Descartes: A Biography

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

Once More into Battle 

recommends, instead, that they acknowledge God’s infinite greatness and

universal Providence. From that perspective, one can see that nothing

occurs without God’s decree and that one need not ‘fear death, pain or

disgrace’ (iv.).

The Cartesian account of love included a brief reflection on love of

country, which motivates individuals to recognize their role as a very

small part of a much greater reality and willingly to risk their lives for

their prince. The sacrifice of one of its parts to save the body politic as

a whole is illustrated by the way in which people accept ‘a little blood-

letting from the arm in order to ensure that the rest of the body is improved’

(iv.). This was stretching the point a little, since Descartes was never

afan of blood-letting and resisted attempts to apply that therapy as he

lay dying.In fact, his lack of trust in the generally accepted medical

therapies of the period extended even to the use of drugs. ‘As for drugs,

either from apothecaries or empirics, I have such a low opinion of them

that I would never advise anyone to use them.’

Chanut was unqualified in his gratitude to Descartes for replying to his

queries and in his praise of the extensive letter ofFebruary.He shared

these grateful sentiments with the queen’s physician, another Frenchman

named du Ryer, on whom Queen Christina depended so closely that she

allowed him home visits to France only on condition that he left his wife in

Stockholm as a guarantee of his prompt return to Sweden. The physician

in turn told the queen about Descartes’ letter, so that she also wanted to

read it and discuss it with Chanut. Having indicated that she had never

experienced the passion of love and therefore could not comment on the

merits of the Cartesian analysis, she raised two questions about whether

Descartes’ account of the indefinite extent of the universe was compati-

blewith Christianity. Christina claimed that, if one denied that the uni-

verseisfinite, it would be difficult to reconcile its indefinite duration

with the biblical account of God’s creation and with the Christian under-

standing of a final judgment. In other words, the Earth as described in

the Bible seemed to have a beginning in time and a definite end. She

was also concerned that the Christian account of the Incarnation would

seem less credible if the traditional view of the human race as being the

centre of creation were surrendered. Why should God be united with

human nature if there were many similar species on other planets and if

mankind, therefore, were no longer the primary or exclusive focus of God’s

benevolence?