Mary Astell’s critique of Pierre Bayle: atheism and intellectual integrity in the Pensées (1682)

2021 ◽  
pp. 134-151
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Broad
Keyword(s):  
Pierre Bayle ◽  
Intellectual Integrity

O Epicuro de Pierre Bayle

Caminhando ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-291
Author(s):  
M.S.A. Primo
Keyword(s):  
Pierre Bayle

Religion, Reason, and Toleration

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Forst
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Political Regime ◽  
Religious Toleration ◽  
Public Justification ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
Pierre Bayle

This chapter compares two Enlightenment theories of religious toleration: the theories of Pierre Bayle and Immanuel Kant. Both Bayle and Kant argued for an autonomous conception of morality as the ground of reciprocal and universal toleration, but they differed in the ways in which they thought of the relation between faith and reason. The chapter discusses how in that latter regard, a Baylean perspective is superior to a Kantian one, whereas it concludes that the Kantian approach has a better way to connect morality and a politics of public justification when it comes to think about a political regime of toleration.

Religion and Toleration from the Enlightenment to the Post-Secular Era

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Forst
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Human Reason ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
Pierre Bayle ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter addresses the classical question of the relationship between enlightenment and religion. In doing so, the chapter compares Jürgen Habermas's thought to that of Pierre Bayle and Immanuel Kant. For, although Habermas undoubtedly stands in a tradition founded by Bayle and Kant, he develops a number of important orientations within this tradition and has changed his position in his recent work. The chapter studies this change to understand Habermas's position better. It also draws attention to a fundamental question raised by the modern world: what common ground can human reason establish in the practical and theoretical domain between human beings who are divided by profoundly different religious (including antireligious) views?

scholarly journals Conscientious Objection in Healthcare and Moral Integrity

2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARK WICCLAIR
Keyword(s):  
Health Professionals ◽  
Conscientious Objection ◽  
Alternative Conceptions ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Moral Space ◽  
Social Component ◽  
Intellectual Integrity ◽  
Moral Convictions

Abstract:There are several reasons for accommodating health professionals’ conscientious objections. However, several authors have argued that among the most important and compelling reasons is to enable health professionals to maintain their moral integrity. Accommodation is said to provide “moral space” in which health professionals can practice without compromising their moral integrity. There are, however, alternative conceptions of moral integrity and corresponding different criteria for moral-integrity-based claims. It is argued that one conception of moral integrity, the identity conception, is sound and suitable in the specific context of responding to health professionals’ conscientious objections and their requests for accommodation. According to the identity conception, one maintains one’s moral integrity if and only if one’s actions are consistent with one’s core moral convictions. The identity conception has been subject to a number of criticisms that might call into question its suitability as a standard for determining whether health professionals have genuine moral-integrity-based accommodation claims. The following five objections to the identity conception are critically examined: (1) it does not include a social component, (2) it is a conception of subjective rather than objective integrity, (3) it does not include a reasonableness condition, (4) it does not include any substantive moral constraints, and (5) it does not include any intellectual integrity requirement. In response to these objections, it is argued that none establishes the unsuitability of the identity conception in the specific context of responding to health professionals’ conscientious objections and their requests for accommodation.

Seventeenth-Century Calvinism and Early Enlightenment Thought

2021 ◽  
pp. 375-392
Author(s):  
Aza Goudriaan
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Thomas Hobbes ◽  
John Calvin ◽  
Sensus Divinitatis ◽  
Pierre Bayle ◽  
Philosophical Debates ◽  
Van Til

Analysing a number of interactions between Calvinists and Early Enlightenment philosophers—and the receptions of John Calvin in these—this chapter shows a complex and persistent presence of Calvin and Calvinists in philosophical debates during the early Enlightenment period. Among Calvinists, Descartes found both opponents and followers. Reformed Cartesians have occasionally appealed to Calvin (e.g. on accommodation and the sensus divinitatis), praised the Reformer (Heidanus, Burman), or neglected him (van Til). The philosopher Arnold Geulincx has been protected (Heidanus.) and published (van Til) by Calvinists, before they began to associate him with Spinoza (Tuinman, Andala, Driessen). Thomas Hobbes quoted Calvin incidentally, but Calvinists usually opposed his philosophy. Thus, the jurist Ulrik Huber used Calvin’s teachings on the testimonium Spiritus sancti against Hobbes—an appeal to Calvin that Huber repeated against another philosopher’s claim that reason alone was able to demonstrate the divinity of scripture. In order to refute Spinozists, Reformed minister Carolus Tuinman translated Calvin’s treatise against the libertines (1545). Responding to Huguenot Pierre Bayle, the Lutheran philosopher G. W. Leibniz wrote favourably about Calvin’s teachings on predestination and providence, as he had done also about Calvin’s views on the Eucharist.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document