原子论与笛卡尔主义:1650 年代乌得勒支争论中的加森迪和戈尔莱乌斯(以及更多人

IF 0.2 Q2 HISTORY
Erik-Jan Bos
{"title":"原子论与笛卡尔主义:1650 年代乌得勒支争论中的加森迪和戈尔莱乌斯(以及更多人","authors":"Erik-Jan Bos","doi":"10.1163/24055069-08040006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interestingly, one of them, Johannes de Bruyn, is considered to be a staunch Cartesian, while the other, Daniel Voet, was a neo-Aristotelian and strongly opposed to Descartes’s philosophy. This article examines this curious situation and analyses the theories of both professors. While converging with Gassendi on several crucial points, their theories relied mainly on other sources. Since De Bruyn’s atomistic view has never been studied before, the main part of the article is devoted to him and his sources. Surprisingly, it turns out that David Gorlaeus was a source of inspiration for De Bruyn’s development of a new type of Cartesianism.","PeriodicalId":37173,"journal":{"name":"Erudition and the Republic of Letters","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Atomism and Cartesianism: Gassendi and Gorlaeus (and More) in Utrecht Disputations in the 1650s\",\"authors\":\"Erik-Jan Bos\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/24055069-08040006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interestingly, one of them, Johannes de Bruyn, is considered to be a staunch Cartesian, while the other, Daniel Voet, was a neo-Aristotelian and strongly opposed to Descartes’s philosophy. This article examines this curious situation and analyses the theories of both professors. While converging with Gassendi on several crucial points, their theories relied mainly on other sources. Since De Bruyn’s atomistic view has never been studied before, the main part of the article is devoted to him and his sources. Surprisingly, it turns out that David Gorlaeus was a source of inspiration for De Bruyn’s development of a new type of Cartesianism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erudition and the Republic of Letters\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erudition and the Republic of Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/24055069-08040006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erudition and the Republic of Letters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24055069-08040006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1650 年代,乌得勒支大学的两位哲学教授为原子论辩护。有趣的是,其中一位约翰内斯-德-布鲁因(Johannes de Bruyn)被认为是坚定的笛卡尔主义者,而另一位丹尼尔-沃伊特(Daniel Voet)则是新亚里士多德主义者,强烈反对笛卡尔哲学。本文探讨了这一奇怪的情况,并分析了两位教授的理论。虽然他们在几个关键点上与伽森迪的观点一致,但他们的理论主要依赖于其他来源。由于德布鲁因的原子论观点以前从未被研究过,因此文章的主要部分专门讨论他和他的资料来源。令人惊讶的是,大卫-戈尔莱乌斯(David Gorlaeus)竟然是德布鲁恩发展新型笛卡尔主义的灵感来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Atomism and Cartesianism: Gassendi and Gorlaeus (and More) in Utrecht Disputations in the 1650s
In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interestingly, one of them, Johannes de Bruyn, is considered to be a staunch Cartesian, while the other, Daniel Voet, was a neo-Aristotelian and strongly opposed to Descartes’s philosophy. This article examines this curious situation and analyses the theories of both professors. While converging with Gassendi on several crucial points, their theories relied mainly on other sources. Since De Bruyn’s atomistic view has never been studied before, the main part of the article is devoted to him and his sources. Surprisingly, it turns out that David Gorlaeus was a source of inspiration for De Bruyn’s development of a new type of Cartesianism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Erudition and the Republic of Letters
Erudition and the Republic of Letters Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信