Naturalism and Unbelief in France, 1650–1729, by Alan Charles KorsEpicureans and Atheists in France, 1650–1729, by Alan Charles Kors

Abstract

Almost thirty years ago, Alan Charles Kors published an exciting and original book entitled Atheism in France, 1650–1729: The Orthodox Sources of Disbelief, which was recently reissued by Princeton University Press. That was announced as Volume One, and the two new publications from Cambridge are effectively the long-awaited sequel. The three books do indeed have a unity, such that the new ones can only be fully appreciated when read in conjunction with their predecessor. Indeed, it is puzzling why the publisher has produced two volumes rather than one, and is charging significantly more for the shorter of the two. Atheism in France combined a very scholarly examination of a wide range of contemporary writings with sensitivity to their context. Kors stressed the notable expansion of the reading public in the seventeenth century, the thirst for books and the enthusiasm for travel in geographical space and historical time. He argued convincingly that, as a result, there was a keen interest in the relationship between Christian Europe and other cultures, whether those of antiquity, of the civilisations of the East or of the natives of the New World. Another crucial context was that of the learned and clerical world. Teachers in universities and colleges were proud of their rigorous training and their proficiency in logic, while they were also taught to generate objections to the most cherished ideas. The majority seem to have viewed the innovative philosophical and scientific views of their time as grave threats to their own central values and to their intellectual integrity. In France, this conservatism was reinforced by the rivalries between clerical groups, and the bitter theological controversies seen at their most extreme in the disputes over Jansenism. The monarchy, largely incited by the powerful and divisive Jesuits, issued a long series of prohibitions directed against the Cartesians and others, which probably exacerbated the disputes and certainly failed to stop the arguments. The printing press encouraged disputants to engage in extended debates before the public, made more intense by the appearance of journals that loved quarrels. A standard technique on all sides, surely founded on scholastic debating practices, was that of the reductio ad absurdum. What this usually meant was that the opponent’s system was shown to lead to an impasse, either opening the way to atheism or actively supporting it. In this fashion, a whole arsenal of arguments against orthodox Christian claims and beliefs was laid before the public, with the atheist being invoked as a heuristic device, only for this material to help inspire the real deists and atheists of the next generation.