System of Nature

by Denis Diderot (Editor), Paul-Henri Thiry, H.D. Robinson (Translation)

"The source of Man's unhappiness is his ignorance of Nature."D'Holbach believed that the misery he saw in mankind around him was caused by religion and its superstitious beliefs - that there was a God who controlled destiny and would reward or punish individuals. The System of Nature was written to replace these delusions with a schema of understanding based solely on the physical workings of nature. "Let Man study this nature, let him learn her laws, contemplate her energies." For d'Holbach the soul is only the physical body, understood from a certain point of view, which dies when the body dies. All the events and the nature of the world can be understood in terms of the motion and properties of matter; even the tiniest causes contribute to huge events - a simple change in the diet of an Emperor (or some other such insignificant cause), he suggests might have been capable of "saving kingdoms." For him, nature's laws are fixed and necessary, and if Man wants to find happiness it is best to accept this - if governments want to rule wisely they should base themselves on this principle. Man's fear of death and desire for immortality should be resisted and those in power should not be allowed to play upon these passions.Clinamen Press has issued the book with a fully modernized text and a newly commissioned introduction by Michael Bush. Recently retired from Manchester University, where he was a reader in History, his previous works include the very successful What is Love? Richard Carlile's Philosophy of Sex for Verso (1998) and Pilgrimage of a Study of the Rebel Armies of October 1536 (1996). He is a keen collector of rare books, specializing in radical authors.

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Atheism, Nonfiction, Science, Classics

296 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1770

About the author

Work on the Encyclopédie (1751-1772), supreme accomplishment of French philosopher and writer Denis Diderot, epitomized the spirit of thought of Enlightenment; he also wrote novels, plays, critical essays, and brilliant letters to a wide circle of friends and colleagues.

Jean le Rond d'Alembert contributed.

This artistic prominent persona served as best known co-founder, chief editor, and contributor.

He also contributed notably to literature with Jacques le fataliste et son maître (Jacques the Fatalist and his Master), which emulated Laurence Sterne in challenging conventions regarding structure and content, while also examining ideas about free will. Diderot also authored of the known dialogue, Le Neveu de Rameau (Rameau's Nephew), basis of many articles and sermons about consumer desire. His articles included many topics.

Diderot speculated on free will, held a completely materialistic view of the universe, and suggested that heredity determines all human behavior. He therefore warned his fellows against an overemphasis on mathematics and against the blind optimism that sees in the growth of physical knowledge an automatic social and human progress. He rejected the idea of progress. His opinion doomed the aim of progressing through technology to fail. He founded on experiment and the study of probabilities. He wrote several articles and supplements concerning gambling, mortality rates, and inoculation against smallpox. He discreetly but firmly refuted technical errors and personal positions of d'Alembert on probability.

Reviews

[Can Inelli · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great work of philosophy that every human being must read. It is the most comprehensive description of Atheism in the history of philosophy.

[Zlatko Dimitrioski · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant dismantling of religion and superstition. As I read the book, I felt how the Middle Ages died.

[Людмил Люцканов · Rating 4 out of 5]

Истински ценна според мен е втората, полемичната част на книгата, в която барон Холбах с охладено от опита и разсъждението въображение пространно разсъждава за вредите от религията, не и за ползите, тъй като въпреки безкрайната си добронамереност ползи от нея всъщност не е открил.:) Но "умовете на хората, способни да се възпламеняват от чудото и изстъпителния възторг, упорито се съпротивяват на най-простите истини и съвсем не се разпалват от учения, които изискват продължителни размисли и разсъждения." Религията пречи на изучаването на природата. Тя руши нравствеността. Ако човек се надява на леко изкупване на греховете, той лесно им се предава. Но и самото понятие "грях" има смисъл само по отношение на другия човек, не и по отношение на бога. "Човек дължи нещо на човека не защото би оскърбил някакъв бог, ако навреди на себеподобния си, а защото, обиждайки го, той би оскърбил човек и би нарушил законите на справедливостта, от запазването на които е заинтересовано всяко човешко същество." Една наистина революционна за времето си книга.

[the halfblade in my wallet · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The book was considered extremely radical in its day and the list of people writing refutations of the work was long. The Catholic theologian Nicolas-Sylvestre Bergier wrote a refutation titled Examen du matérialisme ("Materialism examined"). Voltaire, too, seized his pen to refute the philosophy of the Système in the article "Dieu" in his Dictionnaire philosophique, while Frederick the Great also drew up an answer to it.”

Open Library (pdf in French). Amsterdam, 1772

It is speculated that Frederick was motivated to write a criticism of the System of Nature because the book contained an attack not just on religion, but also on monarchy

[Daniel Bueno · Rating 5 out of 5]

Revelación. Reconocimiento. Fidelización

[Thjodbjorn · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the first (if not THE first) book to be published in the west that was openly and avowedly atheistic.

While a great deal of the particulars of science are very out-dated, the reasoning from the ground up based on observation and experience to arrive at a worldview that posits no gods, no supernatural forces, is very impressive.

[Farrell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another school reading for Philosophy. I found this interesting actually. The argument of not having free will was interesting. Do we not have free will because all of our actions have some sort of motivation behind it?