Descartes: A Biography

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

 Descartes: A Biography

used in Martin Schoock’s book, Regius suggested that there was no ‘reli-

gious enthusiast, no impious person or buffoon, who could not make the

same claim for their folly and madness’. All this suggested that Cartesian

metaphysics was, in some sense, inconsistent with the general philosoph-

ical framework within which it was developed and that its author actually

believed in private the opposite of what he published, as Schoock had

suggested.

Yo uwill not be surprised at my conduct when you realize that many honourable and

intelligent people have often told me that they had too high an opinion of the quality

of your mind to believe that you did not hold, in the depths of your soul, opinions

that are the opposite of those that appear in public under your name. Without any

dissimulation, many here [in Utrecht] are convinced that you have greatly discredited

your philosophy by publishing your metaphysics. (iv.)

Despite these extremely provocative comments, Regius agreed to make

the changes in the text that Descartes requested, out of respect and ‘love’

forhis former tutor. However, he also suggested that if Descartes were to

implement his threat – of dissociating himself publicly from what Regius

had written – it might cause more harm to Descartes’ reputation than to

that of Regius.

Descartes responded predictably to this allegation. While accepting

that it was sometimes prudent not to reveal exactly what one thought

about a controversial subject, he thought it was ‘despicable and immoral’ to

publish the opposite of what one genuinely believed.Although infuriated

bythe charge of intellectual dishonesty, he simply reminded Regius of the

possible outcome of publishing the book, since he had sent it to him in

advance to ask his opinion. ‘I cannot fail to tell you openly that I do not

think it is in any way in your interest to publish anything about philosophy,

not even about the part that deals with physics. First of all, because you

were forbidden by your Magistrate from teaching the new philosophy in

private or in public...’(iv.). If Regius were to transgress the decision

of the magistrates, he would provide a good reason for his enemies to apply

various penalties and, possibly, to deprive him of his post as professor of

medicine at Utrecht.

At this point ( July) the correspondence between Regius and

Descartes comes to an abrupt end, or at least there is no trace of any

further letters between the two former friends. Despite Descartes’ advice

and his threat to disown the book in public, Regius proceeded as planned