Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Anti-Innatism c.1650–c.1690

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

  • 81 Accesses

Abstract

Arguments against innatism developed concurrently with pro-religious innatist claims. Most important here were: (1) writings within the natural law tradition, most importantly those of Richard Cumberland and Thomas Hobbes; (2) polemical works attacking the purported fanatical and enthusiastic elements of Platonic and Cartesian notions of innate ideas, associated most significantly with Samuel Parker; and (3) more positive accounts of the benefits of the new experimental philosophy for understanding God’s creation, with correlate suggestions that religious innatism was less persuasive than the argument from design. The chapter also discusses how Socinianism, Remonstrant theology and the argument from tradition were of comparably minimal influence in the arguments against innatism.

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.

    Spurr (1988, p. 573).

  2. 2.

    On the latter see Mortimer (2009) and Mortimer (2010, pp. 2–3, pp. 17–18).

  3. 3.

    Socinus (1656, vol. I p. 273). See also vol. I, pp. 537–539.

  4. 4.

    Biddle (1648), Preface.

  5. 5.

    Nye (1691, p. 4).

  6. 6.

    Mortimer (2010).

  7. 7.

    Burnet (1725, vol. I p. 188). Mortimer (2010, pp. 214–215).

  8. 8.

    Compare Mortimer (2014) and Miller (1999–2000).

  9. 9.

    Burgersdijk (1640), II:iv.ii. See also Gellera (2016).

  10. 10.

    Selden (1640), I.6 and especially I.7. See also Sommerville (1984).

  11. 11.

    Hall (1654, p. 216.)

  12. 12.

    Burthogge (1675, pp. 340–341).

  13. 13.

    Culverwell (2001, pp. 65–70).

  14. 14.

    More (1652, p. 32).

  15. 15.

    Tillotson (1664, p. 21).

  16. 16.

    Pelling (1696, p. 82). See pp. 82–86.

  17. 17.

    Tillotson (1664, p. 21).

  18. 18.

    Descartes (1985, vol. II p. 130).

  19. 19.

    Hobbes (1996, p. 23).

  20. 20.

    Hobbes (2008, p. 307). I am sidestepping the question of whether Hobbes believed that God was a corporeal being or whether this was esoteric atheism, because this did not factor into his challenge to innate religious ideas. But see the contrasting accounts of Curley (1995); Leijenhorst (2004); and Cromartie (2008).

  21. 21.

    Duncan (forthcoming).

  22. 22.

    Cudworth (1678, pp. 633–634). See also G. A. J. Rogers (1996).

  23. 23.

    Cumberland (2007, p. 250).

  24. 24.

    Cumberland (2007, pp. 252–253). See also pp. 248–249.

  25. 25.

    Parkin (1999, p. 91).

  26. 26.

    Webster (1677, pp. 198–201).

  27. 27.

    Levitin (2014, pp. 28–75), and Parkin (1999, pp. 121–125).

  28. 28.

    Ferguson (1675, p. 41, p. 46). Glanvill (1675, pp. 32–33).

  29. 29.

    Levitin (2014).

  30. 30.

    Parker (1666, pp. 3–4, p. 40).

  31. 31.

    Parker (1666, p. 47).

  32. 32.

    Parker (1666, pp. 53–54).

  33. 33.

    Parker (1666, p. 67).

  34. 34.

    Parker (1666, p. 76).

  35. 35.

    Parker (1666, p. 90).

  36. 36.

    Parker (1666, p. 45).

  37. 37.

    Barker (1674, p. 54).

  38. 38.

    Charleton (1654, p. 208).

  39. 39.

    Hooke (1705, p. 4).

  40. 40.

    Sprat (1667, p. 334).

  41. 41.

    Boyle (1690, pp. 4–5).

  42. 42.

    Burthogge (1678, pp. 55–56).

  43. 43.

    Glanvill (1661, pp. 128–29).

  44. 44.

    Glanvill (1662, pp. 22–23).

  45. 45.

    Glanvill (1668, p. 52).

  46. 46.

    Lewis (2007, p. 196).

  47. 47.

    Glanvill (1671, pp. 161–162).

  48. 48.

    Boyle (1681, pp. 85–86).

  49. 49.

    Boyle (1685).

  50. 50.

    Boyle (1690, p. 77).

  51. 51.

    Boyle (1690, pp. 112–113). See also pp. 103–104.

  52. 52.

    Boyle (1663, p. 102).

  53. 53.

    E.g. Royal Society, Boyle Papers vol. 2. fol. 58r, Boyle Papers Project https://www.bbk.ac.uk/boyle/papers/volume-2/volume-2-fol.57v-58r [Accessed on 12 June 2021].

  54. 54.

    Boyle (1688, p. 35).

  55. 55.

    Boyle (1688, p. 36).

  56. 56.

    Boyle (1688, p. 36).

  57. 57.

    Sinclair (1685), Sig. A5v–A6r.

  58. 58.

    Boyle (1999–2000, vol. xiv, pp. 263–264).

  59. 59.

    Ray (1691, p. 23).

  60. 60.

    Ray (1693, e.g. p. 133).

References

  • Barker, Matthew. 1674. Natural Theology. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biddle, John. 1648. A Confession of Faith Touching the Holy Trinity. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Robert. 1663. Some Considerations Touching the Usefulness of Experimental Natural Philosophy. Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Robert. 1681. A Discourse of Things Above Reason. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Robert. 1685. Of the High Veneration Man’s Intellect Owes to God. Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Robert. 1688. A Disquisition about the Final Causes of Natural Things. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Robert. 1690. The Christian Virtuoso. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Robert. 1999–2000. De diversitate religionum. In Robert Boyle, The Works of Robert Boyle, 14 vols., ed. Michael Hunter and Edward B. Davis, XIV:237–265. London: Pickering & Chatto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgersdijk, Franco. 1640. Institutiones metaphysicae. Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnet, Gilbert. 1725. History of His Own Time, 3 vols. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burthogge, Richard. 1675. Cavsa dei, or, An Apology for God. London.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Charleton, Walter. 1654. Physiologia Epicuro-Gassendo-Charltoniana. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cromartie, Alan. 2008. The God of Thomas Hobbes. The Historical Journal. 51:857–879.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, Ralph. 1678. The True Intellectual System of the Universe. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culverwell, Nathaniel. 2001 [1646]. An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature, ed. Robert A. Greene and Hugh MacCallum. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumberland, Richard. 2007 [1672/1727]. Treatise of the Law of Nature, trans. John Maxwell, ed. Jon Parkin. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curley, Edwin. 1995. Hobbes Versus Descartes. In Descartes and His Contemporaries: Meditations, Objections and Replies, ed. Roger Ariew and Marjorie Grene, 97–109. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Descartes, René. 1985. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, 3 vols, ed. John Cottingham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, Stewart. Forthcoming. Cudworth as a Critic of Hobbes. In A Companion to Hobbes, ed. Marcus Adams. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gellera, Giovanni. 2016. The Epistemology of Sense from Calvin to Hutcheson. Journal of Scottish Thought. 7:148–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanvill, Joseph. 1661. The Vanity of Dogmatizing. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanvill, Joseph. 1662. Lux orientalis. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanvill, Joseph. 1668. Plus ultra: Or, the Progress and Advancement of Knowledge Since the Days of Aristotle. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanvill, Joseph. 1671. Philosophia Pia; or, a Discourse of the Religious Temper, and Tendencies of the Experimental Philosophy which is Profest by the Royal Society. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanvill, Joseph. 1675. An Account of Mr Ferguson, His Commonplace Book in Two Letters. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, John, of Richmond. 1654. Of Government and Obedience as They Stand Directed and Determined by Scripture and Reason. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, Thomas. 1996 [1651]. Leviathan, ed. Richard Tuck, student edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, Thomas. 2008 [1688]. Historia ecclesiastica, ed. Patricia Springborg, Patricia Stablein and Paul Wilson. Paris: Honoré Champion Éditeur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooke, Robert. 1705. The Present State of Natural Philosophy, and where it is deficient. In Robert Hooke, The Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke, ed. R. Waller, 3–7. London, 1705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leijenhorst, Cees. 2004. Hobbes’ Corporeal Deity. Rivista Di Storia Della Filosofia. 59:73–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitin, Dmitri. 2014. Rethinking English Physico-Theology: Samuel Parker’s Tentamina de Deo (1665). Early Science and Medicine. 19:28–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Rhodri. 2007. Language, Mind and Nature: Artificial Languages in England from Bacon to Locke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Jon. 1999–2000. Innate Ideas in Stoicism and Grotius. Grotiana. 20–21:143–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • More, Henry. 1652. An Antidote against Atheism. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer, Sarah. 2009. Human Liberty and Human Nature in the Works of Faustus Socinus and His Readers. Journal of the History of Ideas. 70:191–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer, Sarah. 2010. Reason and Religion in the English Revolution: The Challenge of Socinianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer, Sarah. 2014. De veritate: Christianity and Human Nature. Grotiana. 35:75–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Stephen. 1691. Observations of the Four Letters of Dr. John Wallis, Concerning the Trinity. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, Samuel. 1666. Free and Impartial Censure of Platonick Philosophie. Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkin, Jon. 1999. Science, Religion, and Politics in Restoration England: Richard Cumberland’s De Legibus Naturae. Woodbridge: Royal Historical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling, Edward. 1696. A Discourse Concerning the Existence of God. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, John. 1691. The Wisdom of God. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, John. 1693. Three Physico-Theological Discourses. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, G. A. J. 1996. Innate Ideas and the Ancient Philosophy in Cudworth’s Epistemology. In “Mind Senior to the World”: Stoicismo e origenismo nella filosofia platonica del Seicento inglese, ed. Marialuisa Baldi, 149–161. Milan: Franco Angeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selden, John. 1640. De jure naturali et gentium. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, George. 1685. Satan’s Invisible World Discovered. Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Socinus, Faustus. 1656. Opera omnia, 2 vols. Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville, J.P. 1984. John Selden, the Law of Nature, and the Origins of Government. Historical Journal. 27:437–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprat, Thomas. 1667. The History of the Royal Society of London. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spurr, John. 1988. ‘Rational Religion’ in Restoration England. Journal of the History of Ideas. 49:563–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillotson, John. 1664. The Wisdom of Being Religious. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, John. 1677. The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft. London.

    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). Anti-Innatism c.1650–c.1690. In: The Religious Innatism Debate in Early Modern Britain. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84323-6_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84323-6_3

  • 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