Censuring the Teutonic Philosopher?
This essay examines Henry More’s engagement with Jacob Böhme and compares the sympathetic critique of Böhme with More’s much more negative evaluation of Spinoza. More directs his criticism of Böhme at the similarities between Spinoza and Böhme: their materialism and confusion of God and world. The p...
| Publicado en: | Aries Vol. 18; no. 1; pp. 54 - 75 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Brill Academic Publishers
2018
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=127765305&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 127765305 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 15679896 ED7 jtl: Aries issn: 15679896 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: 2018 vid: 18 iid: 1 pid: 639 pub: Brill Academic Publishers artinfo: ui: 127765305 10.1163/15700593-01801004 ppf: 54 ppct: 21 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 157KB tig: atl: Censuring the Teutonic Philosopher? aug: au: Hedley, Douglas affil: , University of Cambridge su: Boehme, Jakob, 1575-1624 Platonists Materialism sug: subj: Boehme, Jakob, 1575-1624 Platonists Materialism keyword: Cambridge Platonists Henry More Jacob Böhme metaphysics Platonic theology Spinoza ab: This essay examines Henry More’s engagement with Jacob Böhme and compares the sympathetic critique of Böhme with More’s much more negative evaluation of Spinoza. More directs his criticism of Böhme at the similarities between Spinoza and Böhme: their materialism and confusion of God and world. The present essay suggests, however, that the perception of shared Platonism informs More’s more favourable approach to the Silesian. The problem of what “Platonism” means in this context is thus also addressed. Böhme’s writings were valued by More because of a shared metaphysics that rejected both radical dualism and pantheism, and the Platonic theology of the goodness of God and the freedom of man, together with the rejection of predestination. Spinoza, on the other hand, is rejected because of his radical determinism, his denial of any substantial distinction between good and evil, and the transcendent being of the divine. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Aries is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Aries holder: Brill Academic Publishers dt: @attributes: year: 2018 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|