[17] Leviathan, pt. i, ch. vi. Morley’s ed. p. 34. [↑]
[18] Leviathan, pt. iii, ch. xxxiii. [↑]
[20] On this see Lange, Hist. of Materialism, sec. iii, ch. ii. [↑]
[21] Molyneux, an anti-Hobbesian, in translating Hobbes’s objections along with the Meditations (1680) claims that the slightness of Descartes’s replies was due to his unacquaintance with Hobbes’s works and philosophy in general (trans. cited, p. 114). This is an obviously lame defence. Descartes does parry some of the thrusts of Hobbes; others he simply cannot meet. [↑]
[22] E.g., Leviathan, pt. iv, ch. xlvii. [↑]
[23] Kuno Fischer, Descartes and his School, pp. 232–35. Cp. Bentley, Sermons on Atheism (i.e., his Boyle Lectures), ed. 1724, p. 8. [↑]
[24] Hobbes also was of Mersenne’s acquaintance, but only as a man of science. When, in 1647, Hobbes was believed to be dying, Mersenne for the first time sought to discuss theology with him; but the sick man instantly changed the subject. In 1648 Mersenne died. He thus did not live to meet the strain of Leviathan (1651), which enraged the French no less than the English clergy. (Croom Robertson’s Hobbes, pp. 63–65.) [↑]
[25] Hobbes lived to see this law abolished (1677). There was left, however, the jurisdiction of the bishops and ecclesiastical courts over cases of atheism, blasphemy, heresy, and schism, short of the death penalty. [↑]
[26] Croom Robertson, Hobbes, p. 196; Pepys’s Diary, Sept. 3, 1668. [↑]