Cambridge Platonism and the Reception of Spinoza in 17th century England
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_36_13Keywords:
Spinoza, Anne Conway, Cambridge Platonism, monism, religious cognitionAbstract
This article examines the reception of Spinoza’s philosophy in seventeenth-century England, focusing on Henry More and Anne Conway within the circle of the Cambridge Platonists. Taking as its point of departure Spinoza’s claim that the human mind possesses an adequate idea of God which nevertheless often remains inoperative, the paper reconstructs how his immanent monism was interpreted as atheism, enthusiasm, or mysticism. Drawing on the historiographical work of Rosalind Colie (1963) and Sarah Hutton (1984), we revisit the circulation of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and the early manuscript versions of the Ethics, arguing that Conway’s Principles constitutes one of the earliest sustained engagements with Spinoza in English. By analyzing More’s defense of divine transcendence and Conway’s reflections on inspiration, imagination, and moral transformation, we show that their critiques implicitly address the operative force of ideas in shaping behavior. The seventeenth-century debate over Spinozism thus anticipates contemporary discussions in the cognitive science of religion concerning imagination, affect, and the regulation of belief.
Downloads
References
BAYLE, Pierre. Historical and Critical Dictionary: Selections. Translated by Richard H. Popkin. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1991. Original work published in 1697.
COLIE, Rosalie L. Spinoza in England, 1665–1730. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, v. 107, n. 3, p. 183–219, 19 June 1963.
CONWAY, Anne. The Conway Letters. Edited by Marjorie Hope Nicolson. Rev. ed. with an introduction by Sarah Hutton. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.
CONWAY, Anne. The Principles of the Most Ancient and Modern Philosophy. Translated and edited by Allison P. Coudert and Taylor Corse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
CONWAY, Anne. The Principles of the Most Ancient and Modern Philosophy. 2. ed. Edited with an introduction by Peter Loptson. Delmar, NY: Scholars’ Facsimiles & Reprints, 1998.
GARVER, Eugene. Spinoza and the Cunning of Imagination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018.
GOETZ, Stewart; TALIAFERRO, Charles (eds.). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2021.
HUTTON, Sarah. Anne Conway: A Woman Philosopher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
HUTTON, Sarah. Reason and revelation in the Cambridge Platonists, and the reception of Spinoza. In: GRÜNDER; SCHMIDT-BIGGEMANN (ed.). Spinoza in der Frühzeit seiner religiösen Wirkung. Heidelberg: Verlag, 1984. p. 181–200.
MELAMED, Yitzhak Y. The metaphysics of Spinoza’s Theological Political Treatise. In: MELAMED, Yitzhak Y.; ROSENTHAL, Michael A. (ed.). Spinoza’s Theological Political Treatise: A Critical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. p. 128–142.
MOREAU, Pierre-François. Spinoza et le spinozisme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2003.
POPKIN, Richard H. Spinoza’s relations with the Quakers in Amsterdam. Quaker History, v. 73, p. 14–28, Spring 1984.
POPKIN, Richard H. The spiritualistic cosmologies of Henry More and Anne Conway. In: HUTTON, Sarah (ed.). Henry More (1614–1687): Tercentenary Studies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990. p. 98–113.
SPINOZA, Benedictus de. The Chief Works of Benedict de Spinoza. Translated by R. H. M. Elwes. Reprint ed. New York: Dover Publications, 1951.
SPINOZA, Benedictus de. Opera posthuma. Amsterdam, 1677.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nastassja Pugliese, Renato Matoso Brandão
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
