Pierre Gassendi 1592-1655
(Born Pierre Gassend) French philosopher, astronomer, historian, and priest.
Pierre Gassendi's place in the history of science and philosophy is still being written and revised. Gassendi was well known to his contemporaries in his native France and in England as a formidable scholar, the foremost proponent of the Epicurean revival, and an estimable astronomer. However, Gassendi's dense Latin prose, his wearisome prolixity, and his apparent (and perhaps temporary) loss to René Descartes of one of the great battles of Western philosophy condemned him to obscurity from the eighteenth century to the late twentieth century. As the importance of atomism and neo-Epicureanism to the development of modern science becomes clearer, however, Gassendi's stature amongst such notable seventeenth-century thinkers as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton, and even his adversary Descartes, has risen. A leading exponent of French empiricism, Gassendi advocated a skepticism which held that knowledge could be received only through the senses; experiment and observation, rather than pure ratiocination, were the requirements of his natural philosophy. Gassendi's materialism and connection to Epicurus opened him to groundless charges of libertinism and atheism; ironically, the focus of the French priest's life's work was to reconcile Epicureanism with Christianity.
Pierre Gassend was born January 22, 1592, in the small village of Champtercier, in the Provencal region of France. (Gassendi is the Italianized version, the final “i” a mark of honor added due to his scholarly reputation.) His schooling began under his uncle Thomas Fabry, until at the age of seven he was sent to the larger town of Digne to study Latin and arithmetic. At 14 he returned to Champtercier for two years before going to the University of Aix, where he studied philosophy and theology. In 1614 he received his doctorate in theology from the University of Avignon, and in 1616 he celebrated his first Catholic Mass as an ordained priest. It was also in 1616 that Gassendi met his great mentor, Nicolas-Claude Fabri de Peiresc, with whom he maintained a close friendship and extensive correspondence until Peiresc's death in 1637. In 1617 Gassendi took the Chair of Philosophy at the University of Aix. During his six years teaching philosophy (primarily Aristotelian), Gassendi also taught his students his own arguments contrary to the Aristotelian doctrines that dominated early seventeenth-century thought. When, in 1622, Jesuits took over the University and Gassendi was compelled to leave teaching, friends encouraged him to make public his lectures, which constitute his first work, Book I of Exercitationes Paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos, published in 1624 (planned later books were not completed).
Gassendi traveled to Paris in 1625, beginning a friendship with Père Marin Mersenne, who would later be instrumental in the great debates between Gassendi and Descartes. During this year, Gassendi also made connections with Elie Diodati and Galileo as he pursued his interest in observational astronomy, an interest that helped provide the foundation for his philosophical skepticism, which held that knowledge apprehended through the senses was uncertain at best. Meanwhile, his attacks on Aristotle finding only a mixed reception, Gassendi turned his attention to Epicurus, beginning an explication of his philosophy and a short Life of Epicurus for its preface. He proceeded slowly with this work, continuing to maintain his interest in astronomy as well. Interrupted by serious illness and the death of his mentor, Peiresc, Gassendi abandoned the work in 1637 for four years. Instead, he wrote his Life of Peiresc (1641) and, at the request of Mersenne, reviewed Descartes' Meditations, preparing a set of Objections (1641). Descartes' Responses were contemptuous, and Gassendi replied with Instantiae (first circulated in Paris in 1642), creating a public battle between the two philosophers. Gassendi also maintained at this time a heated debate with the astrologer Jean-Baptiste Morin, whose insistence that the earth was the center of the universe spurred Gassendi to develop further the views of Copernicus and Galileo.
In 1645 Gassendi returned to teaching as the Chair of Astronomy at the College Royal de France in Paris, during which time he published his coursework as Institutio astronomica (1647). He was compelled to leave due to failing health, returning to Provence in 1648, a year after his De vita et moribus Epicuri libri octo (Life of Epicurus) finally appeared. Gassendi had not approved of this publication, which barely scratched the surface of what Gassendi had hoped to achieve in reviving Epicurus. Encouraged by friends, Gassendi released much of his later work on Epicurus attached as an appendix to his translation of the Tenth Book of Diogenes Laertius' De Clarorum Philosophorum Vitis.In 1649 his massive Animadversiones in Decimum Librum Diogenes Laertii was published, but despite its positive reception, Gassendi was again displeased with its over-hasty release. The Animadversiones is the only work not reproduced in its original form in Gassendi's Opera omnia.
In 1653 Gassendi returned to Paris, telling a friend in a letter that in leaving Provence he had been delivered “from the jaws of Hell,” so ill had he been feeling. While in Paris Gassendi busied himself with a new edition of his Animadversiones, which would be published posthumously as his Syntagma philosophicum. He also wrote biographies of several astronomers, including Copernicus and Tycho Brahe, and published works on coinage, music, and the history of the diocese of Digne. Beginning in August 1654, however, Gassendi suffered from more severe and more frequent bouts of illness; he was not able to fulfill his plans for his Syntagma philosophicum, which his editors completed in 1658. He died in Paris on October 24, 1655. Prior to his death, Gassendi had selected those texts he wanted included in his complete works and arranged for their publication in Lyon; they were published as his Opera omnia in 1658.
Gassendi's chief importance in the history of science and philosophy has been in his conflict with Descartes and, especially, in his revival of Epicurean philosophy. His first work, Exercitationes Paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos, demonstrates the frustration with the state of seventeenth-century philosophy that would characterize much of his work. To many of his contemporaries, his attack on Aristotelian philosophy was tantamount to an attack on the seventeenth-century worldview, but he was not yet prepared to offer an alternative, as he eventually would in his exposition of Epicurus. Gassendi did, however, promote a positive skepticism that offers intellectual freedom and advocates experimental knowledge, while denying the possibility of complete and certain knowledge. That possibility was a major part of Gassendi's debate with Descartes, who held in his Meditations that things could be known purely via the mind, while Gassendi maintained that knowledge could be obtained only through the senses and was thus necessarily incomplete and uncertain. Throughout Gassendi's Objections, Descartes' Replies, and Gassendi's lengthy Instantiae, the two refer to each other as “Mind” and “Flesh” as an indication of their contempt for the other's position, and as a reflection of the core difference in their epistemology. Yet although Gassendi was best known through the twentieth century for his skirmish with the man who became one of the most important philosophers in the history of Western thought, during his lifetime battling with Descartes was not one of his major concerns.
Throughout the later part of his career especially, vindicating and “Christianizing” Epicureanism as a viable philosophy was the most prominent theme in his work. In particular, Gassendi needed to counter the popular belief that Epicureanism could be equated with libertinism and atheism in order to achieve his goal, and this was part of the work of his De Vita et Moribus Epicuri. Begun in 1626 as an extension of his attack on the Aristotelians, Gassendi revised it significantly to make it an account of Epicurean philosophy and a careful defense of Epicurus from the misrepresentations of the Stoics, early Christian writers, and others who accused him of sensualism or impiety. Gassendi initially intended for De Vita et Moribus to precede a more thorough exposition of Epicurean philosophy, but his original plans were never realized. He published much of his subsequent work on Epicurus with Animadversiones in Decimum Librum Diogenis Laertii, in an appendix titled Philosophiae Epicuri Syntagma, but with his last major work, Syntagma Philosophicum, Gassendi shifted his focus from explicating the doctrines of Epicurus to expounding his own philosophy. Divided into three sections—Logic, Physics, and Ethics—and preceded by a short book on the nature of philosophy, the Syntagma promotes the atomism, skepticism, and materialism Gassendi found in Epicurus and develops it in a seventeenth-century context. The Syntagma was published as the first two volumes of the massive six-volume Opera omnia in 1658, not fully completed by Gassendi, but still offering the most fully realized explication of his neo-Epicurean philosophy.
Even Descartes, who could not contain his frustration with what he considered Gassendi's inability to comprehend his Meditations, had great respect for Gassendi as a scholar. Gassendi's reputation in England was considerable; along with Descartes, he was considered a model for the New Science practiced by the Royal Society. The question of his influence on English thought has been complicated by the vexing practice held by early modern authors of not citing their sources; however, modern studies have convincingly demonstrated the indebtedness of Boyle, Newton, and Locke to Gassendi's work. Olivier Bloch and Richard Kroll, among other modern critics, have endeavored to promote Gassendi's importance to English neo-Epicureanism in both scientific and social circles. In particular, Locke's relationship to Gassendi has been the topic of long-standing critical debate. Kroll suggests that Gassendi was merely one influence among many, while Fred S. and Emily Michael argue that Gassendi's theory of ideas was clearly the foundation for Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Gassendi's alleged libertinism has also attracted the attention of scholars; Richard H. Popkin distinguishes Gassendi's skepticism from the charges of dissolution, while Lisa T. Sarasohn suggests that Gassendi's emphasis on pleasure was a part of the voluntarism that distinguished him from his fellow materialist Thomas Hobbes. The great battle between Cartesian certainty and Gassendist skepticism remains a major focus of the scholarship: Thomas M. Lennon, among others, suggests that Gassendi has long been judged unfairly as a result of Descartes' scorn.
Exercitationes Paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos (philosophy) 1624
Parhelia sive soles quator spurii, qui circa verum appaverunt Romae anno MDCXXIX, de XX (philosophy) 1630
Petri Gassendi Theologi Epistolica Exercitatio, in quo Principes Philosophiae Roberti Fluddi Medici relegantur et ad recentes illius libros adversus R.P.F. Marinum Mersennum, Ordenes Minimorum Sancti Francisci de Paula sareptos responditur (philosophy) 1630
De Mercurio in Sole viso et Venere invisa Parisiis anno (1631) (philosophy) 1632
Instructions de M. Gassend au R. P. Ephrem de Nevers Capucin et a Frere Alexandre d'Angoullesme pour les observations celestes (philosophy) 1636
De apparente magnitudine solis humilis et sublimis (philosophy) 1636; reprinted in Epistolae quatuor 1642
De Nicolai Claudii Fabrici de Peiresc, Senatoris Aquisextiensis, Vita [Life of Peiresc] (biography) 1641
Objectiones quintae Petri Gassendi diniensis ecclesiae praepositi et acutissimi philosophi [Objections] (philosophy) 1641
De Motu impresso a Motore translato (philosophy) 1642
De apparente magnitudine solis humilis et sublimis, Epistolae quatuor (philosophy) 1642
Novum stellae circa Jovem visa, et de eisdem P. Gassendi judicium...
(The entire section is 368 words.)
SOURCE: “To the ingenious and learned Gentleman, the worshipful John Evelyn Esquire,” in The Mirrour of True Nobility & Gentility: Being the Life of the Renowned Nicolaus Claudius Fabricius Lord of Peiresk, Senator of the Parliament at Aix, by Pierre Gassendi, translated by William Rand, J. Streater, 1657, n.p.
[Dr. William Rand translated Gassendi's early Life of Peiresc into English as The Mirrour of True Nobility and Gentility. In this excerpt from the work's dedicatory epistle addressed to the diarist John Evelyn, Rand reveals his admiration for Gassendi's original text and for Gassendi himself.]
To the ingenious and learned Gentleman, the worshipful John Evelyn Esquire.
Much about ten years are fled, since my learned friend Dr. Benjamin Worsley brought me first acquainted with the name and fame of Peireskius, and knowing that I delighted to busie my self in that kind, wished that I would render his history into English. And not long after, my good friend Squire Harlib seconded his Motion, and put the Latine Book into my hand, to take home with me and peruse and consider of. Which I did; but finding it so knottie a piece, both in respect of the matter, and the presse and elegantly concise style, of the learned and judicious Gassendus, I had not the courage to venture upon it; but...
(The entire section is 436 words.)
SOURCE: “Gassendi's Account of the Nature of Things,” in French Free-Thought from Gassendi to Voltaire, Athlone Press, 1960, pp. 85-102.
[In the excerpt below, Spink considers Gassendi's adaptations of Epicurus, comparing Gassendi's work with Lucretius' De Rerum Natura. The critic also examines Gassendi's Syntagma philosophicum, finding Gassendi singular among his French contemporaries as a proponent of atomism.]
It is difficult to determine which of several possible reasons attracted Gassendi to Epicurus in the first place in 1626. He had just given up, or was in process of giving up his plan for publishing a series of direct attacks on the old school in continuation of his Exercitationes paradoxicae. Doubtless it was prudence which caused him to do so; not that he felt menaced by the campaign of his friend Mersenne against the sceptics and deists; more probably he realized that attempts of the type of the Exercitationes paradoxicae were neither new nor effective. The old guard was strongly entrenched, especially in Paris, and was merely irritated without being shaken by such skirmishing. Was he attracted by the idea of rehabilitating Epicurus as a means of decrying Aristotle without openly flouting the authority of his elders? Very possibly. He at any rate intended his Epicurus to be a sequel to his Exercitationes paradoxicae,1 and such an...
(The entire section is 7942 words.)
SOURCE: “Gassendi and the Transition from the Middle Ages to the Classical Era,” in Yale French Studies, No. 49, 1973, pp. 43-55.
[In the following essay, Bloch discusses Gassendi as a transitional figure in the development of modern thought, focusing on his materialism and his epistemology. Bloch argues for the unrecognized importance of Gassendi both to British materialist thought, from John Locke to Immanuel Kant, and to political philosophy through modern times. This essay was translated by T. J. Reiss.]
“In the English materialists, nominalism is an all-important element and broadly speaking it constitutes the first expression of materialism.” The philosopher Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655) was the compatriot and contemporary of Descartes. Yet this remark of Marx in the Holy Family concerning the birth of modern materialism from the womb of medieval theology may equally well be applied to him.1 The very real role played by him in the history of ideas is due no doubt less to his work's immediate public than to the loud echo it provoked in the English scholars and philosophers of the second half of the seventeenth century. In a way they acted as the intermediaries who transmitted his message to the thought of the eighteenth century; such that I feel we may speak of a veritable fusion, beginning in the years 1660-70, of Gassendism with the British philosophical...
(The entire section is 4753 words.)
SOURCE: “The Libertines Érudits,” in The History of Scepticism from Erasmus to Spinoza,” University of California Press, 1979, pp. 87-109.
[In this excerpt, Popkin considers the work of Gassendi in the context of the so-called French libertines of the seventeenth century. The critic debunks the myth of the libertine philosopher as a dissolute atheist, finding instead that although Gassendi was a skeptic, his motives were of an anti-Aristotelian and not an anti-Christian bent.]
Gassendi (or perhaps Gassend)1 was one of the prodigies of the early seventeenth century. He was born in 1592 in Provence, went to college at Digne, and by the age of 16 was lecturing there. After studying theology at Aix-en-Provence, he taught theology at Digne in 1612. When he received his doctorate in theology, he became a lecturer in philosophy at Aix, and then canon of Grenoble. Quite early in life, Gassendi began his extensive scientific researches, assisted and encouraged by some of the leading intellectuals of Aix, like Peiresc. The philosophy course that he taught led Gassendi to compile his extended critique of Aristotelianism, the first part of which appeared as his earliest publication in 1624, the Exercitationes Paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos. This was followed by several scientific and philosophical works, which gained Gassendi the greatest renown in the intellectual world and brought him...
(The entire section is 5073 words.)
SOURCE: “Gassendi's Life of Peiresc: The Humanist's Unattainable Goal of Writing a Universal History,” in Gassendi the Atomist: Advocate of History in an Age of Science, Cambridge University Press, 1987, pp. 41-65.
[In this excerpt, Joy considers Gassendi as a historian, using an examination of his early Life of Peirescto demonstrate the development of his historiography. Finally, Joy proposes, Gassendi's recognition of the futility of Peiresc's “universal history” fueled his later development and expansion of Epicurean philosophy.]
Gassendi's residence in Paris and his Dutch travels in the late 1620s were significant not only because they resulted in his decision to expand the scope of the Epicurean project. They also constituted a key period in his development as a historian of philosophy. For just as his earlier encounters with Mersenne had forced him to rethink the consequences of his use of skepticism as a weapon against Aristotle, his new encounters with influential humanists forced him to recognize the importance of other aspects of humanism, especially those aspects involving the creation and use of scholarly libraries. In Paris Gassendi himself succumbed to the attraction of days of endless research in an impressive repository of books and documents, the library of the historian Jacques-Auguste de Thou, which was administered since De Thou's death in 1617 by Pierre and Jacques...
(The entire section is 13732 words.)
SOURCE: “Hellenistic Background for Gassendi's Theory of Ideas,” in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. XLIX, No. 3, July-Sept., 1988, pp. 405-24.
[In this essay, Glidden demonstrates how Gassendi's reading of Epicurus—transmitted via Thomas Stanley's translation of Philosophiae Epicuri Syntagma—influenced the development of Epicureanism in England. The critic also argues that Gassendi's interpretation of Epicurean philosophy is influenced by his reading of the Stoics.]
Renaissance humanism is characterized by a revival of interest in ancient Greek and Latin writings. At the same time, the uses to which these ancient texts were put were typically contemporary, as Renaissance authors borrowed eclectically from their favorite ancients to make their modern claims. Montaigne wrote this way, but so did many others, many of whom did not feel obliged to cite their sources. For one thing, the audience they were writing for did not need to be informed of these allusions. These who knew their Cicero or Sextus did not require the pedantry of citation or quotation. Those who were unread in the classics could follow the argument all the same. And so Descartes could begin the first of his Meditations with allusions to well known Pyrrhonist arguments, without mentioning them by name.
Unacknowledged borrowings extended to other materials as well. This is especially evident in...
(The entire section is 9166 words.)
SOURCE: “The Theory of Ideas in Gassendi and Locke,” in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. LI, No. 3, July-Sept., 1990, pp. 379-99.
[In this essay, the Michaels argue strongly for Gassendi's considerable influence on John Locke, discussing possible sources for Locke's knowledge of Gassendi and comparing passages from Gassendi's Syntagma Philosophicum and Exercitationes Paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos with Locke's Essays on the Law of Nature and Essay Concerning Human Understanding.]
There has recently been controversy over whether Gassendi should be considered the source of modern empiricism.1 Present day interest in Gassendi's influence on Locke perhaps dates from the observation of R. I. Aaron in his book on Locke, first published in 1937, that “The influence of Gassendi upon Locke, and indeed, upon English thought in general at this period has been strangely neglected.”2 David Fate Norton in his paper “The Myth of ‘British Empiricism’” goes substantially further than Aaron, asserting not only that Gassendi influenced Locke but that Gassendi, not Locke, is the founder of modern empiricism.3 Richard Kroll questions the grounds for Norton's claim but concludes that there is evidence supporting an influence of Gassendi upon Locke.4
While Locke did have contact with Gassendists in France, notably François...
(The entire section is 10328 words.)
SOURCE: “‘Living and Speaking Statues’: Domesticating Epicurus,” in The Material World: Literate Culture in the Restoration and Early Eighteenth Century, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991, pp. 140-79.
[In this excerpt from his study of literature and culture in Restoration England, Kroll argues for Gassendi's importance to the importation of Epicureanism into England. Emphasizing motifs of circulation, the critic demonstrates the influence of not only Gassendi's written works, but also the symbolic figure of Gassendi himself.]
If Galilaeus with his new found glass, Former Invention doth so far surpass, By bringing distant bodies to our sight, And make it judge their shape by neerer light, How much have you oblig'd us? In whose mind Y'have coucht that Cataract w(ch) made us blind, And given our soul and optick can descrie Not things alone, but where their causes lie? Lucretius Englished, Natures great Code And Digest too, where her deep Laws so show'd, That what we thought mysteriously perplext Translated thus, both Comment is and Text
Sir Richard Browne, “On My Son Evelyns Translation of the First Book of Lucretius” (1656)
Cartesius reckoned to see before he died the sentiments of all philosophers, like so many lesser stars in his romantic system, wrapped and drawn within his own vortex.
(The entire section is 17965 words.)
SOURCE: “Mind Versus Flesh,” in The Battle of the Gods and Giants: The Legacies of Descartes and Gassendi, 1655-1715, Princeton University Press, 1993, pp. 106-37.
[In this excerpt, Lennon considers in depth Gassendi's Objections to René Descartes' Meditations. Focusing on the problem of representation, Lennon defends Gassendi from the charge, put forth by both Descartes and later critics, that he simply did not understand the nature of Descartes' method. Nevertheless, as Lennon argues throughout his book, the materialism that provided the foundation for Gassendi's critiques eventually could not compete with the dominance of Cartesian philosophy.]
MIND VERSUS FLESH
Early on Descartes had taken Gassendi to be, if not an authority, then at least someone to be regarded seriously in optics, astronomy, and other matters.1 With Gassendi's Objections, however, Descartes's attitude changes dramatically. On June 23, 1641, he returned to Mersenne Gassendi's objections along with the advice to have them printed without showing them to Gassendi, who when he saw how bad his objections were would want them “suppressed.” Descartes meanwhile was loathe to see his time in replying wasted or the possibility realized that some would think that it was he who, unable to answer the objections, had them suppressed. He concludes the letter: “you will see that I...
(The entire section is 16417 words.)
SOURCE: “Providence and Human Freedom in Christian Epicureanism: Gassendi on Fortune, Fate, and Divination,” in Divine Will and the Mechanical Philosophy: Gassendi and Descartes on Contingency and Necessity in the Created World, Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 86-101.
[In the following excerpt, Osler explicates the voluntarism that permeates Gassendi's work, placing his development of a mechanical philosophy in the context of seventeenth-century theological controversies. The critic finds that Gassendi's insistence on human free will, in addition to divine free will, distinguishes him from other materialist thinkers, including Thomas Hobbes.]
Fate is the decree of the divine will, without which nothing at all is done, … [and] Fortune is the concourse of events that, although unforeseen by men, nevertheless were foreseen by God.
Pierre Gassendi, Syntagma philosophicum1
Having ensured that divine providence played a major role in his mechanical philosophy, Gassendi turned to the question of human freedom in Book III of the “Ethics,” the last part of the Syntagma philosophicum, entitled “On Liberty, Fortune, Fate, and Divination.”2 In this concluding section of his magnum opus, Gassendi cast his discussion in the form of a debate among the major classical philosophies, particularly...
(The entire section is 8739 words.)
SOURCE: “The Role of Freedom and Pleasure in the State and Society,” in Gassendi's Ethics: Freedom in a Mechanistic Universe, Cornell University Press, 1996, pp. 142-67.
[In this excerpt, Sarasohn discusses the progress from Gassendi's idea of natural man to his construction of the social contracts that buttress a system of government. Frequently contrasting Gassendi's “Ethics” with the political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, the critic emphasizes the importance to Gassendi of free will and the primary human drive for pleasure—tempered by prudence—in his notion of a just and moral society.]
GASSENDI'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY AND ITS CONTEXT
Human beings pursue what is pleasurable and conducive to life, and flee from what is painful and detrimental to life. Gassendi and Hobbes agreed on this fundamental human imperative—although Gassendi emphasized pleasure as the primary end, while Hobbes thought that the desire for self-preservation initiated human motion. Whatever the teleological substratum of choice and avoidance, Gassendi and Hobbes were in concord that the motivation for forming the state was a utilitarian calculation of the way life could best be lived.
For both, individual self-interest was the starting point for discussing not only how human beings act as individuals, but also how they act as members of society and the state. Both Gassendi and...
(The entire section is 11036 words.)
Brett, G. S. Gassendi. London: Macmillan and Co., 1908, 307 p.
Focuses mainly on Gassendi's Physics; discusses later views of Gassendi with an emphasis on Leibnitz.
Egan, Howard T. Gassendi's View of Knowledge: A Study of the Epistemological Basis of His Logic. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984, 179 p.
Examines both Gassendi's Syntagmaand his earlier works to develop an account of his logic based on provisional knowledge.
Hervey, Helen. “Hobbes and Descartes in the Light of Some Unpublished Letters of the Correspondence between Sir Charles Cavendish and Dr. John Pell.” Osiris 10 (1952): 67-90.
Demonstrates the importance of Gassendi in the transmission of Epicureanism to England; reveals the animosity between Hobbes and Gassendi, on one side, and Descartes.
Jones, Howard. Pierre Gassendi, An Intellectual Biography. Nieuwkoop: B. deGraaf, 1981, 320 p.
Offers an account of Gassendi's life and work; denies Gassendi any major importance in the history of philosophy.
Kargon, Robert Hugh. “Descartes, Gassend, and the Newcastle Circle.” In his Atomism in England from Hariot to Newton, pp. 63-76. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966.
Focuses on Gassendi's connection to the so-called Newcastle Circle, including...
(The entire section is 723 words.)