Między platonikami z Cambridge a empirystami z The Royal Society - zarys filozofii Josepha Glanvilla
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/szhf.2024.012Słowa kluczowe
Joseph Glanvill, English Neoplatonism, empiricism, sceptical philosophy, early modern philosophy, latitudinarianism, early modern scienceAbstrakt
The article's purpose is to present the views of the 17th-century English philosopher - Joseph Glanvill. They are placed around two main intellectual tendences present in early modern English philosophy. Neoplatonism from the University of Cambridge and the empiricism of the early Royal Society. Discussing the first pool of inspirations, the author points to the typically Platonic elements in his system and the characteristic features of Glanvill’s philosophy, which may place him in the broad tradition of English Latitudinarianism. He then presents the specifics of Glanvill’s skepticism and empiricism. Glanvill’s spiritualist proposals seem to mediate between Cambridge Neoplatonism and the philosophies of the early Royal Society. They were inspired both by the specific understanding of spirit found in More’s Neoplatonic metaphysics and by certain thoughts present among early modern naturalists. In general presentation, Joseph Glanvill’s philosophical views appear as a synthesis of elements characteristic of these two approaches.
Bibliografia
Literatura podmiotu
Glanvill Joseph. „A blow at modern Sadducism in some philosophical considerations about witchcraft”. Early English Books. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A70179.0001.001/1:7?rgn=div1;view=toc.
Glanvill Joseph. „Lux Orientalis”. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://archive.org/details/bim_early-english-books-1641-1700_lux-orientalis-or-an-en_glanvill-joseph_1662/page/ n1/mode/2up.
Glanvill Joseph. „Saducismus triumphatus, or, Full and plain evidence concerning witches and apparitions in two parts: the first treating of their possibility, the second of their real existence”. Early English Books. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://quod. lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A42824.0001.001/1:24.3?rgn=div2;view=toc.
Glanvill Joseph. 1661. The Vanity of Dogmatizing, or, Confidence in opinions manifested in a discourse of the shortness and uncertainty of our knowledge, and its causes: with some reflexions on peripateticism, and an apology for philosophy. London: Printed by E.C. for Henry Eversden (wersja wczesna).
Glanvill Joseph. 1668. „Answers to some of the Inquiries formerly publish’d concerning Mines”. W: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 525–526. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/193101#page/600/mode/1up.
Glanvill Joseph. 1668. „Additional Answers to the Queries of Mines”. W: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 767–771. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/183728#page/151/mode/1up.
Glanvill Joseph. 1668. Plus Ultra. London: Printed for James Collins.
Glanvill Joseph. 1669. „Observations concerning the Bath-Springs”. W: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 977–982. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https:// www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/183746#page/95/mode/1up.
Glanvill Joseph. 1671. Philosophia pia, or, A discourse of the religious temper and tendencies of the experimental philosophy which is profest by the Royal Society to which is annext a recommendation and defence of reason in the affairs of religion. London: Printed for James Collins.
Glanvill Joseph. 1676. Essays on several Important Subjects in Philosophy and Religion. London: J.D. for John Baker.
Glanvill Joseph. 1676. Seasonable Reflections and Discourses in Order to the Conviction & Cure of the Scoffing, & Infidelity of a Degenerate Age. London: Printed by R.W. for H. Mortlock.
Glanvill Joseph. 1681. The Zealous, and Impartial Protestant shewing some great, but less heeded Dangers of Popery, in Order to Thorough and Effectual Security against it: in a Letter to a Member of Parliament. London: Printed by M.C. for Henry Brome.
Glanvill Joseph. 1885. „An Address to the Royal Society”. W: Joseph Glanvill, Scepsis Scientifica or, Confest Ignorance, The Way to Science; in an Essay of the Vanity of Dogmatizing and Confident Opinion, 49–70. London: K. Paul, Trench & Co.
Glanvill Joseph. 1885. Scepsis Scientifica or, Confest Ignorance, The Way to Science; in an Essay of the Vanity of Dogmatizing and Confident Opinion. London: K. Paul, Trench & Co.
Glanvill Joseph. 1954. „The Cupri-Cosmits”. W: Jackson I. Cope, Joseph Glanvill, „«The Cupri-Cosmits»: Glanvill on Latitudinarian Anti Enthusiasm”. Huntington Library Quarterly 17(3): 2–286, 272–286.
Pozostała literatura źródłowa
Bacon Francis. 1996. „New Atlantis”. W: Francis Bacon. A Critical Edition of the Major Works, red. Brian Vickers, 457–489. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Bacon Francis. 1996. „The Advancement of Learning”. W: Francis Bacon. A Critical Edition of the Major Works, red. Brian Vickers, 120–300. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Berkeley George. 2013. Siris. Łańcuch filozoficznych refleksji i dociekań wraz z Dodatkami, przeł. Adam Grzeliński, Marta Szymańska-Lewoszewska. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK.
Boyle Robert. 2001. The Correspondence of Robert Boyle, vol. 2, 4, 5: 1678–1683, red. Michael Hunter, Antonio Clericuzio, Lawrence M. Principe. London–New York: Routledge.
Browne Thomas. 2022. Religio Medici. Religia lekarza, przeł. Justyna Czekajewska, Adam Grzeliński, Marcin T. Zdrenka. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK.
Hobbes Thomas. „The English Works, v. III. Leviathan”. Online Library of Liberty. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/hobbes-the-english-worksvol-iii-leviathan.
Leibniz Gottfried Wilhelm. 1955. Nowe rozważania dotyczące rozumu ludzkiego. Warszawa: PWN.
Locke John. 1955. Rozważania dotyczące rozumu ludzkiego, t. 1–2. Warszawa: PWN.
Montaigne Michel de. 2004. Próby, przeł. Tadeusz Boy-Żeleński. Kraków: Zielona Sowa.
More Henry. „An antidote against atheism”. Early English Books. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A51284.0001.001/1:6?rgn=div1;view=fulltext.
More Henry. 1647. Poems. Cambridge: Printed by Roger Daniel.
More Henry. 1662. „Immortality of the Soul”. W: Henry More, A Collection of Several Philosophical Writings of Dr Henry More, 380–630. London: Printed by James Flesher.
More Henry. 1743. Divine Dialogues. Glasgow: Printed by Robert Foulis.
More Henry. 1925. „Encheiridion Metaphysicum”. W: Henry More, Philosophical Writings of Henry More, red. Flora I. Mackinnon, 182–226. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nettesheim Agrippa von. 1564. „De incertitudine et vanitate scientiarum et artium, atque excellentia verbi Dei declamatio”. Dostęp 23.01.2024. https://archive.org/details/hin-wel-all-00001847-001/page/n9/mode/2up.
Platon. 2002. Timajos, przeł. Władysław Witwicki. Kęty: Wydawnictwo Antyk.
Platon. 2017. Eutyfron, przeł. Ryszard Legutko. Kraków–Warszawa: Ośrodek Myśli Politycznej Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy Teologia Polityczna.
Platon. 2020. Państwo. Kęty: Marek Derewiecki.
Plotyn. 1959. Enneady, t. 1–2, przeł. Adam Krokiewicz. Kraków: PWN.
Spinoza Baruch. 1961. Listy, przeł. Leszek Kołakowski. Warszawa: PWN.
Sprat Thomas. 1667. The history of the Royal Society of London, for the Improving of Natural Knowledge. London: Printed by T.R. for J. Martyn … and J. Allestry.
Stubbe Henry. 1670. „A Review of the precedent Discourse against Mr. Glanvill”. W: A specimen of some animadversions upon a book entituled, Plus ultra, or, Modern improvements of useful knowledge writtten by Mr. Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society. London: [b.w.].
Vaughan Thomas. 1888. The Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan (Eugenius Philatethes): A Verbatim Reprint of His First Four Treatises: Anthroposophia Theomagica, Anima Magica Abscondita, Magia Adamica, and the True Cœlum Terræ. Michi- gan: G. Redway.
Literatura przedmiotu
Armstrong Sean. 2014. „The Devil, Superstition, and the Fragmentation of Magic”. Renaissance and Reformation / Renaissance et Réforme 37(2): 49–80.
Barnaby Andrew. 1997. „«Things Themselves»: Francis Bacon’s Epistemological Reform and the Maintenance of the State”. Renaissance and Reformation / Renaissance et Réforme 21(4): 57–80.
Burns Robert M. 1981. The Great Debate on Miracles: From Joseph Glanvill to David Hume. London–Toronto: Associated University Presses.
Butterfield Herbert. 1951. The Whig Interpretation of History. London: G. Bell.
Cameron Euan. 2010. Enchanted Europe. Superstition, Reason, and Religion 12501750. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Cope Jackson I. 1956. Joseph Glanvill, Anglican Apologist. Washington: Committee on Publications, Washington University.
Coudert Allison. 1990. „Henry More and Witchcraft”. W: Henry More (1614–1687) Tercentenary Studies, red. Sarah Hutton, 115–136. International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées, vol. 127. Dordrecht: Springer.
Cragg Gerald R. 1950. From Puritanism to the Age of Reason: A Study of Changes in Religious Thought within the Church of England 1660 to 1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davies Julie. 2018. Science in an Enchanted World: Philosophy and Witchcraft in the Work of Joseph Glanvill. Routledge Research in Early Modern History. New York-London: Routledge.
Dobbs Betty J. T. 2000. „Newton as Final Cause and First Mover”. W: Margaret J. Osler, Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, 25–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Guy Nathan. 2019. „Giving Locke Some Latitude: Locke’s Theological Influences from Great Tew to the Cambridge Platonists”. W: Revisioning Cambridge Platonism: Sources and Legacy, red. Douglas Hedley, David Leech. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hall Rupert A. 1990. „Henry More and the Scientific Revolution”. W: Henry More (1614–1687) Tercentenary Studies, red. Sarah Hutton, 37–54. International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées, vol. 127. Dordrecht: Springer.
Harrison Peter. 2007. The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hedley Douglas. 2001. „The Platonick Trinity. Philology and Divinity in Cudworth’s Philosophy of Religion”. W: Philologie und Erkenntnis: Beiträge zu Begriff und Problem frühneuzeitlicher Philologie, red. Ralph Häfner, 247–264. Berlin–New York: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Hoppen Theodore K. 1976. „The Nature of the Early Royal Society: Part I”. The British Journal for the History of Science 9(1): 1–24.
Hoppen Theodore K. 1976. „The Nature of the Early Royal Society: Part II”. The British Journal for the History of Science 9(1): 243–273.
Hutton Sarah. 1990. Henry More (1614–1687) Tercentenary Studies. International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées, vol. 127. Dordrecht: Springer.
Jobe Thomas Harmon. 1981. „The Devil in Restoration Science: The Glanvill-Webster Witchcraft Debate”. Isis 72(3): 343–356.
Krook Dorothea. 1955. „Two Baconians: Robert Boyle and Joseph Glanvill”. Huntington Library Quarterly 18(3): 261–278.
Kucharski Dariusz. 2018. „Henry More i Isaac Newton o działaniu materii – kontekst neoplatoński”. Studia Philosophiae Christianae 54(4): 5–26.
Kucharski Dariusz. 2020. Racjonalność wiary w ujęciu Henry’ego More’a. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UKSW.
Leech David. „Defining «Cambridge Platonism»”. University of Cambridge: The Cambridge Platonism Sourcebook. Dostęp 21.01.2024. https://www.cambridgeplatonism.divinity.cam.ac.uk/view/texts/normalised/about-the-cambridge-platonists/defining-cambridge-platonism.
Leech David. 2019. „Henry More and Descartes”. W: Plotinus’ Legacy The Transformation of Platonism from the Renaissance to the Modern Era, red. Stephen Gersh, 127–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Muratori Cecilia. 2019. „«A Philosopher at Randome»: Translating Jacob Böhme in Seventeenth-Century Cambridge”. W: Revisioning
Cambridge Platonism: Sources and Legacy, red. Douglas Hedley, David Leech, 48–64. Dordrecht: Springer.
Osler Margaret J. 2000. „The Canonical Imperative: Rethinking the Scientific Revolution”. W: Margaret J. Osler, Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, 3–21. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Owen John. 1885. „An Essay on the Life and Works of Joseph Glanvill”. W: Joseph Glanvill, Scepsis Scientifica or, Confest Ignorance, The Way to Science; in an Essay of the Vanity of Dogmatizing and Confident Opinion, 7–46. London: K. Paul, Trench & Co.
Płoski Jakub. 2024. „George Berkeley jako neoplatonik? Wspólne podstawy wczesnej i późnej filozofii Berkeleya”. Ruch Filozoficzny 79(3): 49–79.
Popkin Richard H. 1953. „Joseph Glanvill: A Precursor of David Hume”. Journal of the History of Ideas 14(2): 292–303.
Popkin Richard H. 1954. „The Development of the Philosophical Reputation of Joseph Glanvill”. Journal of the History of Ideas 15(2): 305–311.
Prior Moody E. 1932. „Joseph Glanvill, Witchcraft, and Seventeenth-Century Science”. Modern Philology 30(2): 167–193.
Raube Sławomir. 2000. „Filozoficzna apologetyka platońskiej szkoły z Cambridge”. Folia Philosophica 18: 117–128.
Redgrove Stanley H. 1921. Joseph Glanvill and Psychical Research in the Seventeenth Century. London: William Rider & Son, LTD.
Reid Jasper. 2007. The Metaphysics of Henry More. Dordrecht: Springer.
Scott Dominic. 1990. „Platonic Recollection and Cambridge Platonism”. Hermathena 149: 73–97.
Sheppard Kenneth. 2015. Anti-Atheism in Early Modern England 1580–1720. Leiden–Boston: Brill.
Singer B. R. 1976. „Robert Hooke on Memory, Association and Time Perception (1)”. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 31(1): 115–131.
Szwed Antoni. 2016. Fideizm Kalwina i bunt angielskich racjonalistów. Kęty: Wydawnictwo Marek Derewiecki.
Usakiewicz Joanna. 2018. „Damaris Masham, jej związki z Johnem Lockiem i dyskusja z Gottfriedem Wilhelmem Leibnizem”. Studia z Historii Filozofii 9(3): 103– 116.
Wilson Catherine. 1995. The Invisible World. Early Modern Philosophy and Invention of the Microscope. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Windelband Wilhelm. 1893. A History of Philosophy. New York–London: [b.w.].
Wood P. B. 1980. „Methodology and Apologetics: Thomas Sprat’s «History of the Royal Society»”. The British Journal for the History of Science 13(1): 1–26.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Statystyki
Liczba wyświetleń i pobrań: 105
Liczba cytowań: 0