David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (4):389-423 (2004)
: Descartes provides an original and puzzling argument for the traditional theological doctrine that the world is continuously created by God. His key premise is that the parts of the duration of anything are "completely independent" of one another. I argue that Descartes derives this temporal independence thesis simply from the principle that causes are necessarily simultaneous with their effects. I argue further that it follows from Descartes's version of the continuous creation doctrine that God is the instantaneous and total cause of everything that happens, and that this is just what his physics demands. But although God is the total cause of everything, he is not the only cause, since Descartes considers it obvious that finite minds have the power to move bodies. In the face of this apparent paradox, several recent commentators have suggested that Descartes accepted the late scholastic view that God and finite causes somehow collaborate or concur in the production of numerically identical effects. But close examination reveals that the case for Cartesian concurrentism is weak. Fortunately, there is a simpler and more fruitful solution to the problem of reconciling divine and human action. I argue that that in Descartes's world certain motions, such as voluntary movements of our bodies, are causally overdetermined This account allows Descartes to avoid occasionalism without embracing an elaborate metaphysics of secondary causality. Finally, I argue that the overdeterminist interpretation sheds new light on two longstanding problems of Cartesian metaphysics. First, it resolves a serious difficulty with a standard reading of Descartes's conception of human freedom. Second, it offers a novel approach to the old problem of reconciling genuine human action with the principle of the conservation of total quantity of motion
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Andrew M. Bailey (2012). Incompatibilism and the Past. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (2):351-376.
Patricia Easton (2009). What is at Stake in the Cartesian Debates on the Eternal Truths? Philosophy Compass 4 (2):348-362.
Geoffrey Gorham (2005). The Metaphysical Roots of Cartesian Physics: The Law of Rectilinear Motion. Perspectives on Science 13 (4):431-451.
Geoffrey Gorham (2008). Cartesian Temporal Atomism: A New Defence, a New Refutation. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16 (3):625 – 637.
Similar books and articles
Helen Hattab (2007). Concurrence or Divergence? Reconciling Descartes's Physics with His Metaphysics. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (1):49-78.
Andrew R. Platt (2011). Divine Activity and Motive Power in Descartes's Physics. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4):623 - 646.
Helen Hattab (2000). The Problem of Secondary Causation in Descartes: A Response to Des Chene. Perspectives on Science 8 (2):93-118.
Michael Della Rocca (2005). Descartes, the Cartesian Circle, and Epistemology Without God. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (1):1–33.
Michael Della Rocca (2005). Descartes, the Cartesian Circle, and Epistemology Without God. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (1):1-33.
Andrew Pessin (2010). Divine Simplicity and the Eternal Truths: Descartes and the Scholastics. Philosophia 38 (1):69-105.
Jorge Secada (2000). Cartesian Metaphysics: The Late Scholastic Origins of Modern Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads89 ( #43,996 of 1,790,301 )
Recent downloads (6 months)11 ( #75,792 of 1,790,301 )
How can I increase my downloads?