Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-c8zdz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T15:00:52.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Anne Viscountess Conway: A Seventeenth Century Rationalist

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Jane Duran
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The work of Spinoza, Descartes and Leibniz is cited in an attempt to develop, both expositorily and critically, the philosophy of Anne Viscountess Conway. Broadly, it is contended that Conway's metaphysics, epistemology and account of the passions not only bear intriguing comparison with the work of the other well-known rationalists, but supersede them in some ways, particularly insofar as the notions of substance and ontological hierarchy are concerned. Citing the commentary of Loptson and Carolyn Merchant, and alluding to other commentary on the Cambridge Platonists whose work was done in tandem with Conway's, it is contended that Conway's conception of the “monad” preceded and influenced Leibniz's, and that her monistic vitalism was in many respects a superior metaphysics to the Cartesian system. It is concluded that we owe Conway more attention and celebration than she has thus far received.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 4 , Issue 1: Special Issue: The History of Women in Philosophy , Spring 1989 , pp. 64 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by Hypatia, Inc.

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

Conway, Anne. 1982. Principles of the most ancient and modem phibsophy, Loptson, Peter, ed. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Coudert, Allison. 1975. A Cambridge platonist's kabbalist nightmare. Journal of the history of ideas 36(4): 634–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couturat, Louis. 1972. On Leibniz's metaphysics. In Leibniz: a collection of critical essays, Frankfurt, Harry G., ed. Garden City, NY: Anchor.Google Scholar
Descartes, Rene. 1967. The philosophical works of Descartes, Haldane, Elizabeth S. and Ross, G.R.T., eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Descartes, Rene. 1969. The essential Descartes, Wilson, Margaret D., ed. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
Fraser, Antonia. 1985. The weaker vessel. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Kenny, Anthony. 1968. Descartes: a study of his philosophy. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Wilhelm Gottfried. 1951. Leibniz: selections, Wiener, Philip P., ed. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, Aharon. 1962. Henry More: the rational theology of a Cambridge Platonist. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackinnon, Flora Isabel ed., 1969. Philosophical writings of Henry More. New York: AMS Press.Google Scholar
Merchant, Carolyn. 1979. The vitalism of Anne Conway: Its impact on Leibniz's concept of the monad. In Journal of the history of philosophy 27(3): 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolson, Marjorie Hope. 1930. The Conway letters: The correspondence of Anne Viscountess Conway, Henry More and their friends, 1642–1684. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parkinson, G.H.R. 1954. Spinoza's theory of knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Powicke, F.J. 1926. The Cambridge Platonists. London: F.M. Dent & Son.Google Scholar
De Spinoza, Benedict. 1955. On the improvement of the understanding, Elwes, R.H.M., ed. New York: Dover.Google Scholar