Simon Foucher

French philosopher (1644–1696)

Simon Foucher (born 1 March 1644, died 27 April 1696) was a rather inconveniently insightful French polemic philosopher of the latter half of the 17th century. He was not one to simply pick a side and stick to it, a trait that makes him both interesting and, frankly, exhausting to categorize. Foucher carved out a distinct philosophical niche, aligning himself with a nuanced form of Academic skepticism . This wasn’t the kind of all-encompassing, everything-is-uncertain nihilism of Pyrrhonism , which he found as unhelpful as outright dogmatism . Instead, Foucher occupied the uncomfortable middle ground, questioning the confident assertions of his contemporaries without falling into the abyss of absolute doubt. He understood that while the human mind craves certainty like a moth to a flame, clinging to unsubstantiated dogma is just as intellectually perilous as denying the possibility of any knowledge at all. His approach was more about the art of doubting, a precise intellectual tool for dissecting claims rather than a blanket rejection of reality.

Life

Born in the bustling city of Dijon on the first day of March in 1644, Foucher entered the world as the son of a merchant . One might imagine a childhood steeped in practicalities, but Foucher’s path quickly veered toward the ecclesiastical. He appears to have embraced holy orders at a remarkably early age, a common trajectory for bright minds seeking advancement and intellectual engagement in that era. For a period, he held the rather comfortable, if somewhat ceremonial, position of honorary canon in his hometown of Dijon. One can almost picture him, in the quiet cloisters, contemplating the deeper questions of existence between liturgical duties.

However, the allure of provincial life, even with its ecclesiastical comforts, proved insufficient for a mind as restless and critical as Foucher’s. He eventually resigned his canonry, a move that speaks volumes about his intellectual priorities, to relocate to the vibrant, intellectually charged atmosphere of Paris . The capital, even then, was a crucible of ideas, a place where philosophical battles were waged with the intensity of military campaigns. It was in Paris that he pursued higher education, graduating from the esteemed Sorbonne after a rigorous course of study in theology . This theological grounding would prove crucial, as it informed his later attempts to reconcile his skeptical philosophical stance with the tenets of orthodox belief. He spent the remainder of his life immersed in literary and philosophical work within the Parisian intellectual milieu, a fitting environment for a man who made doubting an art form, until his death in the city in 1696.

Works

Foucher, during his active years, managed to cultivate a significant, if often contentious, reputation as a sharp-witted opponent of some of the most prominent philosophical figures of his time. He was particularly known for his intellectual sparring with Nicolas Malebranche , whose occasionalism and theory of “seeing all things in God” seemed to invite Foucher’s meticulous deconstruction. He also engaged with the formidable intellect of Gottfried Leibniz , challenging the very foundations of their ambitious, comprehensive philosophical systems. Foucher was not content to merely nitpick; he resurrected and re-articulated the ancient arguments of the Academy – specifically, the nuanced skepticism of its Middle and New periods – and deployed them with considerable ingenuity against the more dogmatic assertions of his contemporaries. He essentially reminded everyone that the pursuit of absolute certainty often leads to intellectual overreach.

His brand of skepticism , however, was always carefully calibrated. It remained, somewhat surprisingly to some, subordinate to his orthodox religious convictions. For Foucher, the fundamental dogmas of the church were not subjects for philosophical doubt; they seemed to him “intuitively evident.” This wasn’t a contradiction, at least not in his own mind, but rather a strategic intellectual maneuver. His overarching objective was to forge a reconciliation between his philosophical creed and his religious beliefs, allowing him to remain a devout Christian without abandoning his identity as an academician – a true practitioner of doubt. It’s a testament to the complex intellectual landscape of the 17th century that such a position was not only tenable but actively pursued. One might even call it pragmatic, or perhaps, a demonstration of the human capacity to compartmentalize inconvenient truths.

One of Foucher’s most telling insights came to light in his 1673 publication, Dissertation on the Search for Truth. In this work, he astutely brought to the fore humanity’s deep-seated, often unconscious, “psychological predilection for certainties.” It’s a rather inconvenient truth, isn’t it? People, it seems, would rather cling to a comfortable falsehood than face the unsettling expanse of the unknown. Foucher eloquently articulated “the art of doubting,” a crucial intellectual discipline that involves positioning oneself deliberately and thoughtfully “between doubting and believing.” He penned observations that, frankly, still resonate with cosmic weariness today: “One needs to exit doubt in order to produce science—but few people heed the importance of not exiting from it prematurely….It is a fact that one usually exits doubt without realizing it.” He further, and perhaps more cuttingly, asserted, “We are dogma-prone from our mother’s wombs.” This isn’t just a philosophical observation; it’s a profound, almost cynical, commentary on the human condition, suggesting that our inherent biases lead us to embrace fixed beliefs long before we’ve had a chance to critically examine them. A rather inconvenient truth to consider, wouldn’t you say?

Principal works

Foucher, with a peculiar habit that has undoubtedly vexed many a scholar, frequently re-used the same titles for several of his works. This makes it rather tedious, but absolutely necessary, to cite the complete subtitle in order to precisely identify which specific work one is referring to. It’s almost as if he enjoyed the intellectual challenge of disambiguation, or perhaps, just didn’t care for novel nomenclature.

• 1673: Dissertations sur la recherche de la vérité, ou sur la logique des academiciens ( Dissertations on the search for truth, or on the logic of the Academics ) This foundational work, which laid out many of Foucher’s initial skeptical arguments, was never formally published in the conventional sense. Instead, Foucher chose to distribute it privately amongst his intellectual circle. Regrettably, this original text is now lost to history, known to us exclusively through Foucher’s own subsequent references to it in his later, more widely circulated writings. One might ponder if some ideas are simply too potent, or too inconvenient, to survive the relentless march of time.
• 1675: Critique de la Recherche de la vérité, où l’on examine en méme temps une partie des principes de Mr Descartes ( Critique of the “Search for truth”, in which some of the principles of Mr Descartes are examined at the same time ) This publication served as a direct and pointed critique of Malebranche’s work bearing a similar title. Foucher, with a certainty that might seem ironic given his philosophical stance, firmly believed that Malebranche’s choice of title was a deliberate, albeit indirect, rejoinder to Foucher’s own earlier, privately circulated work. It speaks to the intense rivalries and intellectual pride prevalent in the Parisian philosophical scene. It’s worth noting that at this stage, only the first volume of Malebranche’s extensive book had been released, which Foucher, perhaps somewhat prematurely, took to be the complete work. A common pitfall when engaging in intellectual combat.
• 1679: Nouvelle dissertation sur la recherche de la vérité, contenant la réponse à la Critique de la Critique de la Recherche de la Verité ( New dissertation on the search for the truth, containing the response to the Critique of the Critique of the Search for truth ) This intricate title reveals the layered nature of 17th-century philosophical debate. Following Foucher’s initial critique of Malebranche, Robert Desgabets stepped into the fray, offering a counter-critique defending Malebranche’s position. This work, though penned in 1676, was Foucher’s meticulously crafted reply to Desgabets. Its publication was delayed until 1679, reportedly due to the reluctance of publishers to take on such a combative and potentially controversial text. Apparently, even then, publishers preferred comfort over challenging intellectual discourse.
• 1687: Dissertation sur la recherche de la vérité, contenant l’apologie des academiciens, où l’on fait voir que leur maniere de philosopher est la plus utile pour la religion, et la plus conforme au bon sense, pour servir de réponse à la Critique de la Critique, etc.; avec plusiers remarques sur les erreurs des sens et sur l’origine de la philosophie de Monsieur Descartes ( Dissertation on the search for truth, containing the defence of the Academics, in which is shown that their manner of philosophising is the most useful for religion and the closest to good sense, to serve as a response to the Critique of the Critique, etc.; with several remarks on the errors of the senses and on the origins of Mr Descartes’ philosophy ) A rather verbose title, but one that succinctly encapsulates Foucher’s intricate project. Here, he presented a comprehensive “defence of the Academics ,” arguing that their method of philosophizing—which embraced a measured skepticism—was not only “the most useful for religion” but also “the closest to good sense.” It was a strategic argument, designed to demonstrate that intellectual caution and spiritual devotion could coexist, perhaps even strengthen one another. This work further elaborated on his ongoing responses to the various “Critiques of the Critique” and included significant discussions on the inherent “errors of the senses” and a critical examination of the “origins of Mr Descartes’ philosophy,” suggesting a deep engagement with the epistemological challenges of his era.
• 1688: Lettre sur la morale de Confucius, philosophe de la Chine ( Letter on the morals of Confucius, Chinese philosopher ) In a surprising turn, Foucher authored this letter exploring the ethical teachings of Confucius , the renowned Chinese philosopher . This work is noteworthy because Foucher, despite his own Christian orthodoxy, argued that Chinese morality, as exemplified by Confucius, was profoundly “admirable,” even without being rooted in Christian doctrine. It’s a rare moment of cross-cultural appreciation from a 17th-century European philosopher, demonstrating an intellectual breadth that transcended the often-parochial views of his time. A brief glimpse into a world beyond one’s own dogmas, even if it was just a fleeting thought.
• 1693: Dissertations sur la recherche de la vérité, contenant l’histoire et les principes de la philosophie des académiciens. Avec plusieurs réflexions sur les sentimens de M. Descartes ( Dissertations on the search for truth, containing the history and principles of the philosophy of the Academics; with several reflections on the views of Mr Descartes ) This later work was intended to serve as a comprehensive summary and consolidation of Foucher’s philosophical views as articulated in his preceding writings. It provided a historical overview and detailed the core principles of the Academic philosophical tradition, offering clarity and coherence to his arguments. Additionally, it included “several reflections on the views of Mr Descartes,” indicating his continued engagement with, and critical assessment of, Cartesian philosophy. It’s the kind of work one produces when they realize their legacy is taking shape, a final attempt to distill a lifetime of intellectual struggle into something coherent.
• 1686: Traité des hygrometres ou machines pour mesurer la secheresse et l’humidité de l’air. Par m. Foucher chanoine de Dijon. A Paris: chez Estienne Michallet, ruà« saint Jacques à l’image saint Paul prés la fontaine saint Severin. Amidst his weighty philosophical treatises, Foucher also found time for more practical, scientific pursuits. This work, a “Treatise on hygrometers or machines for measuring the dryness and humidity of the air,” showcases a different facet of his intellect. It’s a technical manual, complete with detailed descriptions, published in Paris by Estienne Michallet. It’s almost amusing to consider a philosopher so deeply entrenched in abstract doubt also meticulously describing the mechanics of air moisture measurement. Perhaps a brief respite from the existential void.

Beyond these more substantial works, Foucher also indulged in literary endeavors, publishing two lengthy poems and a scattering of shorter philosophical essays. He maintained an extensive and intellectually significant correspondence with Leibniz , which provided a valuable platform for the exchange and refinement of complex ideas. Furthermore, he even penned a play, though this dramatic work ultimately remained unpublished. It suggests a mind that, despite its rigorous skepticism, found diverse outlets for expression and engagement with the world.

Notes

1. ^ Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2007). “The Ludic Fallacy, or The Uncertainty of the Nerd”. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable . Random House . p. 129. ISBN   978-1-4000-6351-2.
2. ^ Chisholm 1911, p. 736.
3. ^ Chisholm 1911, pp. 736–737.