निकोला मालब्रांश
रचित वस्तुएँ वास्तव में कुछ कारित नहीं कर सकतीं; हर अवसर पर केवल ईश्वर कर्म करता है, और हम संसार को ईश्वर में विचारों को देखकर जानते हैं।
पृष्ठभूमि
अवसर-कारणवाद: हम सब वस्तुओं को ईश्वर में देखते हैं।
मुख्य विचार
- अवसर-कारणवाद
- ईश्वर में दर्शन
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 2
ऑगस्टीन
रने देकार्त
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Reading Descartes’ Treatise on Man in 1664 turned Malebranche to philosophy; The Search after Truth (1674–75) keeps Cartesian dualism and extension as the essence of matter. N. Malebranche, De la recherche de la vérité (1674–75); SEP “Nicolas Malebranche”
रने देकार्त › 1596–1650
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 4
गॉटफ़्रीड विल्हेल्म लाइबनित्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Leibniz, who met Malebranche in Paris in 1675, agreed that created substances do not act on one another, but replaced occasional causes by pre-established harmony (New System, 1695). G. W. Leibniz, Système nouveau de la nature (Journal des savants, 1695); M. R. Antognazza, Leibniz: An Intellectual Biography (2009); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
गॉटफ़्रीड विल्हेल्म लाइबनित्स › 1646–1716
मैरी एस्टेल
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In Letters concerning the Love of God (1695), exchanged with John Norris, Astell took up Malebranche’s view that God, as sole cause of our pleasures, alone deserves love. M. Astell and J. Norris, Letters concerning the Love of God (1695); SEP “Mary Astell”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मैरी एस्टेल › 1666–1731
जार्ज बर्कली
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Like Malebranche, Berkeley made God the cause of our ideas of sense, but in the Three Dialogues (1713) he distinguished his view from seeing all things in God. G. Berkeley, Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous (1713); Philosophical Commentaries (1707–08); SEP “George Berkeley”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जार्ज बर्कली › 1685–1753
डेविड ह्यूम
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Hume took Malebranche’s argument that no necessary connection between finite causes and effects is perceived, but rejected his conclusion that God is the only true cause (Treatise, 1739). D. Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature (1739), “Of the idea of necessary connexion”; An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748); SEP “David Hume”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
डेविड ह्यूम › 1711–1776
आलोचना
परस्पर आलोचना 1
अंतुआन आर्नो ⇄ परस्पर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Malebranche answered Arnauld’s attack in his Réponse (1684) and later letters, defending ideas as objects in God distinct from mental modifications, against Arnauld’s view of ideas as perceptions. N. Malebranche, Réponse au livre Des vraies et des fausses idées (1684); Trois lettres (1685); SEP “Nicolas Malebranche”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Arnauld argued against Malebranche’s vision in God that ideas are the mind’s own perceptions, not representative entities in God (On True and False Ideas, 1683). A. Arnauld, Des vraies et des fausses idées (1683); SEP “Antoine Arnauld”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अंतुआन आर्नो › 1612–1694
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 2
डैमरिस मैशम
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Masham rejected the view of Malebranche, taken up by Norris, that God alone causes our pleasures and so alone deserves love (Discourse concerning the Love of God, 1696). D. Masham, A Discourse concerning the Love of God (1696); SEP “Damaris Cudworth Masham”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
डैमरिस मैशम › 1659–1708
इमानुएल कांट
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Kant counted Malebranche’s continuing intuition of God among the deus ex machina answers to how concepts fit objects – ‘the greatest absurdity’ (letter to Marcus Herz, 1772). I. Kant, letter to Marcus Herz, 21 February 1772 (AA X 129–135)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
इमानुएल कांट › 1724–1804
जिनकी आलोचना की 1
झू शी
जिनकी आलोचना की
Malebranche’s Dialogue between a Christian Philosopher and a Chinese Philosopher (1708) attacks the Neo-Confucian li, as systematised by Zhu Xi and known to him from missionary reports, as an impersonal principle that confuses God with matter – in his eyes close to Spinoza. N. Malebranche, Entretien d’un philosophe chrétien et d’un philosophe chinois sur l’existence et la nature de Dieu (1708); D. E. Mungello, “Malebranche and Chinese Philosophy”, Journal of the History of Ideas 41 (1980)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
झू शी › 1130–1200
कृतियाँ
- 1674सत्य की खोज
मन में भ्रम के स्रोत – हम सब वस्तुओं को ईश्वर में देखते हैं।
मत
Malebranche united Cartesian philosophy with Augustine’s theology. If mind and body are completely different substances, he asked, how can one act on the other? His answer was occasionalism: no created thing has real causal power; God alone acts, and creaturely events are merely the “occasions” on which he acts according to general laws. Likewise we do not perceive things through ideas in our own minds but see all things in God, in whom the ideas reside. God acts through simple general laws rather than particular wills, which also explains the existence of evil. His views influenced Berkeley, and his analysis of causation prepared the ground for Hume.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Born in Paris in 1638, Nicolas Malebranche joined the Oratory, a congregation of priests, in 1660. Reading Descartes’s Treatise on Man in 1664 made him turn to philosophy. He spent the rest of his life in Paris writing and in lively controversies, above all with Antoine Arnauld, and corresponded with Leibniz. He died in 1715.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- The Search after Truth (1674)
- Treatise on Nature and Grace (1680)
- Dialogues on Metaphysics and on Religion (1688)
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है