Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

In defense of real Cartesian motion.

Thomas, Emily (2015) 'In defense of real Cartesian motion.', Journal of the history of philosophy., 53 (4). pp. 747-762.

Abstract

On Thomas Lennon’s (2007) “Eleatic” reading of Descartes, the Cartesian world is in reality motionless, its motions conceived as mere phenomenal appearances. Lennon is aware that this radical reading appears to be at odds with various Cartesian texts that seemingly describe real motions, and accordingly he reinterprets these texts in such a way as to render them compatible with his reading. This reply to Lennon considers many further Cartesian texts that cannot be “reinterpreted” along the lines Lennon describes, with the ultimate aim of showing that the phenomenalist is committed to dividing Cartesian texts into passages dealing with reality and with appearance. I argue there are good reasons not to read Descartes in this way, and we should take Cartesian motion at face value: to be real.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
(322Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2015.0067
Publisher statement:Copyright © 2015 The Johns Hopkins University Press. This article first appeared in Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 53, Issue 4, October 2015, pages 747-762.
Date accepted:02 January 2015
Date deposited:05 December 2016
Date of first online publication:October 2015
Date first made open access:No date available

Save or Share this output

Export:
Export
Look up in GoogleScholar