Isis 93 (3):485-486 (2002)

Eric Palmer
Allegheny College
How must we and the world be constituted if science is possible? René Descartes had some ideas: For example, he wrote in 1639 to Marin Mersenne, “The imagination, which is the part of the mind that most helps mathematics, is more of a hindrance than a help in metaphysical speculation.” In another missive he suggested that, “besides [local] memory, which depends on the body, I believe there is also another one, entirely intellectual, which depends on the soul alone” (pp. 59, 52). Peter Schouls marshals brief passages such as these alongside discussions of Descartes’ major works to sketch a partial portrait of the human being and the universe. Schouls touches on both metaphysics and cognition, asking how things must be arranged to allow Descartes’ famous method to be mobilized. His conclusions run as follows. First, what should come as no surprise, Descartes “insists on a thoroughgoing dualism that allows him to characterize human beings as essentially free and to characterize nature as causally determined.” (44) Second, Schouls develops from Descartes’ cues a theory of cognition that allows for the pursuit of science by the exploitation of that free human creativity. ). Third, Schouls brings the previous points into full development with a speculative discussion of intellectual argument and scientific method.
Keywords Descartes  Cognition  Cartesian Method
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/374090
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
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

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Descartes No Es Un Conceptualista.Amy Karofsky - 2002 - Areté. Revista de Filosofía 14 (2):191-209.
Introduction: Conceivability and Possibility.Tamar Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne - 2002 - In T. Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press. pp. 1--70.
Descartes and the Possibility of Science.Richard A. Watson - 2004 - International Studies in Philosophy 36 (1):286-287.
Descartes and the Possibility of Science (Review).Margaret J. Osler - 2001 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 39 (2):294-295.
Descartes on Nothing in Particular.Eric Palmer - 1999 - In Rocco J. Gennaro & Charles Huenemann (eds.), New Essays on the Rationalists. Oxford University Press. pp. 26-47.
The Relevance of Descartes's Philosophy for Modern Philosophy of Science.Gerd Buchdahl - 1963 - British Journal for the History of Science 1 (3):227-249.


Added to PP index

Total views
85 ( #107,798 of 2,326,550 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
14 ( #42,984 of 2,326,550 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes