In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

346 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 33:~ APRIL 1995 with developing a theory which gave the green light to massive dispossession in the Americas. Since this is the chapter that goes most clearly beyond Locke's explicitly intended meaning, he may be less forgiving than is necessary. His argument is that Locke did not consider the Amerindian relationship with the land as industrious, making the land they lived on in effect "waste" which could therefore be rightfully taken over by industrious European agriculturalists. Tully quotes defenders of European setders who used Locke injust this way, so the issue is not whether the interpretation is anachronistic , but whether Locke meant his text to be used this way. It seems to me that in the Two Treatises Locke had no intention of pinning down an answer to the question of whether or not the Amerindians could be dispossessed, and that in II, sects. 107-108, he in fact demonstrates, contrary to Tully's reading on pp. 151-5 ~, that the Indian nations had governments just like the primitive monarchies that were Filmer's paradigms--and therefore could not rightfully be conquered. Still, it is clear that Locke thought America had waste land just as he and the Levellers thought England did, and it is possible that his text sent messages that he did not explicitly manipulate but that he in some way did in fact intend. It seems more plausible, however, to argue that Locke thought America had room enough for settlers and Indians, just as the Diggers thought England had room enough for themselves, lndeed, it seems to me that the attempt to put Locke on the politically incorrect side of this issue blinds Tully to the positive role Amerindians played in the construction of Locke's global anthropology--a scheme that was by no means uniformly enthusiastic about the advances of civilization. Complaints about particular readings aside (and a large number of typographical errors), this is a learned and subtle contribution to Locke studies, which will expand the horizons of both historians and political philosophers. WILLIAM KLEIN Madison, Wisconsin David Fate Norton, editor. The CambridgeCompanion to Hume. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Pp. xiii + 4oo. Cloth, $59.95- Paper, $x7.95. The CambridgeCompanion to Hume, edited by David Fate Norton, presents a comprehensive guide to Hume's diverse work, one that reflects many of the strengths of current Hume scholarship. All the essays were specially commissioned for this book. Although individual articles cover the well-known topics from Book One of the Treatise that have always been of interest to analytic philosophers--induction, personal identity, scepticism--the anthology places these discussions in the context of the full range of Hume's work. Many contributions illustrate the importance of reading the Treatise as a whole (including the often-neglected Book Two) and of taking the entire body of Hume's work (including the Essaysand the History of England) into account in examining even the more familiar aspects of Hume's philosophy. The attention paid in many articles to the explanation of the historical context of Hume's thought will also be illuminating to many readers. Norton's introduction provides an overview of Hume's life and works. Norton Boog RZVIEWS 347 himself takes Hume to be a "post-sceptical" philosopher, that is, one whose constructive program, the articulation of a science of human nature, starts from the sceptical results of his predecessors. Norton argues that the commitment to the experimental method, and to grounding "moral subjects" in the study of human nature, is manifest in all of Hume's work, the Essays and the History as well as the Treatise and the Enquiries. This view of the continuity of Hume's work is developed in many of the individual contributions as well. David Wootton's fascinating "David Hume, 'the historian' " argues that Hume contributed to the creation of a new kind of history--one that sees events from the point of view of the spectator, not the participant--for a new audience . In this new type of historical narrative Hume explored the "philosophical, political , and moral questions that lay at the heart of his previous enquiries" (285). Knud Haakonssen...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 346-348
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.