“Israel, Forst, and the Patriarch: On Tolerance, Deism, and Radicalism.”

Matthew Sharpe (Deakin University )

Abstract

One interesting feature of returning scholarly interest in the enlightenment in the last generation is that, in several leading accounts, the work of Voltaire--usually considered absolutely central to the French and European movement--holds a decidedly ambivalent place.  For Jonathan Israel, Voltaire would lead a "moderate" enlightenment, deistic (not atheistic), liberal and monarchical (not democratic), sceptical and empirical (not rationalist and monistic) that had become institutionally accepted by the 1740s.  For Rainer Forst, Voltaire' famous advocacy of tolerance, including his most radical, influential works of the 1760s and 1770s do not introduce new arguments for toleration; and worse than this, the author's commitment to a post-Newtonian deism would supposedly prevent him from extending tolerance to atheists, and so regrounding metaphysics in "la morale", as Voltaire would sometimes advertise.  This paper will critically consider Israel and Forst's presentations of "the patriarch", suggesting that Voltaire was far more radical than Israel (and following him, Blum) contend, and that his own deism did not limit, but ground, Voltaire's radical defence of tolerance, especially after the Calas affair.