Margaret Cavendish against Belief in Witchcraft: A World not Always Regular and Limited Human Knowledge
Main Article Content
Abstract
In her Philosophical Letters, Margaret Cavendish strongly rejects the belief in witchcraft, arguing that it would be foolish to attribute all unusual natural effects to the intervention of immaterial entities like the devil. Due to her materialistic stance, she asserts that the devil cannot influence nature. However, when there is no identifiable natural cause for a phenomenon, it is ascribed to a devilish influence. My hypothesis is that Cavendish not only rejects witchcraft because of her materialistic stance but also provides an alternative explanation for such phenomena based on two fundamental cornerstones of her philosophy: 1) an ordered but, at times, irregular universe, and 2) limited human knowledge.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The author is required to sign a letter for the transferal of rights, and to authorize the distribution of his or her article through any format.
The reproduction of articles —but not of images—is permitted, provided the source is cited and the authors’ rights respected.
Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional.
References
Acevedo-Zapata, Diana María, 2017, “Margaret Cavendish. Escritura, estilo y filosofía natural”, Kriterion: Revista de Filosofia, vol. 58, no. 137, pp. 271–290. <https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-512x2017n13703dmaz> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-512x2017n13703dmaz
Bailey, Michael David, 2002, “The Feminization of Magic and the Emerging Idea of the Female Witch in the Late Middle Ages”, Essays in Medieval Studies, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 120–134. <https://doi.org./10.1353/ems.2003.0002> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ems.2003.0002
Broad, Jacqueline, 2007, “Margaret Cavendish and Joseph Glanvill: Science, Religion, and Witchcraft”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 493–505. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.06.002> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.06.002
Boyle, Deborah, 2018, The Well-Ordered Universe: The Philosophy of Margaret Cavendish, Oxford University Press, Nueva York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780195396577-0375
Boyle, Deborah, 2015, “Margaret Cavendish on Perception, Self-Knowledge, and Probable Opinion”, Philosophy Compass, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 438–450. <https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12232> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12232
Calvente, Sofía, 2023, “La crítica de Margaret Cavendish a la filosofía experimental a la luz de su metafísica”, Daimon: Revista Internacional de Filosofía, no. 89, pp. 99–115. <https://doi.org/10.6018/daimon.469741> DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/daimon.469741
Cavendish, Margaret, 1666, Observations upon Experimental Philosophy, Londres.
Cavendish, Margaret, 1664, Philosophical Letters, or, Modest Reflections upon Some Opinions in Natural Philosophy Maintained by Several Famous and Learned Authors of This Age, Expressed by Way of Letters, Londres.
Cavendish, Margaret, 1663, Philosophical and Physical Opinions, Londres.
Cavendish, Margaret, 1655, The Worlds Olio, Londres.
Clark, Stuart, 1997, Thinking with Demons: The Idea of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Clucas, Stephen, 2003, “Variation, Irregularity and Probabilism”, en Stephen Clucas (comp.), A Princely Brave Woman: Essays on Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle, Routledge/Ashgate, pp. 109–209.
Cunning, David, 2016, Cavendish. Arguments of the Philosophers, Routledge, Londres/Nueva York. <https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657929ca>
Detlefsen, Karen, 2007, “Reason and Freedom: Margaret Cavendish on the Order and Disorder of Nature”, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 157–191. <https://doi.org/10.1515/AGPH.2007.008> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/AGPH.2007.008
Duncan, Stewart, 2012, “Debating Materialism: Cavendish, Hobbes, and More”, History of Philosophy Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 391–409.
Elmer, Peter, 2016, Witchcraft, Witch-Hunting, and Politics in Early Modern England, Oxford University Press, Oxford. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717720.001.0001
Hill, Benjamin, 2016, “Academic Scepticism and the Early Royal Society”, en Plínio Junquerira Smith y Sébastien Charles (comps.), Academic Scepticism in the Development of Early Modern Philosophy, Springer, Nueva York, pp. 103–124. <https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45424-5_6> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45424-5_6
Hock, Jessie, 2018, “Fanciful Poetics and Skeptical Epistemology in Margaret Cavendish’s Poems and Fancies”, Studies in Philology, vol. 115, no. 4, pp. 766–802. <https://doi.org/10.1353/sip.2018.0029> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/sip.2018.0029
Kivelson, Valerie y Jonathan Shaheen, 2011, “Prosaic Witchcraft and Semiotic Totalitarianism: Muscovite Magic Reconsidered”, Slavic Review, vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 23–44. <https://doi.org/10.5612/slavicreview.70.1.0023> DOI: https://doi.org/10.5612/slavicreview.70.1.0023
Kramer, Heinrich y Jacobus Sprenger, 1486, Malleus Maleficarum, Estrasburgo.
Lascano, Marcy, 2023, The Metaphysics of Margaret Cavendish and Anne Conway. Monism, Vitalism, and Self-Motion, Oxford University Press, Nueva York. <https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197651636.001.0001> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197651636.001.0001
Levack, Brian P., 2013, The Witch-Hunt in Early Modern Europe, 3ª ed., Routledge, Londres/Nueva York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315838014
Manzo, Silvia, 2023, “Margaret Cavendish acerca del escepticismo, los sueños y la fantasía (fancy)”, Ideas y Valores, no. 72, supl. 10, pp. 93–115. <https://doi.org/10.15446/ideasyvalores.v72n10Supl.111010> DOI: https://doi.org/10.15446/ideasyvalores.v72n10Supl.111010
Manzo, Silvia, 2019, “Monsters, Laws of Nature, and Teleology in Late Scholastic Textbooks”, en Pietro Daniel Omodeo y Rodolfo Garau (comps.), Contingency and Natural Order in Early Modern Science, Springer, Nueva York, pp. 61–92. <https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67378-3_4> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67378-3_4
McNulty, Michael Bennett, 2018, “Margaret Cavendish on the Order and Infinitude of Nature”, History of Philosophy Quarterly, vol. 3, no. 35, pp. 219–240. <https://doi.org/10.2307/48563633> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/48563633
More, Henry, 1656, Enthusiasmus triumphatus, or, A Discourse of the Nature, Causes, Kinds, and Cure, of Enthusiasme, Parresiastes, Londres.
More, Henry, 1653, An Antidote Against Atheism, Or an Appeal to the Natural Faculties of the Mind of Man, Whether there Be not a God, Londres.
Michaelian, Kourken, 2009, “Margaret Cavendish’s Epistemology”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 31–53. <https://doi.org/10.1080/09608780802548259> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09608780802548259
Nate, Richard, 2001, “ ‘Plain and Vulgarly Express’d’: Margaret Cavendish and the Discourse of the New Science”, Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 403–417. <https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2001.19.4.403> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rht.2001.0002
Nider, Johannes, 1437, Formicarius, Viena.
Popkin, Richard, 1983, La historia del escepticismo desde Erasmo hasta Spinoza, Fondo de Cultura Económica, México.
Sarasohn, Lisa T., 2010, The Natural Philosophy of Margaret Cavendish: Reason and Fancy During the Scientific Revolution, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. <https://doi.org/10.1353/book.465>
Sherman, Anita Gilman, 2021, “The Skeptical Fancies of Margaret Cavendish: Reoccupation”, en Skepticism in Early Modern English Literature: The Problems and Pleasures of Doubt, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 137–175. <https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108903813.005> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108903813.005
Van Helmont, Jan Baptist, 1650, A Ternary of Paradoxes. The Magnetick Cure of Wounds: The Nativity of Tartar in Wine. The Image of God in Man, Flesher, Londres.
Walters, Lisa, 2014, “Margaret Cavendish’s Fusion of Renaissance Science, Magic and Fairy Lore”, en Margaret Cavendish. Gender, Science and Politics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 100–137. <https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107588912.003> DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107588912.003