David Renaud Boullier: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Added {{Orphan}} tag
m Replace magic links with templates per local RfC and MediaWiki RfC
Line 12: Line 12:
'''David Renaud Boullier''' (March 19, 1699 – December 24, 1759) was a Dutch [[Protestant]] minister and [[philosopher]].
'''David Renaud Boullier''' (March 19, 1699 – December 24, 1759) was a Dutch [[Protestant]] minister and [[philosopher]].


Boullier was born in [[Utrecht]]. He was a Protestant pastor in [[Amsterdam]] and was active in [[London]] for several years.<ref name="Perkins 2003"/> Boullier opposed the mechanistic philosophy of [[René Descartes]] that animals were machines devoid of a soul, reason or sensation.<ref name="Matytsin 2016">Matytsin, Anton M. (2016). ''The Specter of Skepticism in the Age of Enlightenment''. Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 132-136. ISBN 9781421420523</ref> He also opposed the skepticism of [[Pierre Bayle]] which attempted to eliminate any essential distinction between humans and animals. Boullier believed that God had created animal and human souls with distinct properties.<ref name="Matytsin 2016"/>
Boullier was born in [[Utrecht]]. He was a Protestant pastor in [[Amsterdam]] and was active in [[London]] for several years.<ref name="Perkins 2003"/> Boullier opposed the mechanistic philosophy of [[René Descartes]] that animals were machines devoid of a soul, reason or sensation.<ref name="Matytsin 2016">Matytsin, Anton M. (2016). ''The Specter of Skepticism in the Age of Enlightenment''. Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 132-136. {{ISBN|9781421420523}}</ref> He also opposed the skepticism of [[Pierre Bayle]] which attempted to eliminate any essential distinction between humans and animals. Boullier believed that God had created animal and human souls with distinct properties.<ref name="Matytsin 2016"/>


In 1728, Boullier authored the two volume ''Essai Philosophique sur L'ˆAme des Bêtes'' (''Essay on the Soul of Beasts''), an early work on [[animal rights]]. The book was the longest and most thoughtful discussion on animals [[soul]]s in the 18th century.<ref name="Perkins 2003">Perkins, David. (2003). ''Romanticism and Animal Rights''. Cambridge University Press. pp. 27-29. ISBN 0-521-82941-0</ref> Boullier argued that animals have purposeful motions which proves they have intelligence and an immaterial soul, though on a lesser scale than humans.<ref>Duffy, Cian; Veliki, Martina Domines. (2020). ''Romanticism and the Cultures of Infancy''. Springer. p. 83. ISBN 9783030504298</ref>
In 1728, Boullier authored the two volume ''Essai Philosophique sur L'ˆAme des Bêtes'' (''Essay on the Soul of Beasts''), an early work on [[animal rights]]. The book was the longest and most thoughtful discussion on animals [[soul]]s in the 18th century.<ref name="Perkins 2003">Perkins, David. (2003). ''Romanticism and Animal Rights''. Cambridge University Press. pp. 27-29. {{ISBN|0-521-82941-0}}</ref> Boullier argued that animals have purposeful motions which proves they have intelligence and an immaterial soul, though on a lesser scale than humans.<ref>Duffy, Cian; Veliki, Martina Domines. (2020). ''Romanticism and the Cultures of Infancy''. Springer. p. 83. {{ISBN|9783030504298}}</ref>


Boullier used evidence from comparative anatomy of the brain and from instinct to argue that animals have emotion and sensation but lack the understanding and will of human souls.<ref>Mendelsohn, E; Weingart, P. (2013). ''Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors''. Springer. p. 47. ISBN 9789401106733</ref> Unlike [[Richard Dean (curate)|Richard Dean]] and others who argued that animals possess immortal souls, Boullier did not believe animal souls were immortal. He stated that animals do suffer and they are innocent but their soul can only act through their body and perish with it.<ref name="Perkins 2003"/> Boullier invoked the [[great chain of being]] to link every creature into a united whole to manifest God's purpose.<ref name="Haakonssen 2006">Garrett, Aaron. ''Human Nature''. In Knud Haakonssen. (2006). ''The Cambridge History of Eighteenth Century Philosophy, Volume 1''. Cambridge University Press. pp. 160-233. ISBN 0-521-86742-8</ref> He argued that animal bodies on the lower chain are used for the spiritual happiness of the beings higher on the chain and that their deaths are sometimes necessary to promote this happiness in the created hierarchical world but this excuses only purposive cruelty such as [[meat eating]], not deliberate cruelty.<ref name="Haakonssen 2006"/>
Boullier used evidence from comparative anatomy of the brain and from instinct to argue that animals have emotion and sensation but lack the understanding and will of human souls.<ref>Mendelsohn, E; Weingart, P. (2013). ''Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors''. Springer. p. 47. {{ISBN|9789401106733}}</ref> Unlike [[Richard Dean (curate)|Richard Dean]] and others who argued that animals possess immortal souls, Boullier did not believe animal souls were immortal. He stated that animals do suffer and they are innocent but their soul can only act through their body and perish with it.<ref name="Perkins 2003"/> Boullier invoked the [[great chain of being]] to link every creature into a united whole to manifest God's purpose.<ref name="Haakonssen 2006">Garrett, Aaron. ''Human Nature''. In Knud Haakonssen. (2006). ''The Cambridge History of Eighteenth Century Philosophy, Volume 1''. Cambridge University Press. pp. 160-233. {{ISBN|0-521-86742-8}}</ref> He argued that animal bodies on the lower chain are used for the spiritual happiness of the beings higher on the chain and that their deaths are sometimes necessary to promote this happiness in the created hierarchical world but this excuses only purposive cruelty such as [[meat eating]], not deliberate cruelty.<ref name="Haakonssen 2006"/>


==Selected publications==
==Selected publications==

Revision as of 16:17, 7 January 2021

David Renaud Boullier
BornMarch 19, 1699
Utrecht
DiedDecember 24, 1759
Occupation(s)Minister, philosopher

David Renaud Boullier (March 19, 1699 – December 24, 1759) was a Dutch Protestant minister and philosopher.

Boullier was born in Utrecht. He was a Protestant pastor in Amsterdam and was active in London for several years.[1] Boullier opposed the mechanistic philosophy of René Descartes that animals were machines devoid of a soul, reason or sensation.[2] He also opposed the skepticism of Pierre Bayle which attempted to eliminate any essential distinction between humans and animals. Boullier believed that God had created animal and human souls with distinct properties.[2]

In 1728, Boullier authored the two volume Essai Philosophique sur L'ˆAme des Bêtes (Essay on the Soul of Beasts), an early work on animal rights. The book was the longest and most thoughtful discussion on animals souls in the 18th century.[1] Boullier argued that animals have purposeful motions which proves they have intelligence and an immaterial soul, though on a lesser scale than humans.[3]

Boullier used evidence from comparative anatomy of the brain and from instinct to argue that animals have emotion and sensation but lack the understanding and will of human souls.[4] Unlike Richard Dean and others who argued that animals possess immortal souls, Boullier did not believe animal souls were immortal. He stated that animals do suffer and they are innocent but their soul can only act through their body and perish with it.[1] Boullier invoked the great chain of being to link every creature into a united whole to manifest God's purpose.[5] He argued that animal bodies on the lower chain are used for the spiritual happiness of the beings higher on the chain and that their deaths are sometimes necessary to promote this happiness in the created hierarchical world but this excuses only purposive cruelty such as meat eating, not deliberate cruelty.[5]

Selected publications

  • Essai Philosophique sur L'ˆAme des Bêtes (1728, 1737)
  • Lettres Sur Les Vrais Principes De La Religion (1741)

References

  1. ^ a b c Perkins, David. (2003). Romanticism and Animal Rights. Cambridge University Press. pp. 27-29. ISBN 0-521-82941-0
  2. ^ a b Matytsin, Anton M. (2016). The Specter of Skepticism in the Age of Enlightenment. Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 132-136. ISBN 9781421420523
  3. ^ Duffy, Cian; Veliki, Martina Domines. (2020). Romanticism and the Cultures of Infancy. Springer. p. 83. ISBN 9783030504298
  4. ^ Mendelsohn, E; Weingart, P. (2013). Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors. Springer. p. 47. ISBN 9789401106733
  5. ^ a b Garrett, Aaron. Human Nature. In Knud Haakonssen. (2006). The Cambridge History of Eighteenth Century Philosophy, Volume 1. Cambridge University Press. pp. 160-233. ISBN 0-521-86742-8
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Renaud_Boullier&oldid=998909597"