William King on election, reason, and desire
A reply to Kenneth Pearce
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21597853 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Enrico Galvagni (University of St Andrews, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 194-206 |
| Publication date | 2024-01-02 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | British Journal for the History of Philosophy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0960-8788 • E-ISSN: 1469-3526 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/09608788.2023.2214187 |
| OpenAlex | W4380631739 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 9 |
William King’s De Origine Mali has recently started to attract some attention in early modern scholarship. In a recent paper devoted to King’s theory of free will, Kenneth Pearce identifies a “lacuna” in his text, namely the fact that King “never explicitly describes the process whereby election leads to action” (Pearce, “William King on Free Will”, 4). In this paper, I analyse King’s theory of ‘election’ (roughly, free choice) and Pearce’s interpretation of it. I discuss his claim that there is a lacuna in King’s account and argue that the text provides us with important suggestions on how election generates action. Therefore, no speculative proposal to fill the lacuna is needed. This, in turn, allows me to develop a reading of King’s text that avoids a textual puzzle unsolved in Pearce’s interpretation: while he maintained that every election is “with reason”, my account can take King’s text at face value and explain how some elections are reasonable while others are not
Epistemology · Face value · Law and economics · Linguistics · Political science · Scholarship · Sociology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Computer Science · History · Law · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|