Skip to content
Book

Causal Shakespeare

Jul 2026 · 0 citations

Abstract

To ask, with Hamlet, the deceptively simple question ‘what is the cause?’, is, as this study demonstrates, to get to the root of some of the early-modern period’s most resonant, far-reaching, and contested topics. It is a question that informs everything from the largest metaphysical enquiries to the tiniest instances of particulate physics, asking what this study shows to be the most pertinent question of a philosophically ambitious, intellectually aspirational, theologically destabilized age. Taking King Lear as its focus, this book situates Shakespeare and his world-weary tragedy at the intersection of major epistemic trajectories in philosophical, religious, and scientific thought. Shakespeare’s play, it argues, is produced at a crisis-point, a crux at which confidence in an older metaphysical order was being incrementally eroded, and yet was still to be recuperated by the ‘new’ physics and natural-scientific philosophies to come. Shakespeare writes, in short, at a moment of profound causal uncertainty, conscious of cultural change, and yet not confident of the wisdom of his age’s purported progress. Consequently, Lear is shown to be a play riven by causal scepticism and deep-seated intellectual doubt, in which Shakespeare cycles through a rich array of classical analogues, philosophical influences, biblical sources, and literary intertexts, finding each unfit for the Machiavellian machinations and politic purposes of an incipient modern age. This ambitious and far-reaching study offers a new understanding of Shakespeare’s philosophical underpinnings, illuminating his active, informed participation in an aetiological debate that should be understood as the key epistemological enquiry of his time.

View source

Similar papers

Book 2015

Santayana the Philosopher

Regarding Santayana it has been claimed that he lacks a system while contradicting himself in outrageous ways. An attentive analysis of his complete œuvre, however, reveals something else entirely. It is not easy to classify a thinker as a Platonic materialist, an ironic nihilist, a spiritual atheist, and a conservativ...

D. Moreno · 1 citation
Open access Sep 2026

J. N. Findlay’s Rational Mysticism

The philosopher John Niemeyer Findlay (1903–1987) held that the insights of mystical experience can be philosophically analyzed and articulated in rational form. Findlay provided two routes to the “mystical pole of the cosmos.” In the first, he appealed to the related notions of impersonality and impartiality to transc...

S. Drob · 0 citations
Mar 2026

The Structure of Scientific Recantations: Cormac McCarthy and the Literary Tradition of Scientific Regret

Abstract:This essay situates Cormac McCarthy’s twinned last novels, The Passenger and Stella Maris, alongside a literary tradition that treats the subject of scientific regret after 1945. At turns suspicious and sympathetic, this tradition weighs “pure science” in a moral calculus, often with didactic ends. The histori...

Rick de Villiers · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Russellian monism and neutral monism: scrutinizing inscrutables

This paper critically examines Haoying Liu’s recent challenge to Russellian monism (RM), often understood as the view that (1) physics describes natural phenomena entirely in structural terms; (2) such phenomena possess intrinsic characters, or quiddities, that constitute or ground what physics describes structurally;...

Donovan Wishon · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

On Theology and the “Overcoming” of Metaphysics: Falque, Betz, Heidegger, and Marion

John Betz and Emmanuel Falque have recently defined “metaphysics” as something intrinsic to the Christian faith. This faith, they claim, has always spoken metaphysically, until lately challenged by the likes of Heidegger and Marion. However, when we consider Heidegger and Marion's account, we find a completely differ...

Matthew C. Kruger · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Competition, Causation, and Monism in Spinoza

How are we to think of causality in a monistic world? In particular, how do we apportion causal power between the many things existing in the world and the One thing of which the world fundamentally consists, or as Spinoza would put it, between modes and the one substance of which all of us are modes, namely God or Nat...

Josefine Klingspor · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.