This book is a collection of twelve critical essays, by leading French and Anglo-American scholars on Locke’s relation to Descartes and to Cartesian Philosophers, such as Malebranche, Clauberg, Arnauld, and Nicole. The essays, preceded by a substantial introduction, cover a large variety of topics from natural philosophy (cosmology) to religion, philosophy of mind, metaphysics, and epistemology. The volume underlines Locke’s complex relationship to Descartes and Cartesianism, where stark opposition and subtle family resemblances are tightly intertwined. Since the turn of the twentieth century, ... More

This book is a collection of twelve critical essays, by leading French and Anglo-American scholars on Locke’s relation to Descartes and to Cartesian Philosophers, such as Malebranche, Clauberg, Arnauld, and Nicole. The essays, preceded by a substantial introduction, cover a large variety of topics from natural philosophy (cosmology) to religion, philosophy of mind, metaphysics, and epistemology. The volume underlines Locke’s complex relationship to Descartes and Cartesianism, where stark opposition and subtle family resemblances are tightly intertwined. Since the turn of the twentieth century, the theory of knowledge has been the main locus for the comparison of the two authors. According to an influential historiographical conception, Descartes and Locke form together the spearhead in the ‘epistemological turn’ of early modern philosophy. In bringing together the contributions to this volume, the editors advocate for a shift of emphasis. A precise comparison of Locke’s and Descartes’s positions should cover not only their theory of knowledge, but also their views on natural philosophy, metaphysics, and religion. Their conflicting claims on issues such as cosmic organization, the qualities and nature of bodies, the substance of the soul, God’s government of the world, are relevant not only in their own right to take the full measure of Locke’s intricate relation to Descartes, but also as they allow a better understanding of the epistemological debate that is still running between their heirs.