Richard H. Popkin

Scepticism in the Enlightenment

It may seem very presumptuous to pretend to deal with so vast a subject in a brief paper. However, as I shall try to indicate, if the subject is limited to the traditional philosophical meaning of the term, there was, perhaps surprisingly, very little scepticism in the Enlightenment, and what there was represented either a carry-over of the earlier Montaignian or Baylean tradition, or an anticipation of an irrationalist fideistic scepticism that was to flourish with Kierkegaard, or an anticipation of an epistemological scepticism that was to flourish among the early critics of Kant. And, what scepticism there was in the Enlightenment seems to have been located mainly within the person of one man — David Hume.

Newton’s Biblical Theology and His Theological Physics

In the vast literature about Newton, little is devoted to explaining his religious views, except as personal aberrations, infantile views, or premature signs of senility. In recent years R.S. Westfall, Frank Manuel, James Force and a few others have tried to give some more impressive explanations of why one of the world’s greatest scientists should have spent so much time thinking and writing about religious matters.1 In this paper I should like to turn the problem around, and ask why did one of the greatest anti-Trinitarian theologians of the 17th century take time off to write works on natural science, like the Principia Mathematica?

Hume and Spinoza

HUME STUDIES’ Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the HUME STUDIES archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Each copy of any part of a HUME STUDIES transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

Jewish-Christian relations in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: The conception of the Messiah

At the end of the seventeenth century there was concern amongst some Christian theologians to refute the views that there were to be two messiahs or that the Messiah could be a non-Jew, l The need to refute such views, and to refute them at length, of course, suggests that somebody actually held them. And in the refutations mention is made of people advancing these views. When one traces back the consideration of these messianic possibilities, one finds an interesting picture of how such theories came to the fore in the circumstances of the time.

Leibniz, Mysticism, and Religion

Introduction. 1. Some Occult Influences on Leibnizs Monadology S. Brown. 2. Leibniz and Mysticism D. Rutherford. 3. Leibniz and the Kabbalah A.P. Coudert. 4. Leibniz, Benzelius, and Swedenborg: The Kabbalistic Roots of Swedish Illuminism M.K. Schuchard. 5. Leibniz on Enthusiasm D.J. Cook. 6. Leibniz and Chinese Thought Yuen-Ting Lai. 7. Leibniz as a Lutheran U. Goldenbaum. Index.

Scepticism and the Study of History

During the two centuries prior to the publication of David Hume’s History of England, the attitude of the sceptical thinkers regarding the study of history had changed greatly. The ancient Greek sceptics and the Renaissance sceptics had limited interest in collections of historical data, and saw the work of historians as mostly just fables, poetry or lies, not really contributing to the search for truth. However, in the period 1560–1760, sceptics became more and more concerned with historical studies, in both a positive and negative way. They questioned the reliability of historical data and the kinds of inferences employed in reasoning about the past. On the other hand, they used historical studies as a basic form of sceptical argumentation. Issues raised in the course of this transition in sceptical concern with history, and factors involved in bringing this about, played a major role in the development of the theory and methodology of what is now considered historical research. The great achievements of Pierre Bayle (1647–1706) and David Hume (1711–1776), both philosophical sceptics and practicing historians, can, perhaps, be better appreciated when seen in terms of this phase of the history of modern scepticism.

Spinoza and Bible Scholarship

Spinoza is usually considered one of the creators of modern biblical scholarship and biblical criticism because of the views about the Bible that he expressed in the Tractatus Theologico-politicus (hereafter abbreviated TIP) and in some of his letters. In this paper I shall briefly indicate a way in which Spinoza’s views might have developed, then present what his views were and compare and contrast them with those of some of his contemporaries. Finally I will try to evaluate the extent of his originality.

The Prefaces by Menasseh ben Israel and Jacob Judah Leon Templo to the Vocalized Mishnah (1646)

It is known throughout the world that the Mishnaioth are the crown and splendour of the Jews wherever they be scattered, for they are concise regulations incorporating the most select interpretations of all the commandments of our law received on Sinai, more precious than gold. Yet I saw many of the most wise and learned of my people stuttering over the pronunciation of many words instead of being precise. Few comprehend the conjugation of the verbs and the laws of accentuation, nor the pronouns, and so do not know their right from their left. I said to myself in my heart, the time has come to serve God and to open an entry to students who have been reading for days and years, to make it easier for them with pointing and signs to lighten their burdens, for the meanings are hidden and sealed.

Epicureanism and Scepticism in the Early 17th Century

By the early 17th century there was a good deal of interest and concern with Epicurean physics, especially among chemists and medical doctors, and some interest and concern with Epicurean moral theory and theology. People who were sceptical of traditional morality and theology were being accused by fanatics like le pere Garasse of being Epicureans, even if their professed views were fideistic (like those of Pierre Charron).1 In this paper I will not attempt to survey the various writers of Epicurean tendencies of the period, their affinities to scepticism, and the accusations made against them. Instead I shall treat just two figures, Pierre Gassendi and Uriel Da Costa, and shall try to show that each of them tried to combine an aspect of Epicureanism with a type of scepticism - Gassendi joining an epistemological scepticism with Epicurean physics, and Da Costa joining a religious scepticism with portions of Epicurean theology. The later fusion of these two views produced, I believe, the modern scientific unbeliever.

At the Crossroads of Faith and Reason, An Essay on Pierre Bayle (review)

expressions in thought as well as in other manifestations of mind and soul. Such an investigation of the typically Muslim consciousness will have to be carried out not so much by a comparison with other civilizations or religions as the ultimate standard, but rather by a search for the meaning of such expressions for the Muslims themselves, be they actively or passively involved. A final pressing question remains when we appreciate the present study: how in a given society can the freedom of human existence be brought into the open by philosophical thought ~ The task, role, or function of a philosophy entering into existential problems in a world which is structured by religion is quite important. An investigation into the history of Muslim philosophy, as it is presented by Muslim scholars in this work and as it may be pursued in collaboration with others, is itself a step in the direction of such philosophical research.