Epicureanism and Early Modern Naturalism

It is often suggested that certain forms of early modern philosophy are naturalistic. Although I have some sympathy with this description, I argue that applying the category of naturalism to early modern philosophy is not useful. There is another category that does most of the work we want the category of naturalism to do ? one that, unlike naturalism, was actually used by early moderns
Keywords naturalism  gassendi  mechanism  atomism  atheism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/09608788.2011.583416
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive Antonia LoLordo, Epicureanism and Early Modern Naturalism
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Alexander Douglas (2015). Was Spinoza a Naturalist? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 96 (1):77-99.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Monte Ransome Johnson (2003). Was Gassendi an Epicurean? History of Philosophy Quarterly 20 (4):339 - 360.
Hans Fink (2006). Three Sorts of Naturalism. European Journal of Philosophy 14 (2):202–221.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

48 ( #71,159 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

14 ( #50,975 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.