Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024 |
Resumo: | Early modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate. |
id |
UERN-3_4f5f8fe6b0dd425ad25d29b16965af5a |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs2.periodicos.apps.uern.br:article/5024 |
network_acronym_str |
UERN-3 |
network_name_str |
Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinozaClinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism:: The figure of SpinozaclinamenEpicureanismLucretiusmodal metaphysicsnecessitySpinozaclinamenEpicurismoLucréciometafísica modalnecessidadeEspinosaEarly modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate.Early modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate.Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte - UERN2023-08-04info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/502410.25244/tf.v15i2.5024Trilhas Filosóficas; v. 15 n. 2 (2022): Trilhas Filosóficas: Dossiê Epicurismo antigo e sua recepção (v.15, n.2, 2022) ; 169-1811984-556110.25244/tf.v15i2reponame:Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)instacron:UERNenghttps://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024/3898Copyright (c) 2023 Kyriakos Fytakishttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Fytakis, Kyriakos2023-09-11T15:28:29Zoai:ojs2.periodicos.apps.uern.br:article/5024Revistahttp://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/indexPUBhttp://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/oaitrilhasfilosoficas@uern.br || marcos_erico@yahoo.com.br10.25244/tf1984-55611982-7490opendoar:2023-09-11T15:28:29Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism:: The figure of Spinoza |
title |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza |
spellingShingle |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza Fytakis, Kyriakos clinamen Epicureanism Lucretius modal metaphysics necessity Spinoza clinamen Epicurismo Lucrécio metafísica modal necessidade Espinosa |
title_short |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza |
title_full |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza |
title_fullStr |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza |
title_full_unstemmed |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza |
title_sort |
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza |
author |
Fytakis, Kyriakos |
author_facet |
Fytakis, Kyriakos |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Fytakis, Kyriakos |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
clinamen Epicureanism Lucretius modal metaphysics necessity Spinoza clinamen Epicurismo Lucrécio metafísica modal necessidade Espinosa |
topic |
clinamen Epicureanism Lucretius modal metaphysics necessity Spinoza clinamen Epicurismo Lucrécio metafísica modal necessidade Espinosa |
description |
Early modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-08-04 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024 10.25244/tf.v15i2.5024 |
url |
https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.25244/tf.v15i2.5024 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024/3898 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Kyriakos Fytakis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Kyriakos Fytakis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte - UERN |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte - UERN |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Trilhas Filosóficas; v. 15 n. 2 (2022): Trilhas Filosóficas: Dossiê Epicurismo antigo e sua recepção (v.15, n.2, 2022) ; 169-181 1984-5561 10.25244/tf.v15i2 reponame:Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN) instacron:UERN |
instname_str |
Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN) |
instacron_str |
UERN |
institution |
UERN |
reponame_str |
Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) |
collection |
Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
trilhasfilosoficas@uern.br || marcos_erico@yahoo.com.br |
_version_ |
1797240256182878208 |