Résumés
Abstract
According to Locke, scripture says nothing about the resurrection of the same body. We will be resurrected. But in what sense can resurrected Jane be the “same” as living Jane? Throughout his thinking, Locke holds that sameness of body and/or sameness of soul are not required for the resurrection of “the same Jane.” Sameness of person is required. Locke’s theory of personal identity was ground-breaking in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It was provoking and resulted in a wave of critical responses. His distinction between “man” and “person” is important for his account of personal identity, but the distinction was hard for his contemporaries to understand. The correspondence between Locke and Edward Stillingfleet, for example, shows that for Stillingfleet the distinction between “man” and “person” is artificial. Having read this correspondence, Winch Holdsworth attacks Locke in a sermon in 1719 arguing that Locke denied the resurrection altogether. Catharine Trotter Cockburn tries to defend Locke in her Vindication. Despite her clear understanding of the distinctions applied by Locke, she too struggles with what to make of a person.
Keywords:
- John Locke,
- Edward Stillingfleet,
- Catharine Trotter Cockburn,
- Winch Holdsworth,
- Diachronic Identity,
- Personal Identity,
- Resurrection
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Birch, Thomas. “The Life of Mrs. Cockburn” introduction to Volume 1 of Works by Catharine Trotter Cockburn. London, 1751.
- Descartes, René. Meditations, Objections, and Replies. Edited and translated by Roger Ariew and Donald Cress. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett 2006.
- Dacome, Lucia. “Resurrecting by Numbers in Eighteenth–Century England.” Past & Present 193, no. 1 (November 2006): 73–110. https://doi-org.10.1093/pastj/gt1018.
- Holdsworth, Winch. A Sermon Preached before the University of Oxford at St. Mary’s on Easter Monday. Oxford, 1720.
- Holdsworth, Winch. A Defence of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same Body, In Two Parts. […] London, 1726.
- Kaufman, Daniel. “The Resurrection of the Same Body and the Ontological Status of Organisms: What Locke Should Have (and Could Have) Told Stillingfleet.” In Contemporary Perspectives on Early Modern Philosophy, edited by Owen Hoffman, 191–214. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press, 2008.
- Kaufman, Daniel. “Locke’s Theory of Identity.” In A Companion to Locke, edited by Matthew Stuart, 236–59. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell, 2015.
- Kelley, Anne. Catharine Trotter: An Early Modern Writer in the Vanguard of Feminism. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2002.
- Locke, John. An Essay concerning Human Understanding. Edited by Peter Nidditch. The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2011.
- Locke, John. Mr. Locke’s Reply to the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of Worcester’s Answer to his Second Letter. London, 1699.
- Pearson, John. An Exposition of the Creed. London, 1676.
- Sheridan, Patricia. Introduction to Catharine Trotter Cockburn: Philosophical Writings, edited by Patricia Sheridan. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press, 2006.
- Stillingfleet, Edward. The Bishop of Worcester’s Answer to Mr. Locke’s Second Letter; Wherein His Notion of Ideas Is Prov’d to Be Inconsistent with It Self, And with the Articles of the Christian Faith. London, 1698.
- Thiel, Udo. The Early Modern Subject. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
- Thomas, Emily. “Catharine Cockburn on Unthinking Immaterial Substance: Soul, Space, and Related Matters.” Philosophy Compass 10, no. 4 (2015): 255–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12210.
- Trotter Cockburn, Catharine. A Letter to Dr. Holdsworth. London, 1723.
- Trotter Cockburn, Catharine. A Vindication of Mr. Locke’s Christian Principles, from the Injurious Imputations of Dr. Holdsworth. In Volume 1 of Works, 155-–78. London, 1751.
- Trotter Cockburn, Catharine. “A Defence of Mr. Locke’s Essay of Human Understanding.” In Catharine Trotter Cockburn: Philosophical Writings, edited by Patricia Sheridan, 35-86. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press, 2006.
- Walmsley, Jonathan, C., Hugh Craig, and John Burrows. “The Authorship of the Remarks upon an Essay concerning Humane Understanding.” Eighteenth-Century Thought 6 (2016): 205–43.