Racionalismo, ceticismo e a coerência do Commentaire Philosophique de Bayle

Abstract

Pierre Bayle’s 1686-88 Commentaire philosophique (CP) is widely recognized as one of the first and most radical pleas for universal religious toleration in the West (Zagorin 2003, 240-88). It also has a reputation for being a notoriously difficult text to interpret. The main interpretive issue with the CP is that the second part (CP II) seems to undermine the first part (CP I) entirely: what begins as the work of a Rationalist seems to end as the work of a Skeptic. After demonstrating the immorality of persecution, the work goes on to demonstrate that any person who is sincerely convinced they must persecute indeed has the moral obligation to persecute. The article explores two approaches that aim to address the interpretative paradoxes present in this text by Bayle, advocating for an intermediate position between the Paradoxical and Coherent readings.