Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Innatism Debate c.1690–c.1710

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Religious Innatism Debate in Early Modern Britain

  • 117 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter surveys the lively debate over innatism between c.1690 and c.1710. It recounts some of the key aspects of the immediate reception of Locke’s Essay, but it also stresses that the debate was a multivocal one in which Locke was often not an important player. Similarly, Locke’s Essay was subject to penetrating criticism that claimed the arguments of Book I amounted to very little. Several other figures and lesser known episodes in the debate over religious innatism are surveyed, with the authority of German natural law theorist Samuel Pufendorf and the argument from tradition theorist William Nicholls of particular importance. It is argued that the bulk of debate centred on the Platonic and Cartesian doctrines of innate ideas, and not on the Epicurean and Stoic doctrines of innate prolepses. The decline of Cartesianisn in the universities is charted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The most thorough account of this debate I know of can be found in Pahlan (2009). See also Yolton (1956, esp. pp. 47–64).

  2. 2.

    Carroll (1709) Sig. C2r.

  3. 3.

    Cockburn (1696, p. 24).

  4. 4.

    Wise (1706).

  5. 5.

    Halyburton (1714, p. 38).

  6. 6.

    Philalethes (1739, p. 2).

  7. 7.

    Wynne (1700), Sig. a3v.

  8. 8.

    See, for example, Bold (1699, p. 1); Sergeant (1697, p. 119). Levitin (2010). On Locke’s reception more generally Sell (1997).

  9. 9.

    Burthogge (1678, pp. 56–57); Burthogge (1694), Sig. A3r–A4r.

  10. 10.

    Anon (1691), (1693), (1694), and (1701). New State of Europe Both as to Publick Transactions and Learning, 23 May 1701. See also Athenian Gazette or Casuistical Mercury, 27 September 1691; Athenian Gazette or Casuistical Mercury, 18 February 1693; Gentleman’s Journal, May 1694.

  11. 11.

    Harris (1710), entry “Innate Ideas”; Chambers (1728, vol. ii, pp. 4–5, p. 26, and pp. 280–281).

  12. 12.

    Bailey (1730), entry “Innate Principles or Ideas”.

  13. 13.

    Gascoigne (1989, p. 8, p. 128); Yolton (1986).

  14. 14.

    See the discussion below of Cartesianism in the Scottish universities.

  15. 15.

    Goldie (2005).

  16. 16.

    James Tyrrell to John Locke, 18 February 1690, in Locke (1976–1989), V.

  17. 17.

    “Burnet” (1989, p. 43, p. 58).

  18. 18.

    James Tyrrell to John Locke, 30 June 1690, in Locke (1976–1989), V.

  19. 19.

    Lee (1702, pp. 51–52, p. 54, p. 60). See also Adriaenssen (2011).

  20. 20.

    “Burnet” (1989, p. 60).

  21. 21.

    Stillingfleet (1698, p. 117). See pp. 117–127 more generally.

  22. 22.

    Stillingfleet (1698, p. 90).

  23. 23.

    Stillingfleet (1836, vol. ii, pp. 410–411).

  24. 24.

    Norris (1690, pp. 4–5, pp. 14–15); Lee (1702, pp. 14–15).

  25. 25.

    Anstruther (1701, p. 23).

  26. 26.

    Milner (1700, pp. 3–8 [travel literature] and pp. 154–167 [defence of Herbert]).

  27. 27.

    Anstruther (1701, p. 23).

  28. 28.

    See, for example, the broadside of the youthful Brampton Gurdon, later a Boyle Lecturer, entitled “Idea Dei non est innata,” which criticised Platonic innatism. Gurdon (1696).

  29. 29.

    Turner (1685, pp. 95–97).

  30. 30.

    Turner (1685, p. 94).

  31. 31.

    Turner (1698, pp. 7–8); Ferguson (1675, p. 41).

  32. 32.

    Turner (1687), Sig. A5v.

  33. 33.

    It seems very likely that Bentley had been influenced in his anti-innatism by John Locke’s Essay, which he had probably been reading in the build-up to his sermons and had discussed with John Evelyn. See Jacob and Guerlac (1969, p. 316). Bentley may have been encouraged in this regard by John Evelyn who had chosen him as the First Lecturer: Darley (2006, p. 280).

  34. 34.

    Blount (1693, p. 178).

  35. 35.

    King (1698, pp. 177–178); Varnesius (1673, p. 238).

  36. 36.

    Hutton (2015, p. 67).

  37. 37.

    Parker (1700, pp. 113–128).

  38. 38.

    Parker (1700, p. 127).

  39. 39.

    Sergeant (1698, pp. 108–111); Sergeant (1699).

  40. 40.

    Sergeant (1696), Preface.

  41. 41.

    Sergeant (1696), Preface.

  42. 42.

    Sergeant (1696), Preface.

  43. 43.

    Sergeant (1696), Preface.

  44. 44.

    Sergeant (1696, p. 424).

  45. 45.

    De Vries (1685, p. 56). See also de Vries (1690).

  46. 46.

    Elys (1697, pp. 26–30). Elys was concerned, however, about the esteem in which Locke’s Essay was held in at Oxford, where he had previously been a Fellow at Balliol College. See Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Tanner 23, fol. 77, Edmund Elys to Nicholas Martin 15 September 1697.

  47. 47.

    Rivers (1991–2000, vol. ii, p. 161); Ahnert and McGill (2020, pp. 84–85).

  48. 48.

    Carmichael (2002, p. 227, pp. 246–27 and p. 382); Hutcheson (2006, p. 141). See also Carey (2006, pp. 169–170).

  49. 49.

    Gellera (2015, 2017a, b); Raffe (2015); and Ahnert and McGill (2020).

  50. 50.

    Gellera (2017b, p. 222).

  51. 51.

    Gellera (2017b, p. 223) discussing More (1691), Part III, Loudon (1697), Part XII; and Peacock (1711), Part V. See also Shepherd (1975, p. 86, pp. 120–21, pp. 125–26, and pp. 146–147).

  52. 52.

    Skene (1688), Part II.

  53. 53.

    Fraser (1691), Part IV.

  54. 54.

    Gellera (2013).

  55. 55.

    Cunningham (1692), Section III quoted in Ahnert and McGill (2020, p. 84).

  56. 56.

    Shepherd (1982).

  57. 57.

    Arbuckle (1729, vol. I, p. 79).

  58. 58.

    Pufendorf (1729, p. 133).

  59. 59.

    Tyrrell (1692).

  60. 60.

    Tyrrell (1692, p. 195, p. 196).

  61. 61.

    Tyrrell (1692, p. 198).

  62. 62.

    For a sceptical treatment of the extent of deism see Barnett (2004).

  63. 63.

    Nicholls (1696–1703). I have used the 2nd edition, Nicholls (1699), of Part II of the Conference.

  64. 64.

    See, for example, Halyburton (1714, p. 41 [pagination re-starts with Chapter XIV]); Stackhouse (1729, pp. 34–35); and Du Pin (1720, p. 335).

  65. 65.

    Nicholls (1699, p. 4).

  66. 66.

    Nicholls (1699, p. 31). See also pp. 21–32 more generally and p. 35.

  67. 67.

    Nicholls (1699, p. 33).

  68. 68.

    Nicholls (1699, p. 58).

  69. 69.

    Nicholls (1699, p. 33).

  70. 70.

    Lowde (1699, p. 126, p. 128).

  71. 71.

    Lee (1702, Sig. B1r–v).

  72. 72.

    Beconsall (1698, p. 44). On Becconsall see Goldie (2008).

  73. 73.

    Beconsall (1698, p. 76, p. 6).

  74. 74.

    Beconsall (1698, p. 8).

  75. 75.

    Lowde (1694). See p. 83, Sig. A1, pp. 54–58 (Parker), pp. 68–76 (Cumberland), pp. 76–79 (Tyrrell), pp. 81–83 (Locke and Norris) and pp. 83–84 (Locke).

  76. 76.

    Norris (1690, p. 20).

  77. 77.

    Locke (1694, Sig. B5v–B6r).

  78. 78.

    Chauvin (1693, p. 331).

  79. 79.

    Lowde (1699), See pp. 1–43 and then pp. 43–47 (Malebranche) 49–64 (Beconsall), pp. 59–64 (Locke), pp 125–34 (Nicholls) and pp. 134–51 (Pierre Charron).

  80. 80.

    Lowde (1699, p. 54, p. 56).

  81. 81.

    Edwards (1697, pp. 122–123).

  82. 82.

    Edwards (1695, pp. 1–7, p. 5); Edwards (1699a, p. 150, p. 152).

  83. 83.

    Edwards (1697, pp. 28–30).

  84. 84.

    Edwards (1697, pp. 122–123); Edwards (1699b, pp. 26–28).

  85. 85.

    Edwards (1699b, p. 2, p. 29), and then pp. 16–17 (Selden), p. 23 (Cumberland, Parker, Tyrrell), p. 25 (Norris), p. 26 (Nicholls) and pp. 26–28 (Locke).

  86. 86.

    Pearson (1845, p. 32).

  87. 87.

    Edwards (1701, pp. 34–35 [Socinus, Pearson, Cumberland, Parker, Nicholls] and p. 42 [Locke and Le Clerc]). On Le Clerc’s Lockean anti-innatism see Schuurman (2003, pp. 70–88).

  88. 88.

    Edwards (1713, vol. I, pp. 22–23). Stackhouse (1729, i).

  89. 89.

    Sherlock (1704, pp. 124–164).

  90. 90.

    Sherlock (1704, p. 162).

  91. 91.

    John Locke to Anthony Collins 23 June 1704, Locke (1976–1989), vol. VIII.

  92. 92.

    Anthony Collins to John Locke, 20 June 1704, Locke (1976–1989), vol. VIII.

References

  • Adriaenssen, H.T. 2011. An Early Critic of Locke: The Anti-Scepticism of Henry Lee. Locke Studies. 11:17–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahnert, Thomas, and Martha McGill. 2020. Scotland and the European Republic of Letters Around 1700. In Scottish Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century, ed. Alexander Broadie, 73–93. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Anon. 1691. Athenian Gazette or Casuistical Mercury, 27 September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anon. 1693. Athenian Gazette or Casuistical Mercury, 18 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anon. 1694. The Gentleman’s Journal, May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anon. 1701. New State of Europe Both as to Publick Transactions and Learning, 23 May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anstruther, William. 1701. Essays Moral and Divine. Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, James. 1729. A Collection of Letters and Essays on Several Subjects, 2 vols. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, Nathan. 1730. Dictionarium Britannicum. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, S.J. 2004. The Enlightenment and Religion: The Myths of Modernity. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beconsall, Thomas. 1698. The Grounds and Foundation of Natural Religion. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blount, Charles. 1693. Oracles of Reason. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bold, Samuel. 1699. Some Considerations on the Principal Objections and Arguments which have been Publish’d Against Mr. Locke’s Essay of Humane Understanding. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnet, Thomas. 1989 [1697–1696]. Remarks on John Locke … with Locke’s Replies, ed. George Watson. Doncaster: Brynmill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burthogge, Richard. 1678. Organum vetus & novum. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burthogge, Richard. 1694. An Essay Upon Reason and the Nature of Spirits. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, Daniel. 2006. Locke, Shaftesbury, and Hutcheson: Contesting Diversity in the Enlightenment and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carmichael, Gershom. 2002. Natural Rights on the Threshold of the Scottish Enlightenment: The Writings of Gershom Carmichael, ed. James Moore and Michael Silverthorne. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, William. 1709. Spinoza Reviv’d. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, Ephraim. 1728. A Cyclopaedia, Or, An Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, 2 vols. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chauvin, Pierre. 1693. De naturali religione. Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, John. 1696. An Enquiry into the Nature, Necessity and Evidence of Christian Faith. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, Alexander. 1692. Theses philosophicae. Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darley, Gillian. 2006. John Evelyn: Living for Ingenuity. London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du Pin, Louis Ellies. 1720. A Compleat Method of Studying Divinity. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John. 1695. Some Thoughts Concerning the Several Causes and Occasions of Atheism. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John. 1697. The Socinian Creed. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John. 1699a. Polpoikilos Sophia, A Compleat History or Survey of All the Dispensations and Methods of Religion. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John. 1699b. The Eternal and Intrinsick Reasons of Good and Evil. Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John. 1701. A Free Discourse Concerning Truth and Error. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John. 1713. Theologia reformata, 2 vols. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elys, Edmund. 1697. Refutation of Some of the False Conceits in Mr. Locke’s Essay Concerning Humane Understanding. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Robert. 1675. The Interest of Reason in Religion. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, George. 1691. Positiones aliquot philosophicae. Aberdeen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gascoigne, John. 1989. Cambridge in the Age of the Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gellera, Giovanni. 2013. The Philosophy of Robert Forbes: A Scottish Scholastic Response to Cartesianism. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 11:191–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gellera, Giovanni. 2015. The Reception of Descartes in the Seventeenth-Century Scottish Universities: Metaphysics and Natural Philosophy (1650–1680). Journal of Scottish Philosophy. 13:179–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gellera, Giovanni. 2017a. The Scottish Faculties of Arts and Cartesianism (1650–1700). In Histories of Universities, ed. Alexander Broadie, vol. XXIX/2, 166–187. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gellera, Giovanni. 2017b. English Philosophers and Scottish Academic Philosophy (1660–1700). Journal of Scottish Philosophy. 15:213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldie, Mark. 2005. Printing History of Locke’s Writings 1686–1800. Locke Studies. 5:215–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldie, Mark. 2008. John Locke, Thomas Beconsall, and Filial Rebellion. In Studies on Locke: Sources, Contemporaries and Legacy, ed. Sarah Hutton and Paul Schuurman, 127–142. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gurdon, Brampton. 1696. Idea Dei non est innata. Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halyburton, Thomas. 1714. Natural Religion Insufficient. Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, John. 1710. Lexicon technicum. Vol II. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutcheson, Francis. 2006. Logic, Metaphysics, and the Natural Sociability of Mankind, ed. James Moore and Michael Silverthorne. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutton, Sarah. 2015. British Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, Margaret C. and Guerlac, Henry. 1969. Bentley, Newton, and Providence: The Boyle Lectures Once More. Journal of the History of Ideas. 30:307–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Josiah. 1698. Mr. Blount’s Oracles of Reason. Exeter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Henry. 1702. Anti-scepticism. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitin, Dmitri. 2010. Reconsidering John Sergeant’s Attacks on Locke’s Essay. Intellectual History Review 20:457–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, John. 1694. Essay Concerning Human Understanding, second edition. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, John. 1976–1989. The Correspondence of John Locke, 8 vols., ed. E. S. de Beer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loudon, John. 1697. Theses philosophicae. Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowde, James. 1694. Discourse Concerning the Nature of Man. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowde, James. 1699. Moral Essays. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, John. 1700. An Account of Mr. Lock’s Religion. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • More, Alexander. 1691. Theses philosophicae. Aberdeen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, William. 1699. A Conference with a Theists. Part II, second edition. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, John. 1690. Cursory Reflections on the Essay of Humane Understanding. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahlan, Homyar. 2009. The Reception of John Locke’s Religious and Political Thought, 1690–1710. PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, Samuel (junior). 1700. Six Philosophical Essays. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, George. 1711. Theses philosophicae. Aberdeen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, John. 1845 [1659]. An Exposition of the Apostles Creed, ed. James Nichols. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philalethes. 1739. A Philosophical Discussion upon the Inlets to Human Knowledge. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pufendorf, Samuel. 1729. On the Law of Nature and Nations, fourth edition, ed. Jean Barbeyrac. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffe, Alasdair. 2015. Intellectual change before the Enlightenment: Scotland, the Netherlands and the reception of Cartesian thought, 1650–1700. Scottish Historical Review. 94:24–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivers, Isabel. 1991–2000. Reason, Grace, and Sentiment. A Study of the Language of Religion and Ethics in England 1660–1780. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuurman, Paul. 2003. Ideas, Mental Faculties and Method: The Logic of Ideas of Descartes and Locke and Its Reception in the Dutch Republic 1630–1750. Leiden, NL: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sell, Alan P. F. 1997. John Locke and the Eighteenth Century Divines. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergeant, John. 1696. The Method to Science. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergeant, John. 1697. Solid Philosophy Asserted, Against the Fancies of the Ideist. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergeant, John. 1698. Non Ultra: Or, a Letter to a Learned Cartesian. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergeant, John. 1699. Raillery Defeated by Calm Reason: Or, the New Cartesian Method of Arguing and Answering Exposed. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, Christine M. 1975. Philosophy and Science in the Arts Curriculum of the Scottish Universities in the 17th Century. PhD Thesis, Edinburgh University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, Christine M. 1982. Newtonianism in Scottish Universities in the Seventeenth Century. In The Origins and Nature of the Scottish Enlightenment, ed. R. H. Campbell and Andrew S. Skinner, 65–85. Edinburgh: John Donald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherlock, William. 1704. A Discourse Concerning the Happiness of Good Men. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skene, George. 1688. Positiones aliquot philosophicae. Aberdeen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stackhouse, Thomas. 1729. A Complete Body of Divinity. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stillingfleet, Edward. 1698. The Bishop of Worcester’s Answer to Mr. Locke’s Second Letter. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stillingfleet, Edward. 1836 [1690s]. Origines sacrae, second edition. In Edward Stillingfleet, Origines sacrae or a Rational Account of the Grounds of Natural and Revealed Religion, 2 vols. Oxford, 1836), II:247–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, John. 1685. Discourse Concerning the Messias. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, John. 1687. An Attempt Towards an Explanation of the Theology and Mythology of the Ancient Pagans. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, John. 1698. Phisico-Theological Discourse Upon the Divine Being. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyrrell, James. 1692. A Brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varenius, Bernhardus. 1673 [1649]. Descriptio regni Japoniae et Siam. Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vries, Gerard de. 1685. Exercitationes rationales de Deo. Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vries, Gerard de. 1690. De naturae Dei et humanae mentis. Determinationes pneumatologicae. Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, Thomas. 1706. A Confutation of the Reason and Philosophy of Atheism. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, John. 1700. An Abridgment of Mr. Locke’s Essay, second edition. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yolton, John. 1956. John Locke and the Way of Ideas. Oxford: Claredon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yolton, John. 1986. Schoolmen, Logic and Philosophy. In The History of the University of Oxford, Vol. 5: The Eighteenth Century, ed. by L. S. Sutherland and L. G. Mitchell, 565–591. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. London, UK

    R. J. W. Mills

Authors
  1. R. J. W. Mills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mills, R.J.W. (2021). The Innatism Debate c.1690–c.1710. In: The Religious Innatism Debate in Early Modern Britain. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84323-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84323-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-84322-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-84323-6

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation