Questioning Authority: Anthony Collins’ Challenge to Orthodox Anglican Authority Figures and George Berkeley’s Reply
Abstract
In this paper I argue that the English freethinker Anthony Collins (1676–1729) is making use of ‘conglobation’ to develop an argument across the Vindication of the Divine Attributes (1710) and the Discourse on Free-Thinking (1713), which aims to challenge the religious authority of orthodox representatives of the Anglican church. That is, Colins makes use of a rhetorical (piecemeal) strategy that serves to insinuate one’s proper position to create, what I will call, the ‘authority-challenge’. I reconstruct this challenge in three steps. First, I analyse Collins’ criticism of William King (1650–1729), the Archbishop of Dublin, who according to Collins’ Vindication advances a conception of the divine attributes and of the nature of God that is compatible with atheism. Second, I introduce Collins’ argument from disagreement, which he develops in his Discourse. This argument aims to establish that whenever there is meaningful disagreement, e. g., about the (philosophical) content and not merely about the best terminology, between the supposed experts, we have the right to think on our own about the issue at hand. In the third step, I present the ‘authority-challenge’. In a nutshell, this challenge requires orthodox representatives of the Anglican church either (i) to open the door to atheism by not substantively disagreeing with William King (thereby undermining everything they stand for and presenting themselves as hypocrites) or (ii) to substantively disagree with King to contain atheism (thereby undermining their status as experts for religious issues). Since (i) cannot be an option, they have no choice but to undermine their own authority by impairing their expert status, which, in turn, has ramifications for their political power as well. In the second part of my paper, I argue that §§ 16–22 of the fourth dialogue of George Berkeley’s Alciphron (1732/52) are designed to meet Collins’ ‘authority-challenge’. This will allow me to resolve the puzzle that these sections so far have posed for commentators. In particular, many have been puzzled by Berkeley’s argumentative strategy and in particular his references to the Scholastics. As I argue, however, if §§ 16–22 are read in the light of Collins’ authority challenge, it becomes evident that Berkeley uses these references in his attempt to refute King without failing to meet Collins’ challenge.
Agnesina, J. 2018. The Philosophy of Anthony Collins: Free-Thought and Atheism. Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Airaksinen, T./Gylling H. 2017. “A Threat Like No Other Threat, George Berkeley against the Freethinkers.” History of European Ideas 43.6, 598–613.10.1080/01916599.2016.1223733Search in Google Scholar
Ariew, R. 2011. Descartes Among the Scholastics. Leiden.10.1163/ej.9789004207240.i-358Search in Google Scholar
Attfield, R. 1977. “Clarke, Collins and Compounds.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 15.1, 45–54.10.1353/hph.2008.0087Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, T. 1934. Summa Contra Gentiles. Translated by the English Dominican Fathers. London.Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, T. 1981. Summa Theologiae. Translated by the English Dominican Fathers. New York.Search in Google Scholar
Benítez, M. 2007. “Anthony Collins Revisitado: Deísmo, Panteísmo Y Ateísmo En Los Tiempos Modernos.” Daimon Revista Internacional de Filosofia 41, 25–40.Search in Google Scholar
Bentley, R. 1838. The Works of Richard Bentley. Vol. 3. Sermons Preached at Boyle’s Lecture: Remarks Upon a Discourse of Free-Thinking: Proposal for an Edition of the Greek Testament. London.Search in Google Scholar
Berkeley, G. 1948–57. The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne Vol. I–IX. Ed. T. E. Jessop/A. A. Luce. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. Alciphron. Ed. J. Bennett <https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/berkeley1732.pdf>Search in Google Scholar
–. 1996. Alciphron oder der kleine Philosoph. Ed. W. Breidert. Hamburg.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1993. “Alciphron or the Minute Philosopher” in Focus. Ed. D. Berman. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2010. Berkeley’s Alciphron: English Text and Essays in Interpretation. Ed. L. Jaffro/G. Brykman/C. Schwartz. Hildesheim.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2013. The Correspondence of George Berkeley. Ed. M. A. Hight. Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Berman, D. 1994. George Berkeley: Idealism and the Man. Oxford.10.1093/oso/9780198267461.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
–. 2013. A History of Atheism in Britain: From Hobbes to Russell. London.Search in Google Scholar
Blechl, J. E. 2019. Active Berkeleyanism: Containing an Exposition of an Improved Methodology for Berkeleyan Scholarship Via a New Unified Interpretation of Berkeleyanism, with Objections and Replies. PhD dissertation. University of York.Search in Google Scholar
Browne, P. 1728. The Procedure, Extent, and Limits of Human Understanding. London.Search in Google Scholar
Clarke, S. 1998. A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God: And Other Writings. Ed. E. Vailati. Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511583346Search in Google Scholar
Collins, A. 1710. “A Vindication of the Divine Attributes”: In Some Remarks on His Grace the Archbishop of Dublin’s Sermon, Intituled, Divine Predestination and Foreknowledge Consistent with the Freedom of Man’s Will. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1710a. Priestcraft in Perfection: or, a Detection of the fraud of inserting and continuing this clause-The Church hath power to decree rites and ceremonys, and authority in controversys of faith-in the twentieth Article of the Articles of the Church of England. The Third Edition Corrected. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1713. A Discourse of Free-thinking: Occasion’d by the Rise and Growth of a Sect Call’d Free-thinkers. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1724. An Historical and Critical Essay on the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England. Wherein it is demonstrated that this clause –’ The Church has power to decree Rites and Ceremonies, and Aut[h]ority in Matters of Faith’– inserted in the 20th Article is not a part of the Articles, as they were established by Act of Parliament in the 13th of Eliz. or agreed on by the Convocations of 1562 and 1571. London.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2011. The Correspondence of Anthony Collins (1676–1729), Freethinker: Critical Edition. Ed. J. Dybikowski. Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Copenhaver, B. 2020. “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/pico-della-mirandola/>Search in Google Scholar
Curtin, T. 2014. “Divine Analogy in Eighteenth-Century Irish Philosophy.” The Journal of Theological Studies 65.2, 600–24.10.1093/jts/flu069Search in Google Scholar
Daniel, S. H. 2011. “Berkeley’s Rejection of Divine Analogy.” Science et esprit 63.2, 149–61.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2021. George Berkeley and Early Modern Philosophy. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Dybikowski, J. 2011. The Correspondence of Anthony Collins. Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Fasko, M. 2018. “A Scotist Nonetheless? George Berkeley, Cajetan, and the Problem of Divine Attributes.” Ruch Filozoficzny 74.4, 33–50.10.12775/RF.2018.035Search in Google Scholar
Fasko, M./West, P. 2020a. “Molyneux’s Question: the Irish Debates”. Ed. G. Ferretti/B. Glenney. London, 122–35.10.4324/9780429020377-10Search in Google Scholar
–. 2020b. “The Irish Context of Berkeley’s ‘Resemblance Thesis’”. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 88, 7–31.10.1017/S1358246120000089Search in Google Scholar
–. 2021. Die Sprache Gottes. Basel.Search in Google Scholar
Fauske, C. J. 2016. A Political Biography of William King. London.10.4324/9781315656144Search in Google Scholar
Fields, K. 2011. Berkeley: Ideas, Immaterialism, and Objective Presence. Lanham, Md.Search in Google Scholar
Grzeliński, A. “Berkeley’s Alciphron.” In The Bloomsbury Companion to Berkeley. Ed. B. Belfrage/R. Brook. London, 174–96.Search in Google Scholar
Hochschild, J. P. 2004. “George Berkeley and a Theory of Analogy.” The Downside Review 122.428, 157–68.10.1177/001258060412242802Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, S. 1929. Samuel Johnson, President of King’s College. New York.Search in Google Scholar
Jones, T. 2021. George Berkeley – A Philosophical Life. Princeton.10.1515/9780691217482Search in Google Scholar
King, W. 1702. De Origine Mali. Dublin.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1976. Archbishop King’s Sermon on Predestination. Ed. D. Berman/A. Carpenter. Dublin.Search in Google Scholar
Kline, D. A. 1987. “Berkeley’s Divine Language Argument.” In Essays on the Philosophy of George Berkeley. Ed. E. Sosa. Dordrecht, 129–42.10.1007/978-94-009-4798-6_8Search in Google Scholar
Locke, J. 1995. The Philosophical Works and Selected Correspondence of John Locke. Ed. M. C. Rooks. Charlottesville.Search in Google Scholar
March, W. W. S. 1942. “Analogy, Aquinas and Bishop Berkeley.” Theology 44.264, 321–29.10.1177/0040571X4204426401Search in Google Scholar
O’Higgins, J. 1970. Anthony Collins, the Man and His Work. The Hague.10.1007/978-94-010-3217-9Search in Google Scholar
–. 1976. “Browne and King, Collins and Berkeley: Agnosticism or Anthropo-morphism?”. The Journal of Theological Studies 27.1, 88–112.Search in Google Scholar
O’Rourke, F. 1992. Pseudo-Dionysius and the Metaphysics of Aquinas. Leiden.10.1163/9789004451773Search in Google Scholar
Pearce, K. L. 2017. Language and the Structure of Berkeley’s World. Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198790334.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
–. 2018. “Matter, God, Nonsense.” In Berkeley’s Three Dialogues: New Essays. Ed. S. Storrie. Oxford, 176–90.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2019. “William King on Free Will.” Philosophers’ Imprint 19.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2020. “Peter Browne on the Metaphysics of Knowledge.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 88, 215–37.10.1017/S1358246120000156Search in Google Scholar
Rocca, G. P. 2004. Speaking the incomprehensible God: Thomas Aquinas on the interplay of positive and negative theology. Washington, D.C.Search in Google Scholar
Rozemond, M. 2009. “Can Matter Think? The Mind–Body Problem in the Clarke–Collins Correspondence.” In Topics in Early Modern Philosophy of Mind. Ed. J. Miller. Dordrecht, 171–92.10.1007/978-90-481-2381-0_8Search in Google Scholar
Smith, G. R. 2013. “The Problem of Divine Attributes from Thomas Aquinas to Duns Scotus”. University of Notre Dame Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Taranto, P. 2000. Du Déisme À L’athéisme: La Libre-Pensée D’anthony Collins. Paris.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2010. “Le Personnage De Diagoras.” In Berkeley’s Alciphron: English Text and Essays in Interpretation. Ed. L. Jaffro/G. Brykman/C. Schwartz. Hildesheim, 361–70.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2020. “Berkeley and Browne on Divine Analogy: a Reassessment”. Unpublished draft.Search in Google Scholar
Thompson, A. 2011. “Animals, Humans, Machines and Thinking Matter, 1690–1707.” In Transitions and Borders between Animals, Humans and Machines 1600–1800. Ed. T. Cheung. Leiden, 3–37.10.1163/ej.9789004191815.i-200.5Search in Google Scholar
Toland, J. 1720. Tetradymus. London.Search in Google Scholar
Uzgalis, W. 2018. “Minds and Persons in the Clarke Collins Correspondence.” In Philosophy of Mind in the Early Modern and Modern Ages: The History of the Philosophy of Mind. Ed. R. Copenhaver. London, 284–301.10.4324/9780429508158-13Search in Google Scholar
–. 2020. “Anthony Collins”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 Edition). Ed. E. N. Zalta. <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/collins/>Search in Google Scholar
Wolfe, C. T. 2007. “Determinism/Spinozism in the Radical Enlightenment: the Cases of Anthony Collins and Denis Diderot”. International Review of Eighteenth-Century Studies 1.1, 37–51.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Articles
- Reappraising Plato’s Cratylus
- Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī on Animal Cognition and Immortality
- Questioning Authority: Anthony Collins’ Challenge to Orthodox Anglican Authority Figures and George Berkeley’s Reply
- The Importance of Kant’s Schematism for Schelling’s Project of a Philosophy of Nature
- Sellars’s Core Critique of C. I. Lewis: Against the Equation of Aboutness with Givenness
- Book Reviews
- Proops, Ian. The Fiery Test of Critique: A Reading of Kant's Dialectic. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2021, xiv + 486 pp.
- Textor, Mark. The Disappearance of the Soul and the Turn against Metaphysics: Austrian Philosophy 1874–1918. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2021, xv + 386 pp.
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Articles
- Reappraising Plato’s Cratylus
- Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī on Animal Cognition and Immortality
- Questioning Authority: Anthony Collins’ Challenge to Orthodox Anglican Authority Figures and George Berkeley’s Reply
- The Importance of Kant’s Schematism for Schelling’s Project of a Philosophy of Nature
- Sellars’s Core Critique of C. I. Lewis: Against the Equation of Aboutness with Givenness
- Book Reviews
- Proops, Ian. The Fiery Test of Critique: A Reading of Kant's Dialectic. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2021, xiv + 486 pp.
- Textor, Mark. The Disappearance of the Soul and the Turn against Metaphysics: Austrian Philosophy 1874–1918. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2021, xv + 386 pp.
