Émilie du Châtelet

Leibniz endorses the world apart doctrine, according to which a substance is that which is independent of all other things except God. However, I will argue that in what appears to be a radical departure from the causal version of the world apart doctrine, Du Châtelet—whose metaphysics appears to be Leibnizian from a distance—embraces the causal connectedness of created substances. I further show that Du Châtelet’s rejection of Leibniz’s claim that a substance is causally independent of all other created substances (...) can be traced back to a more fundamental antiLeibnizian commitment on Du Châtelet’s part concerning the in-principle accessibility of natural (i.e., non-divine) sufficient reasons by finite minds and to her commitment to a causal theory of intentionality. (shrink)

I show that unlike her rationalist predecessor Leibniz, Du Châtelet is committed to epistemic causal idealism about natural causes. According to this view, it is constitutive of natural causes that they are in principle knowable by us (i.e., finite intelligent beings). Du Châtelet’s causal idealism stems at least in part from the distinctive theoretical role played by the Principle of Sufficient Reason in her system (as presented in her _Institutions de physique_), as well as her argument for the Principle of (...) Sufficient Reason. I show that far from merely explicating Leibniz’s metaphysics, Du Châtelet develops a radical and novel rationalism that is in keeping with her core commitment to science. (shrink)

I argue for two main points in historiography of physics regarding the significance of Du Châtelet's Foundations of Physics in the development of mechanics. The first is that, despite Du Châtelet calling it a textbook in the Preface, it should not be understood as 'merely' a textbook. Instead, it fits in a tradition of women involved in natural philosophy in that era using liminal publication opportunities, and to reduce some of the resistance to their publication. Even these liminal opportunities were (...) rare and mostly available to women of very high social standing and wealth, who also happened to have supportive families or spouses, and were usually associated with some other well-known male thinker. The second point is that, even if we treat Foundations as a textbook, the way in which it synthesizes and refines work by Newton, Leibniz, Descartes, and others, meets the criteria given by Kuhn for the establishment of a first paradigm, which is not complete without such a definitive statement that enables the mop-up work characteristic of normal science. I conclude that by Kuhn's own criteria, he ought to have identified Du Châtelet as a key part of establishing the first paradigm in physics. She blazed a trail for others to follow. (shrink)

Dieses Buch arbeitet Émilie Du Châtelets Beitrag zur Philosophie- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte im Übergang von der frühen Neuzeit in die Moderne in Hinblick auf ihr Verständnis des Prinzips vom zureichenden Grunde auf. Du Châtelets Bestimmung, Erweisung und Anwendung des Prinzips vom zureichenden Grunde wird im Vergleich zur Auslegung desselben Prinzips bei ihren Vorgängern Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz und Christian Wolff untersucht. Das Prinzip vom zureichenden Grunde ist ein fundamentales Erkenntnisaxiom, dessen Verfechtung und Bestimmung die Rationalisten der Frühmoderne prägt. Dieses Buch erarbeitet, wie (...) Du Châtelets Bestimmung des Prinzips den Ausgang ihres Zeitalters prägt. Das Buch richtet sich an Studierende, Lehrende und Forschende der Philosophie- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte der Frühmoderne, sowie an alle, die an Kausalitätstheorien und dem Prinzip vom zureichenden Grunde interessiert sind. (shrink)

In her Discourse on Happiness, Émilie Du Châtelet claims that one must be susceptible to illusions to be happy. She gives almost no explanation of what illusions are or what causes them, and thus the claim appears to lack an adequate defense. I offer an account of Du Châtelet’s theory of illusion by drawing upon the previously unexamined influence of other French philosophers’ accounts of the connection between passion and illusion, including Descartes, Malebranche, and Anne-Thérèse, Marquise de Lambert. According to (...) this tradition, the passions misrepresent their objects in the imagination, and these misrepresentations can be referred to as “illusions.” Attributing this theory of passionate misrepresentation to Du Châtelet solves two puzzles about illusion that arise in the Discourse. First, it explains why she claims illusions are necessary for happiness. Second, it explains how illusions can be distinguished from cognitive errors made in other domains, like philosophy and natural science. (shrink)

In the second chapter of her <i>Institutions de Physique</i> Emilie Du Chatelet gives two cosmological arguments for the existence of God. In this chapter I focus on the first of these arguments. I argue that, while it bears some significant similarities to arguments given by John Locke and Christian Wolff, it improves on these arguments in at least two ways. First, it avoids a potential equivocation in Locke's argument; and second, it avoids Wolff's mere stipulation that whoever claims that there (...) cannot be an infinite regress of contingent beings does not understand what a sufficient reason is. I finally argue that her argument avoids a related objection, considered by David Hume, on which to explain a causal chain is merely to explain each link in the chain. (shrink)

In this paper, I analyse Émilie Du Châtelet’s (1706–49) account of causation which, in turn, is crucial for understanding her philosophical main work, the Institutions de physique (1740/1742). So far, the topic of causation in Du Châtelet’s thought has received but little attention despite its importance. I will show that Du Châtelet’s account of physical causation is that of physical influx much in line with the position taken by some of the most prominent eighteenth-century German metaphysicians at the time of (...) the publication of her Institutions: Martin Knutzen (1713–49), Johann Peter Reusch (1691–1758) and the pre-Critical Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). I will argue that physical influx takes place at the level of simple substances or physical monads, and I will defend my interpretation against the main objection to physical influx: that it conflicts with Leibniz’s non-transfer argument. The ultimate metaphysical details regarding how physical influx has to be understood remain an issue, that of understanding the causality of the cause. This, however, is an issue that other causal theories face, too (in their own way). (shrink)

I distinguish three ways in which early modern rationalists seek to apply the principle of sufficient reason to empirical science, and critically assess some of their attempts to do so. I focus especially on how these thinkers assume substantive theories of explanation and intelligibility--which are indebted to the mechanist and experimentalist traditions--in many of their deployments of this rationalist principle. A recurring problem is that these philosophers deploy their standards of intelligibility inconsistently: some of their own favored explanations do not (...) always live up to their standards. I argue that the problem is especially acute for Leibniz and Euler, given their enthusiasm for final-causal explanations. (shrink)

I begin by outlining Du Châtelet’s ontology of mathematical objects: she is an idealist, and mathematical objects are fictions dependent on acts of abstraction. Next, I consider how this idealism can be reconciled with her endorsement of necessary truths in mathematics, which are grounded in essences that we do not create. Finally, I discuss how mathematics and physics relate within Du Châtelet’s idealism. Because the primary objects of physics are partly grounded in the same kinds of acts as yield mathematical (...) objects, she thinks we are sometimes licensed in drawing conclusions about physical things from mathematical premises. (shrink)

In the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, Kant attempts to argue a priori from the indefinite divisibility of space to the indefinite metaphysical divisibility of matter. This is one type of argument from the continuity of space—purportedly established by Euclidean geometry—to the continuity of matter. I compare Kant's argument to parallel reasoning in Du Châtelet, whose work he knew. Both philosophers appeal to idealism about matter in their reasoning, yet also face difficulties in explaining why continuity, though not some other (...) properties from geometry, applies to matter. Both also risk inconsistency in adopting potentialist accounts of material parts, while also committing to realism about infinitesimals. An important difference between them is that Du Châtelet deploys at least three definitions of continuity; only one of these, amounting to indefinite divisibility, is shared with Kant. (shrink)

The first few chapters of Du Châtelet’s Institutions de Physique outline a metaphysical foundation that focuses on the principles of knowledge and the fundamental concepts of our knowledge of the physical world. While the first wave of contemporary Du Châtelet scholarship in the 1970s and 1980s read Du Châtelet’s metaphysical foundation as a stripped-down version of Leibniz-Wolffian metaphysics, the latest work has argued against this by suggesting that Du Châtelet’s metaphysics is a method for her physics and can stand on (...) its own feet. This latter interpretation, most prominently advanced by Brading, succeeds in putting Du Châtelet’s metaphysical theory into focus rather than seeing it as a flawed commentary on Leibniz and Wolff. However, it subordinates her metaphysical foundations to the aims of the science of physics, wherein the core question is how bodily interaction works. This paper argues that Du Châtelet’s metaphysical foundations are not meant to ground the science of physics alone, and instead are to lay the foundation for all knowledge of the natural world. By analysing her previously mostly overlooked conception of what ‘a being’ is in chapter 3, we will see that Du Châtelet’s metaphysical foundations address how we gain knowledge of a natural world in our everyday experience of natural beings and thus come to know ‘beings’ in the first place, i.e. prior to scientific judgements on them. The present paper thus asserts that Du Châtelet’s metaphysical foundations are more than a method for her physics. (shrink)

The first part of this paper investigates the purpose, methodological approach, and fundamental thesis of Du Châtelet’s theory of simple beings. The paper shows that ‘simple beings’ in Du Châtelet is a theory concerned with the understanding of extended bodies. The second part of the paper shows that her theory of simple beings, while it has important roots in both Leibniz and Wolff, is remarkably different from theirs. Thus, contrary to a common thread in the literature, Du Châtelet’s theory of (...) simple beings does not commit her to an ontology that can be equated with that of Leibniz or Wolff. Instead, her theory of simple beings is faculty-centred and draws a fundamental and novel distinction between the phenomenal realm of the senses and ‘real’ substances, which can only be grasped through the understanding. (shrink)

Émilie Du Châtelet was a fictionalist about mathematics. Mathematical fictionalism (henceforth, fictionalism) is the view that, strictly speaking, mathematical entities such as numbers, functions, and sets, are fictions that are useful for human purposes, but are not themselves real in an ontological sense. I first explain fictionalism. Then I illustrate Du Châtelet’s position with regard to mathematical entities and give textual evidence of her fictionalism from Institutions de Physique. I offer a sketch of the philosophical-scientific issues that motivated Du Châtelet’s (...) fictionalism: explaining the behavior of bodies, as well as the ontological extraneity of mathematical entities, had they been taken to be real abstracta. Finally, I argue that Du Châtelet’s fictionalism was plausibly motivated by Leibniz’s, Wolff’s, and other mathematicians’ views who themselves held fictionalist positions with regard to certain mathematical issues. Although I project onto Du Châtelet a philosophical position which was not identified as such at the time of her writing, I do so with the aim of highlighting her systematicity and making sense of her priorities, as well as showing a link between historical and contemporary uses of fictions, and issues in the metaphysics of science. (shrink)

I examine Du Châtelet’s methodology for physics and metaphysics through the lens of her engagement with Newton’s Rules for Reasoning in Natural Philosophy. I first show that her early manuscript writings discuss and endorse these Rules. Then, I argue that her famous published account of hypotheses continues to invoke close analogues of Rules 3 and 4, despite various developments in her position. Once relevant experimental evidence and some basic constraints are met, it is legitimate to inductively generalize from observations; general (...) hypotheses can thereafter be assumed as true until contrary experiments show otherwise. I conclude by arguing that this account of induction plays an essential role in her metaphysics, both in an argument for simple substances—which has an inductive premise—and in her attempt to distinguish acceptable and unacceptable metaphysical commitments. (shrink)

This paper suggests a reading of the early 18th-century philosopher Emilie du Châtelet’s position on the questions of knowledge and matter as a surprising early precursor to technoscience/ posthuman feminism’s stand on scientific methodology and embodiment. In her 1740 book Institution de Physics (Foundations of Physics), du Châtelet, in an enlightenment fashion, turns to empiricism in an attempt to explain how we acquire scientific knowledge with an aim to account for the physical world and specifically for bodily agency. It is (...) empiricism that leads her to criticise both the Cartesians as well as the Newtonians disembodied account of force. Du Châtelet’s main quarrel with Newton’s theory of bodies arises from its insufficiency to account for matter as vital. It is here that she turns to Leibniz’s metaphysics in a move that, in effect, redefines the premise of reason. Having an insight into her intellectual world at the dawn of enlightenment highlights the tendencies of our scientific paradigm to account for bodies as nonlogical and affirms the technoscience/ posthuman feminist transformative project. (shrink)

In this chapter, we argue that Du Châtelet’s account of motion is an important contribution to the history of the absolute versus relative motion debate. The arguments we lay out have two main strands. First, we clarify Du Châtelet’s threefold taxonomy of motion, using Musschenbroek as a useful Newtonian foil and showing that the terminological affinity between the two is only apparent. Then, we assess Du Châtelet’s account in light of the conceptual, epistemological, and ontological challenges posed by Newton to (...) any relational theory of motion. What we find is that, although Du Châtelet does not meet all the challenges to their full extent, her account of motion is adequate for the goal of the Principia: determining the true motions in our planetary system. (shrink)

Dans cet article, je propose de relire l’épistémologie de du Châtelet à l’aune de la question de l’autorité. Je montre que les outils méthodologiques convoqués dans les premiers chapitres des Institutions de physique (1740), à savoir le principe de non-contradiction, le principe de raison suffisante, ainsi que la théorie des hypothèses du chapitre 4, peuvent être compris comme des moyens de contrôler l’usage des systèmes des grands auteurs que sont Descartes, Leibniz et Newton. Ils permettent en effet d’éviter les dangers (...) du dogmatisme que représentent l’esprit de parti et l’idolâtrie. Ce faisant, je défends que l’une des originalités de l’épistémologie de du Châtelet est d’intégrer à sa théorie de la physique une réflexion sur la meilleure manière de gérer les autorités scientifiques. Cette perspective a l’avantage de court-circuiter la question traditionnelle des influences ou des filiations de du Châtelet, pour lui préférer celle de la façon dont elle use de la tradition. (shrink)

Abstractabstract:The Discourse on Happiness is Émilie du Châtelet's most translated work, but there is no systematic interpretation of her account of the nature and means to happiness in the secondary literature. I argue that the key to understanding her account lies in interpreting the various roles of the "great machines of happiness." I show that Du Châtelet provides a sophisticated hedonistic account of the nature of happiness, in which passions and tastes are the means to self-perpetuating, increasing, and long-lasting sources (...) of pleasure. In addition, I argue that the remaining "great machines of happiness" are not logically necessary conditions for happiness, but rather character traits that support our tastes and passions. (shrink)

O século XVIII é considerado uma época em que o método de pesquisa newtoniano está bem estabelecido e o seu uso não é questionado, segundo autores como Kuhn. No entanto, como veremos, isso está longe da realidade, pois aqui propomos os seguintes dois objetivos: por um lado, observaremos como dentro dos próprios autores chamados newtonianos não há um uso uniforme do método newtoniano e que alguns deles até o modificam em suas obras onde expõem a doutrina de Newton. Por outro (...) lado, exporemos o método de Émilie du Châtelet, que, tendo lido Newton e esses pensadores, rejeita a metodologia que eles propõem e se prepara para elaborar o que pode ser considerado um precedente do método hipotético-dedutivo utilizado hoje. Em última análise, o objetivo deste estudo é lançar luz sobre a situação do newtonianismo no século XVIII e mostrar a obra de du Châtelet como uma ponte entre duas épocas em relação à metodologia. (shrink)

Existe-t-il une tension entre la Loi de continuité (LC) d’Émilie du Châtelet et sa conviction qu’il existe une différence de nature entre les propositions absolument certaines et les propositions moralement certaines? Dans cet article, je soutiens qu’il n’y a pas de tension, car les commentateurs peuvent faire au moins deux choix d’interprétation. Tout d’abord, ils pourraient affirmer que pour du Châtelet, la LC ne devrait s’appliquer qu’au domaine empirique : il existe un fossé épistémique entre le monde naturel et empirique (...) à partir duquel nous obtenons des vérités moralement certaines, et le monde abstrait et métaphysique à partir duquel nous obtenons des vérités absolument certaines. L’autre alternative, que je défends ici, est la suivante : interpréter du Châtelet comme croyant en une formulation épistémologique de la LC, auquel cas (i) il n’y a pas de différence de nature entre les propositions absolument certaines et moralement certaines, et (ii) le domaine de toutes les vérités est constitué de toutes les vérités, même les vérités absolument certaines (contrairement aux positions de Brading en 2019, Detlefsen en 2014, et de Wells à venir). Cette interprétation résout la tension car elle signifie que du Châtelet n’est pas engagée – à proprement parler – dans une différence de nature entre les vérités absolument et moralement certaines, ce qui est donc cohérent avec une formulation épistémologique de la LC (puisqu’il n’y aurait pas de sauts ou de lacunes entre l’une et l’autre). Selon cette interprétation, il est en principe possible que des vérités moralement certaines deviennent des vérités absolument certaines, une fois que le Principe de contradiction (PC) ou Dieu est la raison suffisante pour laquelle les premières sont en fait absolument certaines. (shrink)

Cet article analyse le rôle des principes premiers dans les Institutions de physique d’Émilie du Châtelet et le rapport de sa conception au projet métaphysique de Christian Wolff, en étudiant la fonction architectonique que revêt la métaphysique générale ou l’ontologie grâce à ce que Wolff appelle les « notions directrices » ou « fondamentales ». J’examine d’abord la doctrine wolffienne telle qu’elle est détaillée dans la dissertation « Des notions directrices et du véritable usage de la philosophie première » de (...) 1729. Ensuite, je regarde de plus près les développements dédiés aux principes premiers dans les Institutions, afin de mettre en lumière leur rôle fondateur en physique. Je souhaite montrer que du Châtelet élabore une conception où les principes métaphysiques – au sens fort conféré au terme de principe ontologique par Wolff – rendent possible l’acquisition de la connaissance et l’accès à la certitude, en assurant l’intelligibilité et le fondement de toutes les sciences. Enfin, je discuterai l’inscription de cette perspective dans la théorie des principes des Lumières, notamment en rapport avec les conceptions sur la métaphysique et le principe premier de Maupertuis et d’Alembert. (shrink)

Today, there is a large consensus in science, politics and society about the relevance and necessity for advancing gender equality. Despite increased measures and initiatives for gender-appropriate research and teaching and for funding programs, women are still strongly underrepresented in science. The number of women in philosophy of science is conspicuously low. While gender and diversity issues are at the top of the agenda in other sciences, disciplines, and scientific cultures, and gender research has long since found its way into (...) practice, there is a considerable research deficit in philosophy of science vis-à-vis such approaches, apart from a few critical voices from feminist science studies. The aim of this chapter is to provide guidance on how to make women’s participation in research visible from a historical, constructive, and systematic point of view by using selected examples from philosophy and history of physics. (shrink)

L’article met en évidence les enjeux de la conceptualisation de la certitude en physique à partir de l’analyse de la situation épistémique du sujet connaissant. Il s’agit d’abord de penser l’incertitude comme notre condition épistémique et de considérer qu’elle est moins une défaillance constitutive que l’identité de tout sujet connaissant. L’article essaie ensuite de montrer comment Émilie du Châtelet travaille au coeur de la distinction conceptuelle leibnizienne entre certitude et probabilité pour élaborer un nouveau régime de certitude.

Dans cet article, nous proposons d’examiner les choix de composition et d’écriture opérés par Émilie du Châtelet dans sa traduction française des Principia Mathematica d’Isaac Newton. En particulier, nous nous interrogeons sur la coexistence au sein de cette dernière de deux textes de style mathématique différent que constituent d’une part la traduction proprement dite des démonstrations géométriques des Principia, et d’autre part la « solution analytique » jointe au deuxième tome des Principes mathématiques de la philosophie naturelle. Dans la mesure (...) où l’ensemble des démonstrations géométriques du texte newtonien sont irréductibles à toute forme de « traduction » analytique complète, nous suggérons que la mise en regard du texte newtonien avec sa « Solution analytique » proposée par du Châtelet procède d’une réflexion singulière de sa part sur les principes régissant la philosophie naturelle. (shrink)

Este artículo se propone examinar el posicionamiento de Émilie Du Châtelet (1706-1749) respecto del tema de la defensa de la educación de las mujeres. Nos concentraremos en dos de sus obras: su adaptación al francés de La fábula de las abejas de Bernard Mandeville y su Discurso sobre la felicidad. Estudiaremos cómo Du Châtelet dialoga con distintos referentes de este debate, como François Fénelon, el abad de Saint-Pierre y Anna Maria van Schurman. Nuestro fin es demostrar la radicalidad de la (...) posición de Du Châtelet, en oposición a aquellas interpretaciones que tienden a desacreditar o a subestimar el compromiso de esta pensadora con la causa de la defensa de la educación de las mujeres. (shrink)

Du Châtelet holds that mathematical representations play an explanatory role in natural science. Moreover, she writes that things proceed in nature as they do in geometry. How should we square these assertions with Du Châtelet’s idealism about mathematical objects, on which they are ‘fictions’ dependent on acts of abstraction? The question is especially pressing because some of her important interlocutors (Wolff, Maupertuis, and Voltaire) denied that mathematics informs us about the properties of material things. After situating Du Châtelet in this (...) debate, this chapter argues, first, that her account of the origins of mathematical objects is less subjectivist than it might seem. Mathematical objects are non-arbitrary, public entities. While mathematical objects are partly mind-dependent, so are material things. Mathematical objects can approximate the material. Second, it is argued that this moderate metaphysical position underlies Du Châtelet’s persistent claims that mathematics is required for certain kinds of general knowledge, including in natural science. The chapter concludes with an illustrative example: an analysis of Du Châtelet’s argument that matter is continuous. A key premise in the argument is that mathematical representations and material nature correspond. (shrink)

I argue that Émilie Du Châtelet breaks with Christian Wolff regarding the scope and epistemological content of the principle of sufficient reason, despite his influence on her basic ontology and their agreement that the principle of sufficient reason has foundational importance. These differences have decisive consequences for the ways in which Du Châtelet and Wolff conceive of science.

This article discusses Du Châtelet’s challenging claim that entertaining illusions, especially illusions of being esteemed by posterity, is conducive to happiness. It does so by taking a contextualizing approach, contrasting her views with some Epicurean aspects of the views on illusions and happiness in Bernard de Fontenelle and Julien Offray de La Mettrie. I will argue for three claims: (1) Du Châtelet’s comparison between self-related illusions and illusions in the theater is vulnerable to objections deriving from some distinctions that Fontenelle’s (...) poetics draws between the role of illusions in the theater and the role of illusions in real life. (2) Examining Fontenelle’s analysis of the detrimental effects of self-related illusions indicates several respects in which Du Châtelet has underestimated the ambivalent nature of illusions. (3) Du Châtelet’s view that illusions are akin to sensations that are favorable to us problematically generalizes La Mettrie’s insight that some acts of the imagination have a quasi-perceptual nature. (shrink)

This article discusses Du Châtelet’s challenging claim that entertaining illusions, especially illusions of being esteemed by posterity, is conducive to happiness. It does so by taking a contextualizing approach, contrasting her views with some Epicurean aspects of the views on illusions and happiness in Bernard de Fontenelle and Julien Offray de La Mettrie. I will argue for three claims: (1) Du Châtelet’s comparison between self-related illusions and illusions in the theater is vulnerable to objections deriving from some distinctions that Fontenelle’s (...) poetics draws between the role of illusions in the theater and the role of illusions in real life. (2) Examining Fontenelle’s analysis of the detrimental effects of self-related illusions indicates several respects in which Du Châtelet has underestimated the ambivalent nature of illusions. (3) Du Châtelet’s view that illusions are akin to sensations that are favorable to us problematically generalizes La Mettrie’s insight that some acts of the imagination have a quasi-perceptual nature. (shrink)

I investigate Du Châtelet's contribution to the concept of time and position the relevance and content of that contribution between Leibniz and Kant. I argue that Du Châtelet advances Leibniz's concept of time by explaining how we form the idea of time in our mind and how time as an ideal being relates to succession in real beings. I show that Du Châtelet, differently to Kant, recognizes the dependency of time in its constitution on succession in "real things" and that (...) her concept of time is in this respect superior to Kant's. With a detailed investigation into Du Châtelet's notion of time in its own right and without prematurely "fitting" it into a defined debate between her contemporaries, I am aiming to reveal her original contribution to an understanding of time. I locate her concept of time in a context that is explicitly philosophical in terms of an investigation into how the idea of time is formed and constituted rather than a physical debate on the nature of time as a phenomenon relating to the movement of bodies. (shrink)

Grâce aux recherches de B. Schwarzbach, S. Seguin et d’autres, nous comprenons aujourd’hui à quel point Émilie Du Châtelet était engagée dans ce qu’on appelle la littérature clandestine. Son fameux ouvrage Examens de la Bible montre la force radicale de sa pensée. Madame Du Châtelet était peut-être aussi un catalyseur des idées libérales et radicales des Lumières mais la recherche, telle qu'elle se présente aujourd’hui, n'a pas encore exploré ses idées. Elle n’a pas non plus accepté l’idée que les femmes (...) auraient pu prendre une part considérable à ce mouvement. Pourtant, ce sont elles qui ont été particulièrement exposées à l'injustice que les normes religieuses imposaient aux femmes, y compris dans la société. (shrink)

The present book contextualizes Du Châtelet's contribution to the philosophy of her time. The editor offers this tribute to an Époque Émilienne as a collection of innovative papers on Emilie Du Châtelet's powerful philosophy and legacy. Du Châtelet was an outstanding figure in the era she lived in. Her work and achievements were unique, though not an exception in the 18th century, which did not lack outstanding women. Her personal intellectual education, her scholarly network and her mental acumen were celebrated (...) in her time, perceiving her to have "multiplied nine figures by nine figures in her head". She was able to gain access to institutions which were normally denied to women. To call an epoch an Époque Émilienne may be seen as daring and audacious, but it will not be the last time if we continue to bring women philosophers back into the memory of the history of philosophy. The contributors paid attention to the philosophical state of the art, which forms the background to Du Châtelet's philosophy. They follow the transformation of philosophical concepts under her pen and retrace the impact of her ideas. The book is of interest to scholars working in the history of philosophy as well as in gender studies. It is of special interest for scholars working on the 18th century, Kant, Leibniz, Wolff, Newton and the European Enlightenment. (shrink)

El siglo XVIII está considerado como una época en la que el método de investigación newtoniano está bien establecido y su uso no se cuestiona, según autores como Kuhn. Sin embargo, como veremos, esto está muy alejado de la realidad, ya que aquí planteamos los dos objetivos siguientes: por un lado, observaremos como dentro de los propios llamados newtonianos no hay un uso uniforme del método newtoniano y que algunos de ellos incluso lo modifican en sus obras donde exponen la (...) doctrina de Newton. Por otro lado, expondremos el método de Émilie du Châtelet, quien, habiendo leído a Newton y a estos pensadores, siente rechazo hacia la metodología que proponen y se dispone a elaborar lo que se puede considerar un precedente del método hipotético-deductivo utilizado hoy día. Lo que se persigue con el presente estudio, en definitiva, es arrojar luz sobre la situación del newtonianismo del siglo XVIII y mostrar el trabajo de du Châtelet como un puente entre dos épocas en relación a la metodología. (shrink)

Much scholarship has claimed the physics of Emilie du Châtelet’s treatise, Institutions de physique, is Newtonian. I argue against that idea. To do so, I distinguish three strands of meaning for the category ‘Newtonian science,’ and I examine her book against them. I conclude that her physics is not Newtonian in any useful or informative sense. To capture what is specific about it, we need better interpretive categories.

There is a growing consensus that Emilie Du Châtelet’s challenging essay “On Freedom” defends compatibilism. I offer an alternative, libertarian reading of the essay. I lay out the prima facie textual evidence for such a reading. I also explain how apparently compatibilist remarks in “On Freedom” can be read as aspects of a sophisticated type of libertarianism that rejects blind or arbitrary choice. To this end, I consider the historical context of Du Châtelet’s essay, and especially the dialectic between various (...) strands of eighteenth-century libertarianism and compatibilism. (shrink)

This is an English translation of Emilie Du Châtelet's "Sur la liberté." This 18th century text discusses freedom of the will, determinism, and divine foreknowledge. Translated from French by Julia Jorati, with the help of Julie Roy. French edition of this text, on which this translation is based: “Sur la liberté,” in Oeuvres complètes de Voltaire, vol. 14, edited by William H. Barber, 484–502. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1989.

In her Discourse on Happiness, Émilie du Châtelet argues susceptibility to illusion is one of the five ‘great machines of happiness,’ and that ‘we owe most of our pleasures to illusions’. However, many who read the Discourse find this aspect of her view puzzling and in tension with her claims that we must always seek truth and obey reason. To understand better her claims in the Discourse on Happiness, this article explores Du Châtelet's discussions of illusions in her Foundations of (...) Physics, On Liberty, and the Dissertation on the Nature and Propagation of Fire. I distinguish four types of illusions that Du Châtelet posits and clarify the ways in which these relate to her views on happiness and love in the Discourse and argue that she avoids deceptive or perpetual illusions of happiness through the use of the principle of sufficient reason. (shrink)

Émilie Du Châtelet’s Foundations of Physics (Institutions de physique, 1740/42) has recently been attracting increasing interest from analytical philosophy in the anglophone world. Du Châtelet’s conception of space and time constitutes a controversial issue. I argue that the current debate underestimates the modal approach and epistemological turn in Du Châtelet’s view on space and time. A historical perspective on Abraham Gotthelf Kästner’s criticism and Jean Henry Samuel Formey’s plagiarism of Du Châtelet underlines the significance of this turning point. Against this (...) background, I revisit Leonhard Euler’s space-time realism and its influence on Immanuel Kant. -/- Les Institutions de physique (1740/1742) d’Émilie Du Châtelet suscitent depuis peu un intérêt croissant dans le monde anglophone, chez les philosophes analytiques. Une question controversée concerne les concepts d’espace et de temps de Du Châtelet. Je soutiens que le débat actuel sous-estime l’approche modale et la tournure épistémologique des considérations de Du Châtelet sur l’espace et le temps. Un regard historique sur la critique d’Abraham Gotthelf Kästner et le plagiat de Du Châtelet par Jean Henry Samuel Formey souligne l’importance de ce tournant. Dans ce contexte, je revisite le réalisme spatio-temporel de Leonhard Euler et son influence sur Emmanuel Kant. (shrink)

ABSTRACTÉmilie Du Châtelet is the only French woman author of a work included in the corpus of clandestine philosophical literature: a set of treatises, dissertations, or letters that circulated in Europe, and especially in France, mainly in manuscript form, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the main purpose of which was to subject religion to rigorous rational criticism (philosophical, historical, scientific). These Examens de la religion, one of the most controversial works in this corpus, circulated during the eighteenth century and (...) gave rise to a form of legend: sometimes said to be the work of Émilie Du Châtelet, sometimes the result of a form of collaboration between Du Châtelet and the one whose life she shared for a long time: Voltaire. If the feminine point of view on the Bible played a role in the recent attribution of this text to Émilie Du Châtelet, the existence of a properly feminine writing in the wider context of clandestine philosophical literature can now be discussed. This article aims to put this debate into perspective, at both the methodological and philosophical level. (shrink)

There is a tension in Emilie Du Châtelet’s thought on mathematics. The objects of mathematics are ideal or fictional entities; nevertheless, mathematics is presented as indispensable for an account of the physical world. After outlining Du Châtelet’s position, and showing how she departs from Christian Wolff’s pessimism about Newtonian mathematical physics, I show that the tension in her position is only apparent. Du Châtelet has a worked-out defense of the explanatory and epistemic need for mathematical objects, consistent with their metaphysical (...) nonfundamentality. I conclude by sketching how Du Châtelet’s conception of mathematical indispensability differs interestingly from many contemporary approaches. (shrink)

For Émilie Du Châtelet, I argue, a central role of the principle of sufficient reason is to discriminate between better and worse explanations. Her principle of sufficient reason does not play this role for just any conceivable intellect: it specifically enables understanding for minds like ours. She develops this idea in terms of two criteria for the success of our explanations: “understanding how” and “understanding why.” These criteria can respectively be connected to the determinateness and contrastivity of explanations. The crucial (...) role Du Châtelet’s principle of sufficient reason plays in identifying good explanations is often overlooked in the literature, or else run together with questions about the justification and likelihood of explanations. An auxiliary goal of the article is to situate Du Châtelet’s principle of sufficient reason with respect to some of the general epistemological and metaphysical commitments of her Institutions de Physique, clarifying how it fits into the broader project of that work. (shrink)