• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Steven Nadler

University of Wisconsin, Madison
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    229
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Events
    5
  •  News and Updates
    76

 More details
  • University of Wisconsin, Madison
    Department of Philosophy
    Distinguished Professor
Columbia University
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 1986
Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America
Areas of Interest
Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
17th/18th Century Philosophy
  • All publications (229)
  •  44
    Reason, Will, and Sensation (review)
    International Studies in Philosophy 29 (4): 99-100. 1997.
  • Nietzsche und die Kriminalwissenschaften.
  •  106
    Les vérités éternelles et l'autre monde : les racines juives de Spinoza
    Les Etudes Philosophiques 71 (4): 507. 2004.
    Continental Philosophy
  •  13
    Chapter 6. A New Philosophy
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 111-142. 2013.
  •  22
    Chapter 2. The Philosopher
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 8-35. 2013.
  •  23
    Chapter 7. God in Haarlem
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 143-173. 2013.
  •  20
    Chapter 3. The Priest
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 36-54. 2013.
    Liar Paradox
  •  18
    Chapter 4. The Painter
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 55-86. 2013.
  •  18
    Index
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 227-238. 2013.
  •  25
    Acknowledgments
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. 2013.
    René Descartes
  •  19
    Chapter 5. “Once in a Lifetime”
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 87-110. 2013.
  •  16
    Bibliography
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 219-226. 2013.
  •  24
    Chapter 1. Prologue: A Tale of Two Paintings
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 1-7. 2013.
  •  21
    Notes
    In The philosopher, the priest, and the painter: a portrait of Descartes, Princeton University Press. pp. 199-218. 2013.
    René Descartes
  •  7
    Arnauld's Theory of Perception: A Study in the Cartesian Philosophy of Ideas
    University Microfilms International. 1986.
    This is a study of Arnauld's theory of perceptual acquaintance in the light of his commitment to Cartesian philosophy. I begin with an examination of the nature and extent of Arnauld's commitment to Descartes' method and metaphysics. In chapter III I look at Malebranche's theory of ideas and perception, arguing that it is open to both a representationalist interpretation and, in some contexts, a direct realist interpretation. Arnauld's critique of Malebranche is examined in chapter IV. In chapte…Read more
    This is a study of Arnauld's theory of perceptual acquaintance in the light of his commitment to Cartesian philosophy. I begin with an examination of the nature and extent of Arnauld's commitment to Descartes' method and metaphysics. In chapter III I look at Malebranche's theory of ideas and perception, arguing that it is open to both a representationalist interpretation and, in some contexts, a direct realist interpretation. Arnauld's critique of Malebranche is examined in chapter IV. In chapter V I present an analysis of Arnauld's act theory of ideas wherein I argue that Arnauld holds a direct realist account of our perceptual acquaintance with the external world. Arnauld's understanding of 'idea' often follows Descartes' own use of the term. I support this claim by examining several important contexts from Descartes' where 'idea' is used to refer not to mental objects perceived, but rather to mental acts or operations. Finally, in chapter VI, I turn to Arnauld's account of the intentionality of perception. I first examine briefly the notion of 'objective being' as it appears in late scholastic thought and in Descartes. I then look at the way in which the representational content/objective reality of ideas is central to Arnauld's theory of intentionality
    Nicolas Malebranche
  •  3
    Spinoza's Monism and the Reality Of The Finite
    In Philip Goff (ed.), Spinoza on Monism, Palgrave-macmillan. 2011.
    Monism
  •  1
    Occasionalism and the mind-body problem
    In Michael Alexander Stewart (ed.), Studies in seventeenth-century European philosophy, Oxford University Press. 1997.
    Philosophy of ConsciousnessMetaphysics of MindMind-Body Problem, General
  • Dualism and occasionalism: Arnauld and the development of Cartesian metaphysics
    Revue Internationale de Philosophie 48 (190): 421-439. 1994.
    Dualism
  •  39
    Un libro forjado en el infierno
    Ideas Y Valores 61 (150). 2012.
  •  55
    Descartes et Cervantes : le malin génie et la folie de Don Quichotte
    Laval Théologique et Philosophique 53 (3): 605-616. 1997.
    Continental Philosophy of Religion
  •  101
    Probability and Truth in the Apology
    Philosophy and Literature 9 (2): 198-202. 1985.
    This article is a reply to an earlier piece by kenneth seeskin (philosophy and literature, 1982). I argue that socrates' defense is more of a parody of gorgian rhetoric than seeskin is willing to allow. They key lies in socrates' use of rhetoric to persuade the beliefs of the athenian jurors by means of probabilities. When replying to the expressed pretexts of the trial, He uses "base" rhetoric; when finally attending to the real reasons behind his accusations, He resorts to "the truth about his…Read more
    This article is a reply to an earlier piece by kenneth seeskin (philosophy and literature, 1982). I argue that socrates' defense is more of a parody of gorgian rhetoric than seeskin is willing to allow. They key lies in socrates' use of rhetoric to persuade the beliefs of the athenian jurors by means of probabilities. When replying to the expressed pretexts of the trial, He uses "base" rhetoric; when finally attending to the real reasons behind his accusations, He resorts to "the truth about his life."
    Philosophy of Literature
  •  103
    Review: The science of conjecture (review)
    Mind 112 (447): 539-542. 2003.
    Blaise PascalModel Theory
  •  60
    Nicholas Jolley. Causality and Mind: Essays on Early Modern Philosophy. ix + 279 pp., bibl., index. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. £45
    Isis 106 (3): 718-719. 2015.
  •  54
    Spinoza, Leibniz, and the Gods of Philosophy
    In Smith Justin & Fraenkel Carlos (eds.), The Rationalists, Springer/synthese. pp. 167--182. 2011.
    Leibniz: Philosophy of Religion
  •  56
    Consciousness Among the Cartesians
    Studia Leibnitiana 43 (2): 132-144. 2011.
  •  123
    Review: Early Modern Philosophy: Mind, Matter, and Metaphysics (review)
    Mind 115 (460): 1158-1160. 2006.
    17th/18th Century Philosophy
  •  115
    La question du Mal chez Leibniz. Fondements et élaboration de la théodicée (review)
    Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (2). 2009.
    One of the welcome features of Leibniz research over the past quarter century has been the abandonment of the old "chicken vs. egg" debate about whether Leibniz's logic precedes and grounds his metaphysics or vice versa. Scholars such as Robert M. Adams, Daniel Garber, and Donald Rutherford, among others, have brought our attention to what might be called the systematic "holism" of Leibniz's thought and the way in which its various elements—logical, physical, metaphysical, and theological—reinfo…Read more
    One of the welcome features of Leibniz research over the past quarter century has been the abandonment of the old "chicken vs. egg" debate about whether Leibniz's logic precedes and grounds his metaphysics or vice versa. Scholars such as Robert M. Adams, Daniel Garber, and Donald Rutherford, among others, have brought our attention to what might be called the systematic "holism" of Leibniz's thought and the way in which its various elements—logical, physical, metaphysical, and theological—reinforce each other. Rutherford, in particular, has argued persuasively that if anything is central to Leibniz's project and its systematicity, it is his philosophical theology, and especially his theodicy.Paul Rateau's book is an important contribution to our understanding of Leibniz's thinking about the problem of evil and the way in which it relates to so many other aspects—philosophical, political, theological—of his system. It is, without question, the most thorough, careful, and philosophically astute study to date of Leibniz's theodicy and its ramifications. It is also an exceedingly well-written and fascinating book
    Leibniz: Philosophy of Religion
  •  137
    Scientific Certainty and the Creation of the Eternal Truths: A Problem in Descartes
    Southern Journal of Philosophy 25 (2): 175-192. 2010.
    René Descartes
  •  164
    Arnauld’s God
    Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (4). 2008.
    In this paper, I argue that Arnauld’s conception of God is more radical than scholars have been willing to allow. It is not the case that, for Arnauld, God acts for reasons, with His will guided by wisdom (much as the God of Malebranche and Leibniz acts), albeit by a wisdom impenetrable to us. Arnauld’s objections to Malebranche are directed not only at the claim that God’s wisdom is transparent to human reason, but at the whole distinction between will and wisdom in God, even if that wisdom wer…Read more
    In this paper, I argue that Arnauld’s conception of God is more radical than scholars have been willing to allow. It is not the case that, for Arnauld, God acts for reasons, with His will guided by wisdom (much as the God of Malebranche and Leibniz acts), albeit by a wisdom impenetrable to us. Arnauld’s objections to Malebranche are directed not only at the claim that God’s wisdom is transparent to human reason, but at the whole distinction between will and wisdom in God, even if that wisdom were “hidden.” Arnauld’s God, in fact, approaches the extreme voluntarist God of Descartes, and thus transcends practical rational agency altogether.
    17th/18th Century French Philosophy, Misc
  •  114
    Gersonides: Judaism Within the Limits of Reason
    British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4). 2011.
    British Journal for the History of Philosophy, Volume 19, Issue 4, Page 816-819, July 2011
    History of Western Philosophy17th/18th Century Philosophy
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback