[Abstracts] Conference at Nantes, France, January 20-21, 2016 - Marta García-Alonso

Marta García-Alonso

 

“Pierre Bayle : la souveraineté, condition de la tolérance”

 

More than a few of Bayle’s interpreters point out the contradiction between the Rotterdam philosopher’s doctrine of tolerance and his political philosophy. For many, his vindication of sovereign power — which some describe as absolute — is paradoxical when combined with his defense of universal tolerance and of freedom of conscience. This is so much the case that some — one of whom is the editor of the selection of Bayle’s political texts in English, Sally Jenkinson* — modulate this “conservative” side of the author by looking among Bayle’s texts for those that are more in favor of democracy and the merits of popular politics.

The hypothesis that I will present in this talk is the following: Bayle’s criticism of the pactist theory in fashion during his time and his proposal of indivisible sovereignty are not just provisional proposals related to the moment, arising from the criticism of his Protestant co-religionists in the Refuge — mainly, Pierre Jurieu. On the contrary, I believe that his concept of political power constitutes an essential element for the effective implementation of his doctrine of tolerance. In effect, if the vindication of freedom of conscience that he advocates in his Commentaire Philosophique is to have any real meaning, it can only be through its implementation by the pertinent political authorities. But for this implementation to be effective, these authorities cannot have their power disputed, there must be no cracks through which the sedition systematically promoted by clergymen, theologians, and members of religious orders can slip. Only an indivisible sovereignty, a strong power, independently of the kind of government that is finally established, is capable of defending Bayle’s most prized freedom: freedom of conscience. Only an ahistorical reading allows us to think that this proposal is paradoxical or contradictory within the thinking of the philosopher from Rotterdam. 

*       Cf. S. Jenkinson, Pierre Bayle, Political Writings, Cambridge University Press, 2000, “Introduction,” pp.18-41. Similarly, “Two Concepts of Tolerance: Or Why Bayle Is Not Locke,” Journal of Political Philosophy, 4 (1996), pp.302-321.