Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-k7rjm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-23T11:41:41.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Causal and Logical Necessity in Malebranche's Occasionalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

A.R.J. Fisher
A.R.J. Fisher*
Affiliation:
Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The famous Cartesian Nicolas Malebranche (1638-1715) espoused the occasionalist doctrine that ‘there is only one true cause because there is only one true God; that the nature or power of each thing is nothing but the will of God; that all natural causes are not true causes but only occasional causes’ (LO, 448, original italics). One of Malebranche's well-known arguments for occasionalism, known as, the ‘no necessary connection’ argument (or, NNC) stems from the principle that ‘a true cause… is one such that the mind perceives a necessary connection between it and its effect’ (LO, 450).

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 523 - 548
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bennett, J. 1984. A Study of Spinoza's Ethics. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. 1996. ‘Spinoza's Metaphysics.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza, Garrett, D. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Church, R. 1970. A Study in the Philosophy of Malebranche. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Cunning, D. 2008. ‘Malebranche and Occasional Causes.’ Philosophy Compass 3: 471–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curley, E. 1969. Spinoza's Metaphysics: An Essay in Interpretation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Della Rocca, M. 2008. ‘Causation Without Intelligibility and Causation Without God in Descartes.’ In A Companion to Descartes, Broughton, J. and Carriero, J. eds. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Downing, L. 2005. ‘Occasionalism and Strict Mechanism: Malebranche, Berkeley, Fontenelle.’ In Early Modern Philosophy: Mind, Matter, and Metaphysics, Mercer, C. and O’Neill, E. eds. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freddoso, A. 1991. ‘God's General Concurrence with Secondary Causes: Why Conservation is not enough.’ Philosophical Perspectives 5: 553–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. 1978. A Treatise of Human Nature. Nidditch, P. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jolley, N. 1990. ‘Berkeley and Malebranche on Causality and Volition.’ In Central Themes in Early Modern Philosophy, Cover, J.A. and Kulstad, M. eds. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Jolley, N. 2006. ‘Metaphysics.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Early Modern Philosophy, Rutherford, D. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, S. 2008. ‘Necessary Connections and Continuous Creation: Malebranche's Two Arguments for Occasionalism.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 46: 539–66.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G.W. 1973 [1686]. ‘Necessary and Contingent Truths.’ Morris, M. and Parkinson, G.H.R. trans. In Philosophical Writings, Parkinson, G.H.R. ed. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G.W. 1989. Philosophical Essays. Ariew, R. and Garber, D. trans. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Loeb, L. 1981. From Descartes to Hume: Continental Metaphysics and the Development of Modern Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Malebranche, N. 1992 [1680-1]. Treatise on Nature and Grace. Riley, P. trans. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Malebranche, N. 1997 [1674-5]. The Search after Truth. Lennon, T. and Olscamp, P. trans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malebranche, N. 1997 [1688]. Dialogues on Metaphysics and on Religion. Scott, D. trans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCracken, C.J. 1983. Malebranche and British Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Nadler, S. 1996. ‘’’No Necessary Connection’’: The Medieval Roots of the Occasionalist Roots of Hume.’ The Monist 79: 448–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadler, S. 2000. ‘Malebranche on Causation.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Malebranche, Nadler, S. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ott, W. 2008. ‘Régis’ Scholastic Mechanism.’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 39: 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyle, A. 2003. Malebranche. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Régis, P.-S. 1691. Cours entier de philosophie ou Système général selon les principles de Descartes. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Huguetan.Google Scholar
Régis, P.-S. 1996. L’usage de la raison et de la foi. Armogathe, ed. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
Robinet, A. ed. 1955. Malebranche et Leibniz: Relations personelles. Paris: J.Google Scholar
Rome, B. 1963. The Philosophy of Malebranche. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar
Schmaltz, T. 2000. ‘Malebranche on Ideas and the Vision in God.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Malebranche, ed. Nadler, S. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmaltz, T. 2008. ‘Occasionalism and Mechanism: Fontenelle's Objections to Malebranche.’ British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16: 293–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoemaker, S. 1998. ‘Causal and Metaphysical Necessity.’ Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 79: 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sleigh, R. 1990. ‘Leibniz on Malebranche on Causality.’ In Central Themes in Early Modern Philosophy, Cover, J.A. and Kulstad, M. eds. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Spinoza, B. 1994 [1677]. A Spinoza Reader: The Ethics and Other Works. Curley, E. trans. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suárez, F. 1994 [1597]. On Efficient Causality: Metaphysical Disputations 17-19. Freddoso, J. trans. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Watson, R. 1993. ‘Malebranche, Models, and Causation.’ In Causation in Early Modern Philosophy: Cartesianism, Occasionalism, and Preestablished Harmony, Nadler, S. ed. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar