Joseph Priestley and the Argument from Design

ABSTRACT

Although Joseph Priestley was notorious for rejecting much of orthodox Christianity and replacing it with a materialistic Unitarianism, in another respect he was an orthodox theist of his time in that he passionately upheld the Argument from Design. The Argument from Design was the heart of his “rational religion”. He contended that natural order, especially biological order, could only be successfully explained by intentional agency. At the time, however, the Argument was coming under attack, first from David Hume, then from Matthew Turner, and lastly from Erasmus Darwin. Priestley replied to each of these critics. This article surveys his replies. The three critics of the Argument contended that intelligent agency could offer only a weak explanation of natural order, that natural order is self-explanatory, or that natural mechanisms can explain biological order. Priestley in turn critiqued all three contentions, arguing that the Argument is a strong explanation; that natural order cannot be self-explanatory; and that the proposed natural explanations conflict with the empirical evidence.     

A Provincial Minister in Politics: Henry W. Crosskey*

Henry W. Crosskey (1826–93), a late Victorian unitarian minister who served in Derby, Glasgow and Birmingham, is now best remembered for his involvement in Liberal politics and policy, especially education, as both an advocate and as a member of the Birmingham School Board. An eloquent preacher, he was also an important geologist, recognized both for his original research and for popularising the science and its impact on theology, and a revealing figure in the evolution of English unitarian thought. From his student days at Manchester College, Crosskey was a follower of his teacher, James Martineau, but, unlike Martineau, he advocated an active role for government, particularly local government, in promoting social well‐being. In the political crises of 1885–6, though differing from Gladstone on religious education, disestablishment, and home rule for Ireland, he was unable to follow Joseph Chamberlain, a member of his congregation, into alliance with the Conservative Party. His scientific convictions led to his emergence in later life as an admirer of the broad piety of the early unitarian theologian and scientist, Joseph Priestley, whose followers had warred with Martineau's disciples in the bitter mid century struggle between ‘Old’ and ‘New’ unitarianism, thus serving as a bridge between the two schools of interpretation. He is also an important reminder of the expanding demands, internal and external, of an urban pastorate in the later 19th century.     

Joseph Priestley as an heir of Newton

ABSTRACT

Like most Enlightenment philosophers, Priestley acknowledges his debt to Newton. However, despite his mentor’s prohibition against “making hypotheses”, in the 1770s, he embarked on a surprising metaphysical epic that led him, the theologian and scientist, to develop in his Disquisitions a bold system that articulated materialism, necessity and Socinianism. This synthesis constitutes the originality of a thinker who wanted to reapprehend science, metaphysics and theology together at the very moment when their dispersion seemed inevitable (and to give them an educational and political extension). It is based on a monistic ontology to which Priestley did not hesitate to give the unexpected name of materialism, at the risk of a number of misunderstandings, while he claims, much to the dismay of Reid, to closely follow the method of Newton. This paper will focus on the relation between Priestley and Newton’s ambiguous inheritance. What is Priestley’s “science” made of? What is its relationship to Newton and his “rules”, to mathematics, to the theory of language, to the so-called “analysis and synthesis method”, to Boscovich? How important is his claim for hypotheses and metaphysics? If Priestley indeed was a Newtonian, he surely was an unorthodox one.     

Point Atomism,Space and God, 1760–80

This paper compares and contrasts the main metaphysical and religious ideas of the eighteenth-century political theorist and chemist Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) with those of his correspondent Ruder Boscovic (1711–1787), astronomer, poet, mathematician, diplomat and Jesuit priest. It points out the theological differences between the two thinkers resulting from the divergent ontological and metaphysical implications of the theory of point atomism that they shared. This theory they placed in a wider context, considering both its limits and its value as a contribution to ongoing speculations concerning the nature of space and time, theological conundrums such as free will and the mind-body problem. Where they differed, however, was that Priestley, a chemist rather than a mathematician, used point atomism mainly to support his campaign to further materialism and discredit Christianity. Boscovic, on the other hand, carefully distinguished the truths of faith and reason and was therefore indignant at Priestley's misuse of his speculations. Boscovic's protest was probably motivated in part by the materialism of atheists such as the Baron d’Holbach (1723–1789). Priestley was no atheist, however. Interestingly, François Arouet de Voltaire (1698–1778), unaware of the works of either Boscovic or Priestley, devised a theistic materialism in his last years that in many respects resembled Priestley's. I begin with brief biographies of the two thinkers, and outline their intermittent relationship.     

Joseph Priestley on metaphysics and politics: Jonathan Israel's ‘Radical Enlightenment’ reconsidered

This article probes Jonathan Israel’s theory about ‘Radical Enlightenment’ inaugurating political modernity by way of explicating the thought of Joseph Priestley. In Israel’s view, despite the inconsistencies plaguing Socinian thought, Priestley, a monist, emerged as an ardent supporter of religious toleration and democratic republicanism. This article seeks to restore the fundamental coherence of Priestley’s theological and metaphysical views, arguing that they were produced as parts of a system founded on the simultaneous adherence to providentialism and necessitarianism. Prized as a prerequisite of the unfolding of the divine plan, the unobstructed expression of religious opinions was the centre of the conception of civil society and civil liberty that Priestley articulated based on these premises and his forays into politics aimed to secure its permanence. A comparison of Priestley’s stance on the issue of manhood suffrage with that of Richard Price reveals not the materialist Priestley, but Price, a dualist, as an advocate of democratization and casts into doubt the applicability of Israel’s scheme in the case of England. The article closes with some suggestions towards reappraising the relationship between Enlightenment and modernity.     

Priestley in Germany

ABSTRACT

The paper focuses on the reception of Priestley in Germany, which is remarkable for the huge and assiduous interest it raised in different philosophical milieus. Priestley’s dynamical conception of matter, his explanation of the functioning of the brain, and of the production of material ideas are at the basis of the new form of materialism that develops in Germany in the late 1770s, and which differs completely from the model of mechanical materialism Germany was used to in earlier decades. Indeed, the German reception of Priestley’s ideas begins surprisingly early, just one year after the publication of his edition of Hartley’s Observations on Man (1775), and traverses the two final decades of the eighteenth century with a considerable number of reviews and references in the main philosophical journals and works of the time. In 1778, his introduction to the Observations was translated into German and presented in the form of a manifesto of a new materialistic philosophy compatible with the claims of morals and religion. Within a few years, Priestley became the unavoidable reference point for the most relevant theological and philosophical discussions concerning the nature of matter and spirits, the place of God, the possibility of human freedom, and the legitimacy of free thinking.     

Priestley on materialism and the essence of God

ABSTRACT

The paper focuses on Priestley’s complex views on the essence of God in connection with his materialism, elaborated in the Disquisitions Relating to Matter and Spirit (1777/ 1782). This issue is crucial if one wishes to get a clear idea of what Priestley’s materialism amounts to; whether it is mainly a thesis about the material grounds of the human mind (“psychological materialism”), or a more far-reaching one about what kind of substances exist in the world (a version of “ontological materialism”). The claim that God may be material allows for the most radical version of ontological materialism according to which everything in the world is material, without altogether denying that God exists. In fact, Priestley considers and partially defends at least three different views on the potential materiality of God: (1) an agnostic stance that is his official view, (2) materialism about God based on his own theory of matter, and (3) “gross” materialism about God. The aim of the paper is to analyze these three views, in particular concerning what kind of materialism they support and whether they can contribute to the consistent Christian materialism Priestley envisaged.     

From the logic of ideas to active-matter materialism: Priestley’s Lockean problem and early neurophilosophy

ABSTRACT

Empiricism is a claim about the contents of the mind: its classic slogan is nihil est in intellectu quod non fuerit in sensu, “there is nothing in the mind (intellect, understanding) which is not first in the senses.” As such, it is not a claim about the fundamental nature of the world as material. I focus here on in an instance of what one might term the materialist appropriation of empiricism. One major component in the transition from a purely epistemological claim about the mind and its contents to an ontological claim about the nature of the world is the new focus on brain–mind relations in the eighteenth century. Here I examine a Lockean trajectory as exemplified in Joseph Priestley’s 1777 Disquisitions Relating to Matter and Spirit. However, Locke explicitly ruled out that his inquiry into the logic of ideas amounted to a “physical consideration of the mind.” What does it mean, then, for Priestley to present himself as continuing a Lockean tradition, while presenting mental processes as tightly identified with “an organical structure such as that of the brain” (although he was not making a strict identity claim as we might understand it, post-Smart and Armstrong)? One issue here is that of Priestley’s source of “empirical data” regarding the correlation and indeed identification of mental and cerebral processes. David Hartley’s theory in his 1749 Observations on Man was, as is well known, republished in abridged form by Priestley, but he discards Hartley’s “vibratory neurophysiology” while retaining the associationist framework, although not because he disagreed with the former. Yet Hartley was, at the very least, strongly agnostic about metaphysical issues (and it is difficult to study these authors while bracketing off religious considerations). One could see Locke and Hartley as articulating programs for the study of the mind which were more or less naturalistic (more strongly so in Hartley’s case) while avoiding “materialism” per se; in contrast, Priestley bit the (materialist) bullet. In this paper I examine Priestley’s appropriation and reconstruction of this “micro-tradition,” while emphasizing its problems.     

J.B. Priestley: Bradford and a provincial narrative of England, 1913–1933

J.B. Priestley's writing has been used to explore aspects of landscape and Englishness. Through an analysis of Priestley's early journalism in the Bradford Pioneer and the Yorkshire Observer, we argue that his critical disengagement to most of the landscapes of England was based on a connection to the landscapes of his youth in Bradford where he first developed his fictional and documentary narrative style. In his early journalism, Priestley articulated a sense of dwelling in Bradford that was rooted in the experience of two distinct local landscapes: the spaces of the city and the nature of the surrounding upland and moorland. Priestley's geographical ideal balanced the civility of the Edwardian city embedded in a landscape that offered escape to and commune with nature. The existential balance between the two was, we argue, central to the narrative geographies developed by Priestley in his fiction which is illustrated through an analysis of his two early novels: The Good Companions (1929) and Angel Pavement (1930). We suggest that the ways in which Priestley's interwar writing expressed dwelling in local landscapes might be thought of as a critical provincialisation of London and England.     

遵义乡贤宦泽民述略

宦泽民第遵义名门、沙滩文化重要的学者宦懋庸之孙。从晚清留学日本,投身辛亥革命,参加护国运动,桑梓从教十余年。一生勇于奉献,尽职尽责,算得上是贵州一位有作为的乡贤,值得后世效法。     

Dr Thomas Beddoes The Interaction of Pneumatic and Preventive Medicine with Chemistry

Abstract

Chemistry has often been pressed into the service of medicine. In the years following Lavoisier's chemical revolution, the attention of chemists focused upon gases. Thomas Beddoes (1760–1808) developed a research programme that explored the therapeutic effects of different gases in the treatment of tuberculosis and other diseases. Beddoes was inspired by the discoveries of Joseph Priestley, employed young Humphry Davy as an assistant in his researches, received advice and encouragement from Erasmus Darwin, and used pneumatic apparatus designed by James Watt. He also engaged in efforts directed at social reform and at reforms in public health, being especially concerned with the condition of the poor. His Pneumatic Institution in Bristol was at one and the same time a research centre and a health clinic. This paper explores the interaction between chemistry and medicine in Beddoes' career, within a context of scientific and social ferment.     

明末清初文人命运之管窥——侯方域生平考

侯方域是明末清初著名的文人之一,他出生于名门望族,受过良好的教育,很早就名满天下。他早年交游广阔,与当时的一帮名士朝夕对酒作诗,品评当世人物,颇有济世之志。后来,因得罪了小人,自己落得四处飘零,又由于农民战争及清军的蹂躏,他的大部分好友都散去或死去;明清易代,他又成了夹缝中的遗民。他虽然英年早逝,但短暂的一生却历经巨变沧桑。     

方国瑜与中国西南对外关系史研究

中国西南对外关系史是方国瑜先生史学研究的起点,并贯穿其整个史学研究生涯。方先生不但从文献资料的整理与研究、人才培养方面奠定了中国西南对外关系史研究的坚实基础,还广泛深入地研究了中缅、中越界务问题,中国西南与东南亚的民族联系与政治关系,中国西南与东南亚及南亚的交通、经济和文化关系,是中国西南对外关系史研究的开拓者和奠基人。     

陈抟生平事迹述论

陈抟是中国中古思想文化史上的重要人物,由于他的著述大多散佚,加上传记资料比较零散,过去的研究相对不足.本文在前人成果的基础上,从六个方面对陈抟的生平事迹加以探讨:一是陈抟的出生、里籍、姓名字号、童年生活、慕道原因、早期经历;二是陈抟隐居武当山的缘由和时间,在武当山的著述情况,出游时谒拜的两位重要老师何昌一和麻衣道者;三是陈抟迁居华山的时间和缘由,在华山与师友们的交游;四是陈抟在华山期间与周世宗、宋太祖、宋太宗的交往;五是陈抟在华山亲授的几位弟子;六是陈抟图书易、内丹学、睡功的成就和传承谱系,以及其诗、书、画成就.总体上认为,陈抟历经晚唐、五代、宋初之世,阅历丰富,思想深邃,胸怀博大,德行超群,不愧为独领风骚、别具一格的道门高隐和学术大师.     

Remembering Rehnquist

William Hubbs Rehnquist spent the last thirty-three years of his life as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court, fifteen as an Associate Justice and eighteen as Chief Justice. I met Bill when I was a freshman at Stanford in 1946. He was attending Stanford and working part time as a "hasher" at my dormitory during the evening meal. He amazed all of the young women by carrying such heavy loads of dishes on his tray. Perhaps that is how he learned to carry all those heavy loads in all of the years that followed. He was tall and good-looking, and he had a sharp sense of humor.     

王世贞明史研究之成就与特点

王世贞的明史研究涉猎了万历以前几乎所有的重大问题 ,从明代政治事件、典章制度、社会经济、中外关系、文化生活到历史人物等等方面 ,他都有独到的看法和贡献 ,且涉及明代社会的各个层面 ,开创了一派以实录为本位的新掌故史学 ,留下了丰富的资料。他的明史研究贯串着歌颂明朝的思想 ,体现其“成一家之言”的著史志向 ,因而他在明代史学史上具有十分突出的地位。     

从俄藏档案看周达文生平事迹研究中的几个问题

周达文是贵州镇远出生的中共早期重要人物。先后在莫斯科东方大学、中山大学、列宁学院学习和工作,受到中共中央和共产国际的器重,《斯大林全集》中的《给丘贡诺夫的信》就是写给他的。由于他的后半生是在苏联度过,为研究他的生平事迹带来很大困难。俄罗斯新解密的档案材料,可以帮助我们考察清楚他的生卒年月、他在北京的革命活动、在留苏中共党员中的作用和地位、他坚持反对王明的宗派主义和左倾冒险主义并因此而被陷害致死,以及后来苏联最高法院为他平反等重要问题。     

李流芳生平交游考略

李流芳为明未著名的文人画家,他不仅在绘画上取得了很大的成就,且诗文、书法、印章均擅,是一位具有多方面才能的艺术家。李流芳早年热心干科举,曾六次进京会试,但均铩羽而归。他晚年醉心于山水,和一些志同道合的友人浪迹江湖,创作了不少山水画佳作。由于李本人无画学专著,且诗文书画又散佚较多,故本文试图通过著录文献及其诗友的文集大致梳理出其生平及交游的情况。     

为共产主义事业奋斗到底的一生--我所了解的晚年陈云(上)

陈云同志的一生是坚贞不渝的共产主义者的一生。他在晚年作为党的第二代中央领导集体的重要成员,为共产主义事业奋斗到底的精神,突出表现在他对改革开放的社会主义方向的把握上,对党的重大原则的坚持上,对党和国家战略的深谋远虑上,对人民群众切身利益的关心上以及对个人的严格要求上。在党的建设方面,他思考最多的,除了搞好党风外,主要是如何端正思想路线、保证党内民主和选拔优秀中青年干部的问题。在经济建设方面,他总是从国家的全局和长远利益出发,关注那些影响我们长期发展的制约因素;并且对计划与市场的关系进行了深入思考,为在微观搞活的同时加强宏观控制提供了理论依据。他时刻挂念人民群众的疾苦,关心群众的切身利益,并力求在制订具体政策中加以体现。他在晚年依然保持谦虚谨慎、顾全大局、艰苦朴素、克己奉公的作风,为我们树立了永葆共产党人政治本色的光辉榜样。