•  3
    Gueroult on Spinoza and the Ethics
    Revue Internationale de Philosophie 291 (1): 51-62. 2020.
    Cet article concerne l’application de la méthode « dianoématique », ou « étude des doctrines », dans le commentaire important de Martial Gueroult aux deux premières parties de l’ Éthique de Spinoza. Gueroult met l’accent sur deux affirmations distinctes dans les deux volumes de ce commentaire. La première affirmation, tirée du premier volume, est que Spinoza adopte une version du monisme dans la première partie de l’ Éthique selon laquelle Dieu, en tant que substance infinie, consiste en une uni…Read more
  •  9
    This is a dictionary of Descartes and Cartesian philosophy, primarily covering philosophy in the 17th century, with a chronology and biography of Descartes's life and times and a bibliography of primary and secondary works related to Descartes and to Cartesians.
  • Nicolas Malebranche
    In Steven Nadler (ed.), A Companion to Early Modern Philosophy, Blackwell. 2002.
    This chapter contains section titled: Life and Works Vision in God and Ideas Cartesian Matter and the Soul Occasionalism and Theodicy Influences.
  •  11
    Spinoza's Mereology
    In Yitzhak Y. Melamed (ed.), A Companion to Spinoza, Wiley. 2021.
    Spinoza seems to argue both that “God or Nature” is mereologically simple, and that this being is mereologically complex insofar as it is composed of parts. This chapter proposes on Spinoza's behalf a resolution of this antinomy. This resolution focuses on Spinoza's mereology of the material world. It offers an alternative interpretation according to which Spinoza adheres both to the indivisibility of extended substance and to the reality of the finite modal parts that compose an infinite modal …Read more
  •  17
    Malebranche
    Mind 113 (449): 215-218. 2004.
  •  39
    Malebranche’s Theory of the Soul: A Cartesian Interpretation
    Philosophical Review 107 (2): 334. 1998.
    While there has been a resurgence in Malebranche scholarship in the anglophone world over the last twenty years, most of it has focused on Malebranche’s theory of ideas, and little attention has been paid to his philosophy of mind. Schmaltz’s book thus comes as a welcome addition to the Malebranche literature; that he has given us such a well-researched and carefully argued study is even more welcome. The focus of this work is Malebranche’s split with Descartes on the question of our knowledge o…Read more
  • Moral evil and divine concurrence in the Theodicy
    In Larry M. Jorgensen & Samuel Newlands (eds.), New Essays on Leibniz’s Theodicy, Oxford University Press. 2014.
  • Claude Clerselier and the development of Cartesianism
    In Steven Nadler, Tad M. Schmaltz & Delphine Antoine-Mahut (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism, Oxford University Press. 2019.
  • The curious case of Henricus Regius
    In Steven Nadler, Tad M. Schmaltz & Delphine Antoine-Mahut (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism, Oxford University Press. 2019.
  • Robert Desgabets and the supplement to Descartes's philosophy
    In Steven Nadler, Tad M. Schmaltz & Delphine Antoine-Mahut (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism, Oxford University Press. 2019.
  •  20
    The Located Subject of Thought: Hobbes, Descartes, More
    Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 113 (1): 3-19. 2022.
    Hobbes s’est opposé à Descartes en affirmant que l’on doit inférer du cogito que le sujet de la pensée est matériel. Le présent article commence par examiner cet argument fameux. Selon une interprétation courante, l’argument repose sur la théorie des idées de Hobbes. Cependant, cette interprétation a été contestée dans la littérature récente. Un examen de ce débat nous conduit à examiner un autre argument selon lequel tout sujet doit être localisé dans l’univers au moyen de son extension. Ce nou…Read more
  •  32
    Descartes and the Ontology of Everyday Life
    Philosophical Review 130 (4): 587-591. 2021.
  •  29
    The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism (edited book)
    Oxford University Press. 2019.
    The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism comprises fifty specially written chapters on Rene Descartes and Cartesianism, the dominant paradigm for philosophy and science in the seventeenth century, written by an international group of leading scholars of early modern philosophy. The first part focuses on the various aspects of Descartes's biography and philosophy, with chapters on his epistemology, method, metaphysics, physics, mathematics, moral philosophy, political thought, medical th…Read more
  • Deflating Descartes' Causal Axiom
    In Daniel Garber & Steven Nadler (eds.), Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy Volume 3, Clarendon Press. 2006.
  •  102
    Cartesian causation: body–body interaction, motion, and eternal truths
    Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (4): 737-762. 2003.
    There is considerable debate among scholars over whether Descartes allowed for genuine body–body interaction. I begin by considering Michael Della Rocca’s recent claim that Descartes accepted such interaction, and that his doctrine of the creation of the eternal truths indicates how this interaction could be acceptable to him. Though I agree that Descartes was inclined to accept real bodily causes of motion, I differ from Della Rocca in emphasizing that his ontology ultimately does not allow for…Read more
  •  27
    The indefinite in the Descartes-More correspondence
    British Journal for the History of Philosophy 29 (3): 453-471. 2021.
    In this article, I consider Descartes’ enigmatic claim that we must assert that the material world is indefinite rather than infinite. The focus here is on the discussion of this claim in Descartes’ late correspondence with More. One puzzle that emerges from this correspondence is that Descartes insists to More that we are not in a position to deny the indefinite universe has limits, while at the same time indicating that we conceive a contradiction in the notion that the universe has a limit. I…Read more
  •  44
    This chapter is a re-consideration of the powerful set of objections to the Cartesian theory of mind that Princess Elisabeth offered in her 1643–49 correspondence with Descartes. Much of the scholarly discussion of this correspondence has focused on Elisabeth’s initial criticisms of Descartes’ views of mind–body interaction and union, and has presented these criticisms as assuming the general principle that objects with heterogeneous natures cannot interact. However, this account of the criticis…Read more
  •  26
    Suárez and Descartes on the Mode(s) of Union
    Journal of the History of Philosophy 58 (3): 471-492. 2020.
    in a january 1642 letter, rené descartes advises his correspondent—his then-follower, the Utrecht medical professor Henricus Regius—to consistently endorse the view that the human mind is related to its body by means of a "substantial union": Whenever the occasion arises, as much privately as publicly, you ought to profess that you believe a human to be a true ens per se and not per accidens and the mind to be really and substantially united to the body not through position or disposition [situm…Read more
  •  2
    The Early Dutch Reception of L’Homme
    In Stephen Gaukroger & Delphine Antoine-Mahut (eds.), Descartes' Treatise on Man and Its Reception, Springer. 2016.
    This is a consideration of the connection of L’Homme to two very different forms of early modern Dutch Cartesianism. On the one hand, this work was central to a dispute between Descartes and his former disciple, Henricus Regius. In particular, Descartes charged that Regius had plagiarized L’Homme in order to distance himself from a form of Cartesian physiology in Regius that is not founded on a proof of the spirituality of the human soul. Despite this repudiation, Regius remained a prominent pro…Read more
  •  23
    Quantity and Extension in Suárez and Descartes
    Vivarium 58 (3): 168-190. 2020.
    This paper compares the development of the notion of continuous quantity in the work of Francisco Suárez and René Descartes. The discussion begins with a consideration of Suárez’s rejection of the view – common to ‘realists’ such as Thomas Aquinas and ‘nominalists’ such as William of Ockham – that quantity is inseparable from the extension of material integral parts. Crucial here is Suárez’s view that quantified extension exhibits a kind of impenetrability that distinguishes it from other kinds …Read more
  • Deflating Descartes' Causal Axiom
    Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 3 1-32. 2006.
  • What Has History of Science to Do with History of Philosophy?
    In Mogens Laerke, Justin E. H. Smith & Eric Schliesser (eds.), Philosophy and its History: Aims and Methods in the Study of Early Modern Philosophy, Oxford University Press Usa. 2013.
    In this chapter I consider the relation of history of philosophy to the history of science. I argue that though these two disciplines are naturally linked, they also have special commitments that distinguish each from the other. I begin with the history of the history of science, a discipline that was once allied with philosophy of science but that has increasingly evolved toward social history. Then I consider the debate over whether the history of philosophy is essential for, or rather largely…Read more
  •  44
    The Metaphysics of Surfaces in Suárez and Descartes
    Philosophers' Imprint 19. 2019.
    In his discussions of the Eucharist, Descartes gives prominent place to the notion of the “surfaces” of bodies. Given this context, it may seem that his account of surfaces is of limited interest. However, I hope to show that such an account is in fact linked to a philosophically significant medieval debate over whether certain mathematical “indivisibles”, including surfaces, really exist in nature. Moreover, the particular emphasis in Descartes on the fact that surfaces are modes rather than pa…Read more
  •  30
    Spinoza-Malebranche: à la croisée des interprétations ed. by Raffaele Carbone, et al
    Journal of the History of Philosophy 57 (1): 170-171. 2019.
    This collection includes material from the international conference, “Spinoza-Malebranche,” held in 2015, first at the Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne and subsequently at the École Normale Supérieure in Lyon. The justification for the volume, as indicated in Chantel Jaquet’s preface, is that the relations between Spinoza and Malebranche have not recently drawn the sort of attention from scholars that the relations of each to Descartes have received. Of course, there is the question of why t…Read more