En Kadim ve Modern Felsefenin İlkeleri

by Anne Conway, Ferit Burak Aydar (Translator)

Anne Conway (1631-1679): 17. yüzyıl İngiliz filozofu. Yaşadığı dönemin ilk kadın filozoflarından biridir. Döneminin ünlü filozoflarından Henry More’un başını çektiği Cambridge Platoncuları okulunun üyeleri arasında anılır. Felsefesinde Leibniz ve Kabalist van Helmont’un etkilerini görmek mümkündür. Günümüze kalan tek eseri olan En Kadim ve Modern Felsefenin İlkeleri de ölümünden sonra ilk kez van Helmont tarafından, Amsterdam’da Latince olarak yayımlanmıştır. Anne Conway döneminin popüler felsefelerine bir cevap olarak kaleme aldığı eserinde Kartezyen düalizme karşı çıkar; Spinoza ve özellikle de Hobbes’un felsefelerini kimi zaman alaya varan bir sertlikle eleştirir. Kontes Anne Conway’in bu özgün eseri Türkçede ilk kez yayımlanıyor.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Classics

128 pages, Hardcover

First published June 30, 1982

About the author

Anne Conway (also known as Viscountess Conway; née Finch; 14 December 1631 – 18 February 1679) was an English philosopher whose work, in the tradition of the Cambridge Platonists, was an influence on Gottfried Leibniz.

Reviews

[Michael Wayne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Snails can become dogs but dogs can not become people

[nemėgstu filosofijos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Beskaitant Conway mane dažnai apima pykčio jausmas. Tai tiek.

Beskaitant Conway mane dažnai apima pykčio jausmas dėl socialinės bei akademinės neteisybės. Visų pirma, Conway, būnant moteriai, buvo užsiūtos lūpos, jai teko slėptis po jos vyro vardu. Antra, akademijoje ji buvo it naujo vėjo gūsis -- besidomėdama Kabbalah, kritikuodama mechanicistinę pasaulėžiūrą Conway sukūrė naują, originalią filosofinę sistemą, pasaulėžiūrą, padėjo pamatus monados sąvokai (kurią sau laimingai aproprijavo Leibnizas), tačiau visa tai gana neturėjo reikšmės. Iki dabar apie Conway teoriją kalbama kaip apie kažką itin išskirtinio, tačiau ji neiškyla iš keturių šimtų metų tylos.

Norisi apie jos mintis kuo garsiau rėkti, atsižvelgiant dar į tą faktą, jog jos itin tinka prie dabartinės ekologinės situacijos. Nežinau, dėl ko leidykla nusprendė leisti būtent tokią obskiūrinę knygelę, tačiau jaučiu didelę pagarbą, kad padarytas toks nekomercinis ėjimas.

[Faith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Conway presents a vitalist ontology of Spirit, with God as first mover and creator in a Samsara-like loop. Christ is the middle being between God and creatures. God is immutable and cant become more of anything, Christ can only become more good, and creatures can become either more good or evil. The goodness or evilness of creatures determines whether they move up and down the ladder of nature, i.e., they might become a stone, or even temporarily go to hell (Conway thinks hell can't possibly be infinite as eternity only belongs to God, and it's just a way to remediate for one's sins through suffering). Nothing could be evil forever as God needs his divine operations to keep on going.
There is some other stuff Conway writes about, but she is rather unclear - perhaps because this book is translated from the Latin translation and the original version is forever lost. Nevertheless, I think her ontology, theology and theodicy are rather inspirational, creative, and somewhat cute.

[Virginia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Conway was a Kabbalistic Quaker who was writing at a time when women weren't generally writing philosophy, so she is herself an interesting subject. The introduction to this little book does a good job of outlining her life and its effect on her work. The text has a few issues, some of which are misinterpretations of a figure whom she perhaps didn't read directly, others of which are uses of antiquated physical science in refutations (for instance, she uses the fact that rotten wood produces living bugs as a proof of the living nature of matter). Overall though this is well worth reading, especially considering the influence it seems to have had on Leibniz, which is discussed in the introduction. I would recommend this to anyone interested in modern philosophy.

[Will Miller · Rating 5 out of 5]

Stages of liking Anne Conway:

1) Holy moley, I can't believe a woman wrote philosophy in the 17th century.
2) By gosh, I am impressed by the actual philosophy this 17th century woman wrote.
3) Ye gods, this philosophy is actually better than other 17th century philosophy -- and not by a small margin.
4) Um, well, it's also better than anything else I've read that is called philosophy. I mean, not to exaggerate. But also -- yeah. If Conway and Spinoza had actually gotten together for a coffee, maybe all our problems would be solved, and we could just listen to Steely Dan and eat tapas like civilized people.

[Rich Booher · Rating 5 out of 5]

A difficult, dense, and neglected masterpiece. Belongs on the shelf alongside other great works of metaphysics. It also involves some really wacky and fun moments, such as:

“Through their mediation, the limbs and parts so apparently separated always retain a certain real unity and sympathy, as many examples show, especially the following two. The first is this: if someone without a nose has a nose made for him from the flesh of another man and it is fastened to him like a twig grafted to the trunk of the tree in which it is inserted, when that other man dies and his body rots, that nose also rots and falls from the body of the living man.” (VII, S.4)

“If anyone asks what are these more excellent attributes, I reply that they are the following: spirit or life and light, by which I mean the capacity for every kind of feeling, perception, or knowledge, even love, all power and virtue, joy and fruition, which the noblest creatures have or can have, even the vilest and most contemptible. Indeed, dust and sand are capable of all these perfections through various successive transmutations…” (IX, S.6)

[Sinan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Bakmayın başlıkta “Felsefe” teriminin geçtiğine; baştan sona teoloji, safsata!
“Sıfır” veremiyor olmamızdan ötürü maalesef tek yıldız verdim…

[Bennett · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an important 17th c. work by Anne Conway, an erudite disciple of the Cambridge Platonist Henry More, a devotee of a Christian interpretation of Kabbalism and Quaker, whose arguments (Contra Descartes, Hobbes, More and Spinoza) set the stage for modern thinking on the topic of theodicy. Her theory of atomism, drawing from ancient Greek sources through Kabbalism, sees matter and spirit not as separate realities, but on a spectrum. Her thinking on the material/spiritual world is fascinating and more complex that can be explained here (especially matter's infinitude), but it's worth noting that she anticipates many discoveries of modern chemistry and biology and philosophizes with a profound belief in the created reality of life and how the spirit and body cannot be separated, especially when thinking from a theological perspective. Areas worth exploring more: her thoughts on the Trinity, the role of the Holy Spirit, which is strangely absent, and her use of scripture to support her scientific arguments of atomism (f.e. Matthew 3:9, God is able to of these stones raise up children unto Abraham).

[Imanol Faya · Rating 4 out of 5]

Es un buen librito de filosofía (es muy cortito, 70 páginas sin contar la introducción y los prefacios). Es un vitalismo mecanicista heredero del monismo de Spinoza, especialmente crítica con el dualismo cartesiano. Aunque sus aportes más originales no funcionen en lo absoluto, sobre todo su intento de dividir la totalidad en tres sustancias especiales (Dios, Cristo y las "criaturas"), sus argumentos contra el cartesianismo son excelentes, sumamente interesantes. Tambien sus apoetes sobre el sufrimiento y la noción de progreso son muy bonitas. Es cierto que mientras más avanza la argumentación, más claro queda que es incapaz de superar el monismo spinoziano, lo que hace de toda su ontología (exceptuando a Dios y a Cristo, que nunca logran ser coherentes con respecto a la tercera sustancia) un materialismo vitalista que no llega a afirmar, pero que se deriva de todo su sistema. Muy buena lectura, y la influencia directa de Leibniz, lo cual está bastante bien.

[Ethan]

Initially I read two chapters for my degree, and on that first impression I thought Conway was a bit muddled and presenting a somewhat incoherent view. After having read the whole thing I now recognise that what she was writing was a genuinely unique and interesting formalisation of some theological-philosophical thinking originating in a familiarity with a Platonised/Christianised Kabbalism.

Conway contends with her contemporaries, and had a surprising influence on Leibniz, a fact I did not know before. It is genuinely, and this cannot be understated, a true shame that she has been so overlooked in the canon of modern philosophy.

[Tomos · Rating 4 out of 5]

I studied Conway for a few weeks for an Early Modern Philosophy course, where we focused on chapters 7 and 8 from the 'Principles'. I was initially very wary of her underlying theology, prematurely branding it heretical because of her distinguishing between God and Christ on a substantial level. Returning to her text with the time and patience to unravel the intricacies of her philosophy has given me a greater appreciation for this radical philosopher and theologian - if you want to understand Conway, take your time and don't jump around.

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting feminist critique to read after Descartes and Spinoza, but it's a little too heavy on the Christian theology as argument against the rationalist philosophies for my liking. I was very impressed to see some ideas in here looking a lot like some in modern science, like endosymbiotic theory, quantum entanglement, and ecological energy flow. In some ways, Conway was way ahead of her time

[Toma Bandzaityte · Rating 5 out of 5]

Man atrodo naivokas autorės požiūris į Dievą, kūriniją, bet to tikėjimo begaliniu tobulėjimu ir ėjimu į šviesą taip kartais trūksta ir norisi. Tad tekstas susiskaitė gan maloniai, tuo labiau kad kaip filosofinė apybraiža nėra viena iš sudėtingiausių. Leidimas nuostabus, komplimentai leidyklai Jonas ir Jokūbas.

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Made me think...what does God have to do with COVID-19 if God has these certain attributes?

[Bodo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Baller

[cait · Rating 4 out of 5]

women philosophers >>>>>>>>>>>>>

"if Alexander cannot become Darius, then he cannot change into his horse, Bucephalus either" but he can turn into Alexander the horse!

[Anika Carino · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fave rationalist

[Calixte Walls]

Studied Chapter 8 and 9, arguments against Descartes

[Ezekiel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Universalist Quaker polymath philosopher whose ideas flowered among the Cambridge Platonists and even went on to influence Leibniz. Outrageously neglected.

[Markku · Rating 3 out of 5]

Strange, fragmentary work but very interesting. Learn how Christ mediates between creatures and the creator and how stones move into grass and paper into human beings.

[Velvetink]

bookfi.org