Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCavaillé, Jean-Pierre
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-08T08:36:08Z
dc.date.available2025-03-08T08:36:08Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.date.submitted2024-04-02T15:49:06Z
dc.identifierONIX_20240402_9791221502664_157
dc.identifierhttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/89188
dc.identifier.urihttps://doab-dev.siscern.org/handle/20.500.12854/190136
dc.description.abstractThis essay explores the reciprocal contamination of the notions of error and erring at the beginning of the early modern time in Latin and Romance languages, through the example of the concept of “erroneous conscience”. This concept, for Pierre Bayle and those who followed him at least on this point, allows for the decriminalization of religious beliefs, and even those that challenge religion(s), by recognizing the “rights of the erroneous conscience”. This right is a right to error and to erring/wandering limited to religious convictions and apparently aimed solely at “tolerance” (supporting and excusing erroneous/wandering opinions). However, it did not escape contemporaries that it radically challenged the very idea that a universal truth could be universally known and established in this field.
dc.languageItalian
dc.relation.ispartofseriesKnowledge and its Histories
dc.rightsopen access
dc.subject.otherErroneous conscience
dc.subject.otherpyrrhonism
dc.subject.othermoral rationalism
dc.subject.otheratheism
dc.subject.otherintolerance
dc.titleChapter The Notions of Erroneous Conscience in Pierre Bayle
dc.typechapter
oapen.identifier.doi10.36253/979-12-215-0266-4.08
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy2ec4474d-93b1-4cfa-b313-9c6019b51b1a
oapen.relation.isbn9791221502664
oapen.pages15
oapen.place.publicationFlorence
dc.seriesnumber2
dc.abstractotherlanguageThis essay explores the reciprocal contamination of the notions of error and erring at the beginning of the early modern time in Latin and Romance languages, through the example of the concept of “erroneous conscience”. This concept, for Pierre Bayle and those who followed him at least on this point, allows for the decriminalization of religious beliefs, and even those that challenge religion(s), by recognizing the “rights of the erroneous conscience”. This right is a right to error and to erring/wandering limited to religious convictions and apparently aimed solely at “tolerance” (supporting and excusing erroneous/wandering opinions). However, it did not escape contemporaries that it radically challenged the very idea that a universal truth could be universally known and established in this field.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record