Grounds of Natural Philosophy

by Margaret Cavendish, Colette Verger Michael (Introduction)

A 5.25x7.25" reprint of a work by a 17th century scientist, poet, and philosopher, originally published in 1668 by A. Maxwell. She relates her original theories on the relationship of men to animals, the nature of different types of diseases, and the difference between God and Nature. Includes an introductory biography. No index. For students in the history of science. Annotation c. by Book News, Inc., Portland, Or.

Genres: Philosophy

311 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1996

About the author

Margaret Lucas Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle, was the youngest child of a wealthy Essex family. At the age of 20 she became Maid of Honour to Queen Henrietta Maria and traveled with her into Persian exile in 1644. There she married William Cavendish, Marquis (later Duke) of Newcastle.

Between 1653 and 1668 she published many books on a wide variety of subjects, including many stories that are now regarded as some of the earliest examples of science fiction.

Reviews

[E. · Rating 3 out of 5]

I first read this book almost twenty years ago when I was teaching at course at the University of Oklahoma An Exploration of the History of Women in Philosophy. Each year senior grad students could apply to teach a course of their own design, and my final year of grad teaching I was accepted to teach this course I created. One of my goals in teaching such a course was compelling my own research into female philosophers so that I might enrich my own understanding in order to develop better courses for the future that would include the voices of women, something I believe I've been better about in my subsequent teaching.

I encountered Margaret Cavendish first in an excerpt in Margaret Atherton's Women in Early Modern Philosophy (a textbook for my course) and was able to discover that this major work of hers had been republished. I read it at the time with much interest, in particular noting the ways that her materialism anticipated the physicalisms I was drawn to, as it was reductive. I felt she had some affinities with process thought.

In re-reading this time around, I didn't encounter anything really new that jumped out to me, but it was good to refresh my acquaintance with this work, as Cavendish is someone I reference in my intro course.