Anne Conway's Ontology of Creation: A Pluralist Interpretation

Journal of the American Philosophical Association 10 (2):333-348 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Does Anne Conway (1631–79) hold that the created world consists of a single underlying substance? Some have argued that she does; others have argued that she is a priority monist and so holds that there are many created substances, but the whole created world is ontologically prior to each particular creature. Against both of these proposals, this article makes the case for a substance pluralist interpretation of Conway: individual creatures are distinct substances, and the whole created world is not ontologically prior to the individual creatures that compose it. The basic argument for such a view draws on Conway's claims about the freedom and moral responsibility of individual creatures. The pluralist reading is straightforwardly compatible with these claims, while the monistic readings are not.

Similar books and articles


Added to PP

341 (#62,417)

6 months
165 (#21,512)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John R. T. Grey
Michigan State University

References found in this work

Monism: The Priority of the Whole.Jonathan Schaffer - 2010 - Philosophical Review 119 (1):31-76.
Ontological Dependence and Grounding in Aristotle.Phil Corkum - 2016 - Oxford Handbooks Online in Philosophy 1.
Anne Conway as a Priority Monist: A Reply to Gordon-Roth.Emily Thomas - 2020 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 6 (3):275-284.
What Kind of Monist is Anne Finch Conway?Jessica Gordon-Roth - 2018 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 4 (3):280-297.

View all 13 references / Add more references