Abstract
The aim of this paper is twofold: to clarify the nature of Elisabeth’s adherence to Cartesian philosophy; to discover whether, on the question of the interaction between the mind and the body, Elisabeth’s objections really caused Descartes difficulty. On the first point, one should acknowledge that Elisabeth considers Cartesian philosophy less as an unquestionable doctrine than as a superior form of the culture of reason. On the second, the main difficulty concerns the “power of the soul to move the body.” But this power consists neither in the direct use of a mechanically defined force, nor in the exercise of a mysterious formal causation. All the power of the soul over the body relates to the natural or acquired correlation between certain thoughts and certain impressions in the brain. But Descartes, in his reply to Elisabeth in the spring of 1643, does not wish to develop these views immediately. He is not exactly embarrassed: he defers his explanations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
I quote the Shapiro translation, sometimes modified.
- 2.
Proceedings published in Kolesnik-Antoine and Pellegrin (2014).
- 3.
September 13, 1645, AT IV, 289; S 110. See also April 25, 1646, AT IV, 405; S 133.
- 4.
Rule XII, AT X, 412–415.
- 5.
“Whereas Descartes is willing to entertain a species of formal causation to explain the interaction of mind and body, Elisabeth squarely rejects the idea that the Scholastic notion of a real quality demonstrates the kind of causation in play in the case of the human being. It is important to her that any causal explanation be a mechanistic one, and on the mechanist models of efficient causation both cause and effect are material.” Shapiro, in Elisabeth and Descartes (2007, 41).
- 6.
Replies to the Fourth Objections, II, 4, AT VII, 236 and 241 ff. See also Replies to the First Objections, AT VII, 109, 111.
- 7.
Replies to the Fifth Objections, II, 4, AT VII, 356; see also Rule XII, AT X, 411.
- 8.
I have dealt with this question in Kambouchner (2017).
Bibliography
Agostini, I. (2014). Le mythe du cartésianisme d’Élisabeth. In D. Kolesnik-Antoine & M.-F. Pellegrin (Eds.) (pp. 101–118).
Alanen, L. (2003). Descartes’s concept of mind. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
Alexandrescu, V. (2012). What someone may have whispered in Elisabeth’s ear. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, 6, 1–27.
Baillet, A. (1691). Vie de Monsieur Descartes. Paris: D. Horthemels.
Descartes, R. (1964–1974). Œuvres, 11 vols., eds. Ch. Adam & P. Tannery, nouvelle presentation. Paris: Vrin-CNRS.
Ebbersmeyer, S. (2014). Épicure et argumentations épicuriennes dans la pensée d’Élisabeth. In D. Kolesnik-Antoine & M.-F. Pellegrin (Eds.) (pp. 171–183).
Elisabeth of Bohemia and René Descartes. (2007). The correspondence between princess Elisabeth of Bohemia and René Descartes (L. Shapiro, Trans.). Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Elisabeth and Descartes. (2015). Der Briefwechsel zwischen Elisabeth von der Pfalz und René Descartes (S. Ebbersmeyer, Trans.). Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.
Garber, D. (1983). Understanding interaction. What Descartes should have told Elisabeth. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 21(suppl.): 15–32; reprint in Descartes Embodied, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press (2001) (pp. 168–188).
Kambouchner, D. (1995). L’Homme des Passions. Commentaires sur Descartes, 2 vols. Paris: Albin Michel.
Kambouchner, D. (2017). Descartes on the power of the soul: A reconsideration. In S. Gaukroger & Wilson, C. (Eds.), Descartes and cartesianism: Essays in Honour of Desmond Clarke (pp. 177–188). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kolesnik-Antoine, D., & Pellegrin, M.-F. (Eds.). (2014). Élisabeth de Bohême face à Descartes: Deux philosophes? Paris: Vrin.
Shapiro, L. (1999). Princess Elizabeth and Descartes: The union of soul and body and the practice of philosophy. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 5, 249–273.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kambouchner, D. (2021). What Is Elisabeth’s Cartesianism?. In: Ebbersmeyer, S., Hutton, S. (eds) Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618–1680): A Philosopher in her Historical Context. Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71527-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71527-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-71526-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-71527-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)