various roles in Keith Lehrer's coherentist epistemology. However, this shift raises several difficulties: (i) the impact of epistemological concerns on actual intellectual inquiries gets lost; (ii) the favored model of justification lacks in generality; (iii) 'vertical justification' (which proceeds via the faculty) is not independent from 'horizontal justification' (not proceeding via the faculty).

The article deals with the problem of the so-called “axiological neutrality” which characterizes modern science. Starting from a psychological conception of intrinsic value as that which is perceived worth being pursued, the author first shows that science can study values only indirectly. There are two senses in which science must remain axiologically neutral: on the one hand, it must avoid all ontological evaluation of its objects (ontological neutrality); on the other hand, it must keep separate the evaluation of its results from the question of justifying them (epistemological neutrality). Nevertheless, values intervene in the scientific research, principally in the form of epistemic values (coherence, simplicity, rationality). At the end the author shows that the ethical and political context determines the framework in which values are assigned.

The article proposes a comparison between the critique that Antoine Arnault (1612-1694) raises against Malebranche’s views on perception and the critique that Thomas Reid (1710-1796) moves against the theory of ideas defended by Berkeley and Hume. Both Arnault and Reid advocate a position according to which our perceptions allow us to have direct knowledge of material objects existing independently of us and not only of representations of them. Arnault proposes different arguments to refute Malebranche. In doing that he doesn’t completely reject the Cartesian representational account of perception. Reid is more radical: in order to refuse Berkeley and Hume he rejects the whole theory of ideas, and focuses instead on the mental powers through which we cognize reality.

A review of Pierre Lucier’s Empirisme logique et langage religieux (1976). The work compares the interpretations of religious language provided by R.B. Braithwaite (who advocates the emotivist interpretation characteristic of logical positivism), of R.M. Hare (who proposes a “transcendental” interpretation seeing in religious language the acknowledgment of an order making possible both moral action and scientific research), and of I.T. Ramsay (who, against logical positivists, defend the possibility for religious language to reveal a transcendent dimension).

In his Theory of moral Sentiments , Adam Smith does not deal only with interpersonal moral issues. He also addresses some economic and political consequences that tie with his analysis of ‘sympathy’. Interestingly, these socially relevant outcomes do not feature as products of sympathy proper, but rather as byproducts of certain ‘irregularities’ or biases which affect the way sympathy actually works. The stability of a political society through a system of ‘ranks’ which are spontaneously granted a share of authority thus gets projected beyond the reach of a rational approach, e.g. of a contractarian character. Although the idea of a spontaneous order certainly attracts Adam Smith here as elsewhere, his approach of the economic and political sphere in TMS is nevertheless tinged with a tone of moral criticism which must be taken seriously

Leibniz presents himself, especially in his late correspondence with Remond, as a concordist: in other philosophical views, even distant and ancient ones, he sets out to discover «traces of truth» that are already present there. According to the concordist programme, Leibniz claims, philosophers are right in what they affi rm, and wrong in what they deny. This paradoxical asymmetry is given a logical explanation in the paper, in connection with the topic of «reduplication», i. e. the introduction of qualifi cations in otherwise simple categorical propositions. In order to be right in affi rming a complex disjunctive proposition, it is enough for one of the disjuncts to be true; but in order to be right in negating a complex disjunctive proposition, it is required for all of them to be false. Meanwhile, if one may «qualify» propositions by different reduplications of their terms, in principle one of those qualifi ed propositions is bound to be true. On such presuppositions concordism can be expected to be quite effective as a meta-philosophical perspective

In the concrete exercise of practical reason, certain pieces of knowledge are required: they relate to the obligations to which the agent is committed (according to the deontological orientation in practical philosophy), to the actions themselves, as well as to the situations in which the agent operates. It appears that these pieces of knowledge are themselves required by what may be called here “second-order obligations”. The purpose of the article is to identify the place of these obligations and to show the link that they establish between practical and theoretical reason.

The article proposes a comparison between the critique that Antoine Arnault (1612-1694) raises against Malebranche’s views on perception and the critique that Thomas Reid (1710-1796) moves against the theory of ideas defended by Berkeley and Hume. Both Arnault and Reid advocate a position according to which our perceptions allow us to have direct knowledge of material objects existing independently of us and not only of representations of them. Arnault proposes different arguments to refute Malebranche. In doing that he doesn’t completely reject the Cartesian representational account of perception. Reid is more radical: in order to refuse Berkeley and Hume he rejects the whole theory of ideas, and focuses instead on the mental powers through which we cognize reality.

Brentano, expert et continuateur de l’ontologie aristotélicienne, traite du problème métaphysique de l’individuation dans un petit nombre d’écrits . Il retient pour ce problème une solution ordinairement rejetée, l’individuation par le lieu . À ce titre, il occupe une position originale. La notion de lieu, cependant, tout comme plus généralement la notion de l’accident, ressort tout à fait transformée des analyses de Brentano : le lieu devient une détermination substantielle, non accidentelle, des corps. Dans des écrits tardifs, Brentano étend son analyse du lieu à une cosmologie qui n’admet qu’une seule substance corporelle étendue, dont les corps particuliers sont les accidents.Brentano, both expert and continuator of the Aristotelian ontology, devotes his attention to the metaphysical problem of individuation in a small number of writings collected under the title Kategorienlehre. For this problem, he adopts a solution which gets ordinarily rejected, individuation through place . Hence he occupies an original position on this issue. The notion of place, however, as well as the notion of accident more generally, gets completely transformed in the Brentanian analysis : place becomes not an accidental but a substantial determination. In some late writings, Brentano extends his analysis of place to a cosmology which admits a unique extended bodily substance, of which particular bodies are only the accidents

The part‐whole and element‐system relations are usually not given a temporal interpretation. Taking a thesis of Father Bochenski as a starting point , the author first gives an adequate temporal interpretation of this thesis. Then, he shows that a divergence arises, in non‐static systems, between the system itself and the mereological sum corresponding to it at a certain instant. Therefore, any reductionism has to confront the generally neglected problem of this divergence. Résumé Les relations partie‐tout et élément‐système ne sont pas habituellement interprétées de manière temporelle lorsqu'elles sont approachées de manière formelle. On prend ici pour point de départ une thèse formulée par le P. Bochenski, "tout élément d'un système est une partie propre de ce système", dont on donne d'abord une interpretation temporelle adéquate. On met ensuite en évidence la divergence, pour les systèmes non statiques, du système et de la somme méréologique qui lui correspond en un instant donné. Le réductionnisme doit done affronter le problème généralement négligé de cette divergence. Zusammenfassung Gewöhnlich werden die Relationen zwischen Teil und Ganzem und zwischen Element und System nicht zeitlich interpretiert, wenn sie formal behandelt werden. Von einer These von P. Bochenski ausgehend versucht man zuerst, dieser These eine angemessene zeitliche Interpretation zu geben. Dann zeigt man, dass es bei nicht‐statischen Systemen eine Divergenz zwischen dem System und der ihm zu einer bestimmten Zeit entsprechenden mereologischen Summe gibt. Das sich daraus für den Reduktionismus ergebende Problem wird meist vernächlassigt

The letters published here belong to the ‘Fonds Pierre Prevost’ held by the Library of Geneva. Our presentation of the letters is modelled on that of the published correspondences of Adam Smith and Thomas Reid. Our aim in transcribing the letters that follow has been to establish a clean and reliable text with minimal editorial intervention. We have made no attempt to normalise the spellings, capitalisation, and apparently aberrant usage found in the letters or to modernise the punctuation, and we have not expanded the contractions that occur in the original texts. However, Prevost’s contractions in Letters 13 and 15 are likely to provide major problems for most readers, and we have therefore added an appendix in which these contractions have been written out.

At the end of the XVIIth century Nicholas Malebranche intervened in the «quietist dispute» in his Treatise on the Love of God (1697). This short treatise presents an anti-quietist standpoint based on the philosopher’s systematic analyses in the fields of theology and of psychology of the feelings and of the will. This article shows how Malebranche takes up the challenge of quietism, the logical heart of which, here reconstituted rigorously, is found in other moral philosophies. The requirement of impartiality produces a paradox when the agent at the same time has to define and take responsibility for his own behaviour, and potentially forget himself due to his requirement of impartiality. Finally, Malebranche avoids this paradox by attributing a very important place to the notion of order, by means of which he fits in with his own analyses on the theme of Providence.

In the philosophical tradition marked by Descartes and empiricism, the idea of epistemic justification was most often seen in terms of construction on foundations that would be as many immediately justified starting points. The article exposes a completely different approach to the question, due to the philosopher Keith Lehrer. In this approach the epistemic justification derives from a coherence relationship between beliefs that are never immediately justified starting points. What is then decisive for the justification of a belief is to discard or neutralize all the objections that can be raised against it. From an example, the article presents this approach to epistemic justification and exposes a difficulty that it encounters.