Malebranche’s Theory of the Soul: A Cartesian Interpretation

Philosophical Review 107 (2):334 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

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 of the nature of the mind; the book concentrates specifically on Malebranche’s rejection of the claim that we know the nature of the mind better than we know the nature of body. Schmaltz maintains that Malebranche’s arguments for his position are, for the most part, successful against the Cartesians who opposed him, though he claims—and this is perhaps the central claim of the book—that “Malebranche took his negative thesis concerning our knowledge of the soul to involve not so much a rejection of Cartesianism as an internal correction of it”. While acknowledging that Augustine was “the primary inspiration for [Malebranche’s] view of the ideas that are the objects of perception”, Schmaltz’s interpretation of Malebranche’s theory of the soul “presents it as fundamentally Cartesian”. According to Schmaltz, not only is Malebranche closer to Descartes in this regard than is generally thought, he is closer to him than are many other Cartesians. Part 1 of the book examines Malebranche’s position that while we have certain knowledge of the soul’s existence, we have only confused knowledge of its nature. Part 2 focuses on Arnauld’s objection that if in fact we had no clear idea of the soul, we could not, despite Malebranche’s claims to the contrary, know anything of its immortality, spirituality, or freedom.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Knowing our nature: A note on Régis’ response to Malebranche.Fred Ablondi - 2007 - History of European Ideas 33 (2):135-141.
Causality and Human Freedom in Malebranche.Fred Ablondi - 1996 - Philosophy and Theology 9 (3-4):321-331.
Intellect and illumination in Malebranche.Nicholas Jolley - 1994 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 32 (2):209-224.
Malebranche and ideas.Steven M. Nadler - 1992 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Malebranche.Andrew Pyle - 2003 - New York: Routledge.
Malebranche and Knowledge of the Soul.Fred Ablondi - 1999 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 73 (4):571-581.
« Blasphème » Ou « Imagination Sans Fondement » ? La Bataille Des Griefs Théologiques Entre Descartes Et Malebranche.Cristian Moisuc - 2013 - Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy 5 (1):201-218.
Malebranche (review).Antonia LoLordo - 2006 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (1):124-125.
Malebranche on Descartes on mind-body distinctness.Tad M. Schmaltz - 1994 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 32 (4):573-603.
The Cambridge companion to Malebranche.Steven M. Nadler (ed.) - 2000 - New York: Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
39 (#356,630)

6 months
4 (#319,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Fred Ablondi
Hendrix College
Tad Schmaltz
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Citations of this work

Revisiting the Early Modern Philosophical Canon.Lisa Shapiro - 2016 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 2 (3):365-383.
Leibniz on the Metaphysics of Color.Stephen Puryear - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (2):319-346.
Hume on Modal Projection.Bridger Ehli - 2024 - Mind 133 (529):167-195.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references