No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The ‘Principle’ of Natural Order: or What the Enlightened Sceptics did not doubt
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 January 2010
Extract
My title advertizes a paradox. The characteristic complaint of the sceptic is that others make assumptions they are not entitled to make. A philosophical sceptic is committed to a systematic refusal to accept such assumptions in the absence of the kind of justification they think is required. A sceptic who, none the less, helps himself to such an assumption, seems to be caught in a paradoxical position. This is the kind of situation in which, it seems, certain eighteenth-century sceptical philosophers were placed in relation to the ‘principle’ of natural order. They did not doubt that there is such a principle, that there is a source or ultimate cause of the order to be found in the universe. And yet, on their own terms, is not the existence of such a principle something we should expect them to have doubted? What I shall try to do in this lecture is to bring out why they did not doubt the existence of such a principle and how serious their failure to do so is for their sceptical position.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 1978
References
NOTES
1 Enquiries concerning Human Understanding and concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A., rev. Nidditch, P. H., (Oxford (Clarendon Press), 3rd edition, 1975), p. 30.Google Scholar Other references to this work will also be to this edition.
2 Oeuvres Philosophiques de Condillac, ed. LeRoy, G. (Paris, 1947–1951), 3, 9. 511 f.Google Scholar
3 Selected Works of Voltaire, trans, by McCabe, Joseph (London (Watts & Co.), 1935), p. 9.Google Scholar
4 In his article ‘(Qualités) Cosmiques’ in the Encyclopédie.
5 Library of Liberal Arts edition, ed. Smith, N. Kemp, Indianapolis (Bobbs-Merrill), p. 174 f.Google Scholar
6 In his article in the Encyclopédie on ‘Corps’, quoted by Grimsley, Ronald in his Jean d'Alembert (Clarendon Press, 1963), p. 278.Google Scholar