Descartes: A Biography

c CUNYB/Clarke     December, :

 Descartes: A Biography

‘It is known that I am a lover of peace and quiet more than anyone else,

that I have never instituted legal proceedings against anyone or engaged

in controversy with anyone. I have often even condoned the injuries I suf-

fered rather than try to avenge them’ (viii-.–). He offers the same

explanation that he had given on previous occasions of why he is living in

the United Provinces, rather than in France, where he could have enjoyed

the protection of his own nation:

As many people know, I lived in relative comfort in my native country. My only reason

forchoosing to live elsewhere was that I had so many friends and relatives whom I

could not fail to entertain, and that I would have had little time and leisure available to

pursue the studies which I enjoy and which, according to many people, will contribute

to the common good of the human race. (viii-.–)

In contrast with this retiring, peace-loving, and tolerant scholar who minds

his own business, Voetius is presented as someone who is very much

involved in the public life of the new Dutch republic. He is a preacher and

professor, and was for a time rector of the university.He is known as

being ‘most querulous, bitter, and troublesome’ (viii-.), and he has

looked for ‘rows and controversies to destroy other people’s reputations,

and to appear so implacable, obstinate and terrifying, that no one would

subsequently dare to challenge him’ (viii-.).Descartes illustrates

Voetius’ penchant for meddling in the affairs of others by reference to the

Confraternity of the Blessed Virgin.

This intervention by Voetius into the internal affairs of another town,

in a different province (Brabant), helped support Descartes’ claim that

he was a meddling, dogmatic, and quarrelsome theologian who found

reasons to dispute in public even with members of the Calvinist Church.

Descartes usually avoided becoming involved in theological controversies,

even within his own church, and it was a new – possibly unwise – step on

his part to engage in what seemed like an internal dispute within Dutch

Calvinism about the extent to which they should tolerate social interaction

with Roman Catholics. Wise or otherwise, Descartes took full advantage of

the opportunity to brand Voetius as a troublemaker. ‘Nothing can tend to

civil unrest more readily than if someone relies on the authority of one town

to condemn what has been done in another town – and not just anything

done there, but something that was done for the good of the republic – in

a public writing which, rather than reproach with reasons, afflicts them

with insults’ (viii-.).Descartes uses this obscure theological dispute