The Mechanisation of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes' Natural Philosophy

The Mechanisation of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes' Natural Philosophy

The Mechanisation of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes' Natural Philosophy

The Mechanisation of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes' Natural Philosophy

Synopsis

This book discusses the Aristotelian setting of Thomas Hobbes main work on natural philosophy, De Corpore (1655). Leijenhorsts study puts particular emphasis on the second part of the work, entitled Philosophia Prima. Although Hobbes presents his mechanistic philosophy of nature as an outright replacement of Aristotelian physics, he continued to use the vocabulary and arguments of sixteenth and seventeenth-century Aristotelianism. Leijenhorst shows that while in some cases this common vocabulary hides profound conceptual innovations, in other cases Hobbes self-proclaimed new" philosophy is simply old wine in new sacks. Leijenhorsts book substantially enriches our insight in the complexity of the rise of modern philosophy and the way it struggled with the Aristotelian heritage."

Excerpt

This book studies Thomas Hobbes’ debt to late Aristotelian philosophy. I, for my part, am also endebted to those who have contributed to that which lies before you. This book is a revision of my dissertation written at Utrecht University. My thanks thus goes first and foremost to my supervisor, Karl Schuhmann, for his enduring encouragement. Over the years, he has generously shared with me the wealth of his scholarship. Our extensive collaboration has shaped me profoundly.

I am grateful to all those who have given their valued comments upon my work and who have helped me resolve problems relating to Hobbes, Aristotelianism and seventeenth-century philosophy in general. Many thanks go to Charles Lohr, Mordechai Feingold, Roger Anew, Steven Harris, Spencer Pearce, Leen Spruit, Theo Verbeek, Frans De Haas, Michaela Boenke, Eckhard Kessler, Helen Hattab, Frank Horstmann, Yves Charles Zarka, Piet Steenbakkers, and Marin Terpstra for their help.

Over the past few years, I have had the privilege to work within a keenly stimulating environment. the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Natural Philosophy of the University of Nijmegen (NWO grant 200–22–295) has proven to be a fertile brooding ground for my own research. I would like to particularly thank Hans Thijssen, the project leader of the Center, for his encouragement and comments upon my work. My thanks go to Paul Bakker, for patiently answering my sometimes inane questions concerning medieval philosophy. As well, I thank Carla Rita Palmerino for her examination of various drafts of this work. I especially thank Christoph Lüthy, my collega proximus, for his meticulous linguistic and philosophical comments on the entire text. May our CHL-Brotherhood last for ever. I thank Paul Scholey for his excellent help in improving the style and grammar of this work.

My mother died while I was writing my dissertation and before this book was completely revised, my father also passed away. I dedicate this book to their loving memory. I thank Roos, Hildegard and Odile for bearing with me and preventing my mind from fossilising.

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.