Determinism and Causal Feedback Loops in Montesquieu's Explanations for the Military Rise and Fall of Rome

British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (3):507-528 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Montesquieu's Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de leur décadence (1733/1734) is a methodological exercise in causal explanation on the meso-level applied to the subject of the military rise and fall of Rome. Rome is described as a system with contingent initial conditions that have a strong path-determining effect. Contingent and plastic initial configurations become highly determining in their subsequent operation, thanks to self-reinforcing feedback loops. Montesquieu's method seems influenced by the ruthless commitment to efficient causality and the reductionism of seventeenth-century mechanicist philosophy; but in contrast to these predecessors, he is more interested in dynamic processes than in unchangeable substances, and his use of efficient causality in the context of a system approach implies a form of holism that is lacking in his predecessors. The formal and conceptual analysis in this article is in many ways complementary with Paul Rahe's recent predominantly political analysis of the Considérations. At the same time, this article points to a problem in the works on the Enlightenment by Jonathan Israel: his account stresses a one-dimensional continuum consisting of Radical, Moderate and Counter-Enlightenment. This invites Israel to place the combined religious, political and philosophical views of each thinker on one of these three points. His scheme runs into trouble when a thinker with moderate religious and political views produces radical philosophical concepts. Montesquieu's Considérations is a case in point.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On chance in causal loops.J. Berkovitz - 2001 - Mind 110 (437):1-23.
Explaining causal loops.U. Meyer - 2012 - Analysis 72 (2):259-264.
Causal loops and the independence of causal facts.Phil Dowe - 2001 - Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S89-.
Action, control and sensations of acting.Benjamin Mossel - 2005 - Philosophical Studies 124 (2):129-180.
Non‐committal Causal Explanations.David Pineda - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (2):147-170.
On causal loops in the quantum realm.Joseph Berkovitz - 2002 - In T. Placek & J. Butterfield (eds.), Non-Locality and Modality. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 235--257.
Time travel without causal loops.Bradley Monton - 2009 - Philosophical Quarterly 59 (234):54-67.
Forms of causal explanation.Erik Weber, Jeroen Van Bouwel & Robrecht Vanderbeeken - 2005 - Foundations of Science 10 (4):437-454.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
48 (#316,781)

6 months
9 (#250,037)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?