[147] In his Blow at Modern Sadducism (4th ed. 1668), Sadducismus Triumphatus (1681; 3rd ed. 1689), and A Whip to the Droll, Fidler to the Atheist (1688—a letter to Henry More, who was zealous on the same lines). These works seem to have been much more widely circulated than the Scepsis Scientifica. [↑]
[148] Scepsis, ch. 20, § 3. [↑]
[149] See Glanvill’s reply in a letter to a friend (1665), re-written as Essay II, Of Scepticism and Certainty: in A short Reply to the learned Mr. Thomas White in his collected Essays on Several Important Subjects, 1676. [↑]
[150] See the reply in Plus Ultra: or, the Progress and Advancement of Knowledge since the days of Aristotle, 1668, Epist. Ded. Pref. ch. xviii, and Conclusion. [The re-written treatise, in the collected Essays, eliminates the controversial matter.] [↑]
[151] First printed with Glanvill’s Philosophia Pia in 1671. Rep. as an essay in the collected Essays. [↑]
[152] Owen, pref. to Scepsis, pp. xx–xxii. [↑]
[153] Owen, pref. to ed. of Scepsis Scientifica, p. ix. [↑]
[154] Of whom, however, a high medical authority declares that, “as a physiologist, he was sunk in realism” (that is, metaphysical apriorism). Prof. T. Clifford Allbutt, Harveian Oration on Science and Medieval Thought, 1901, p. 44. [↑]
[155] Cp. Whewell, as last cited, pp. 75–83; Hallam, Literature of Europe, iv, 159–71. [↑]
[156] Reid, Intellectual Powers, Essay I, ch. i; Hamilton’s ed. of Works, p. 226. Glanvill calls Gassendi “that noble wit.” (Scepsis Scientifica, Owen’s ed. p. 151.) [↑]