Essay Review: Henry More and Newton's Gravity,Henry More: Magic,Religion and Experiment

Henry More to Dr John Sharp, 16 August 1680, Sloane MSS 4276, f. 41. I have quoted this from the excellent new edition of Marjorie Hope Nicolson, The Conway letters: The correspondence of Anne, Viscountess Conway, Henry More, and their friends, 1642–1684, rev. ed. by Hutton Sarah (Oxford, 1992), 478–9. Sharp was a former student of More's who was subsequently to rise to the Archbishopric of York. At this time he was rector of St Giles's-in-the-Fields.

Stukeley William , Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton's life (London, 1936), 57. See also Gjertsen Derek , The Newton handbook (London, 1986), 263–4.

Selby De du Garbandier are , I should point out, the fictional creations of Myles na Gopaleen. See O'Brien Flann , The third policeman (London, 1988), 95.

More to Dr John Sharp, in Nicolson, The Conway letters (ref. 1), 479.

More gives a succinct account of the major differences between them in his letter to Sharp. For More's views on the Apocalypse see his Apocalypsis Apocalypseos; or, the Revelation of St. John the Divine unveiled (London, 1680); Plain and continued exposition of the several prophecies or divine visions of the prophet Daniel (London, 1681); and An illustration of those two abstruse books in Holy Scripture, the Book of Daniel and the Revelation of S. John (London, 1685). On Newton's views see his Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St John (London, 1733); as well as Manuel Frank E. , Isaac Newton, historian (Cambridge, Mass., 1963); Westfall R. S. , Never at rest: A biography of Isaac Newton (Cambridge, 1980); Castillejo David , The expanding force in Newton's cosmos (Madrid, 1981); Gjertsen , Newton handbook (ref. 2), 273–5, 396–9; and Force J. E. Popkin R. H. , Essays on the context, nature, and influence of Isaac Newton's theology (Dordrecht, 1990), 103–18.

Newton Isaac , Mathematical principles of natural philosophy, translated by Andrew Motte in 1729, revised by Cajori Florian (Berkeley, 1934), 546.

Consider, for example, Burtt E. A. , The metaphysical foundations of modern physical science (London, 1932), 280–99; Koyré Alexandre , From the closed world to the infinite universe (Baltimore, 1957), 206–20; McGuire J. E. , “Force, active principles and Newton's invisible realm”, Ambix, xv (1968), 154–208; idem, “Existence, actuality and necessity: Newton on space and time”, Annals of science, xxxv (1978), 463–508; and McMullin Ernan , Newton on matter and activity (Notre Dame and London, 1978).

The book could be said to be partial in two senses. As Professor Hall himself says in his Preface, it “is concerned only with the scientific aspects of More's thought, and his relationship to Newton in particular” (p. xi). What we have, therefore, is an intellectual biography concerned with only part of More's life's work, and a book on More written by a scholar who is more partial to technical history of science and to Newton than to the history of theological thought and to More.

More Henry , Antidote against atheism, 164 in his Collection of several philosophical writings (London, 1662).

More Henry , Enchiridion melaphysicum: She de rebus incorporels succincta et luculenta dissertatio … (London, 1671), 68.

Hall A. R. Hall M. B. , (eds), Unpublished scientific papers of Isaac Newton (Cambridge, 1962), 132.

See Henry J. , “Francesco Patrizi da Cherso's concept of space and its later influence”, Annals of science, xxxvi (1979), 549–73; Grant Edward , Much ado about nothing: Theories of space and vacuum from the Middle Ages to the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, 1981), 199–221.

Hall A. Rupert , Henry More , 216, quoting from the General Scholium to the Principia, p. 545 in Cajori's edition (ref. 6), but using his own translation.

For a full discussion of the populist background to More's condemnation of “nullibism” see Henry J. , “A Cambridge Platonist's materialism: Henry More and the concept of soul”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, xlix (1986), 172–95, esp. pp. 189–95. On Patrizi, Gassendi and Charleton see citations in ref. 12.

On the influence of Jewish ideas see Copenhaver Brian P. , “Jewish theologies of space in the Scientific Revolution: Henry More, Joseph Raphson, Isaac Newton and their predecessors”, Annals of science, xxxvii (1980), 489–548. For a full survey of theories of space, including detailed accounts of More's and Newton's ideas see Grant , Much ado (ref. 12).

In fact More's views were misunderstood by all but his closest followers. For most of More's contemporaries, his insistence on the three-dimensionality of space, spirit, and God smacked of materialism or something very close to it. It seemed so close to materialism that Thomas Hobbes, for example, is reputed to have said that “if his own Philosophy was not True, he knew of none that he should sooner like than More's of Cambridge”. See Ward Richard , The life of the learned and pious Dr. Henry More, late Fellow of Christ's College in Cambridge (London, 1710), 80. For a full discussion and tentative explanation of contemporary views of More's philosophy see Henry , “A Cambridge Platonist's materialism” (ref. 14).

I have given fuller accounts of More's intellectualist theology and its implications for his philosophy in a series of articles. See, for example, “A Cambridge Platonist's materialism” (ref. 14); “The matter of souls: Medical theory and theology in seventeenth-century England”, in French R. K. Wear A. (eds), The medical revolution in the seventeenth century (Cambridge, 1989), 87–113; and “Henry More versus Robert Boyle: The Spirit of Nature and the nature of Providence”, in Hutton Sarah (ed.), Henry More (1614–1687): Tercentenary studies (Dordrecht, 1990), 55–76.

More , Enchiridion metaphysicum (ref. 10), 69–70. For fuller discussion see Koyré , Closed world (ref. 7), 147–54, and Grant , Much ado (ref. 12), 227–8.

Newton Isaac , Opticks, or a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflections and colours of light, based on the fourth edition, London, 1730 (New York, 1952), 404.

Hall Hall , (eds), Unpublished papers (ref. 11), 132.

More , Enchiridion metaphysicum (ref. 10), 70, 72. Quoted from Koyré , Closed world (ref. 7), 148, 150.

For a fuller discussion of this tradition see Lindberg David C. , “The genesis of Kepler's theory of light: Light metaphysics from Plotinus to Kepler”, Osiris, new series, ii (1986), 5–42, pp. 14–17; McEvoy James , The philosophy of Robert Grossetesle (Oxford, 1982), 149–88, 369–441.

Professor Hall actually uses the phrase “philosophically deplorable” to sum up Newton's attitude to the concept of active matter in his “Newton and the absolutes: Sources”, in Harman P. M. Shapiro A. E. (eds), The investigation of difficult things: Essays on Newton and the history of the exact sciences (Cambridge, 1992), 261–85, p. 281.

See, for example, Queries 1, 4, 5, 21, 29, and 31 in the Opticks.

The letters are reprinted in Cohen I. B. (ed.), Isaac Newton's papers and letters on natural philosophy, 2nd edn (Cambridge, Mass., 1978), 279–312; see pp. 298, 302–3.

What follows draws upon a longer article of mine which is principally concerned with these comments in the letters to Bentley, and which considers the interpretations not just of Professor Hall but also of various other leading Newton scholars: “‘Pray do not ascribe that notion to me’: God and Newton's gravity”, in Force James E. Popkin Richard H. (eds), Newton and Spinoza as Bible scholars: Recent essays (Dordrecht, forthcoming).

There is another difficulty in understanding Newton's meaning when he talks of the cause of gravity “acting constantly”. Professor Hall and others have tended to see this as a signal that Newton has God in mind as the direct cause. Elsewhere in his writings Newton does indeed seem to suggest that God must continually supervise the system of the world and these pronouncements are brought in to support the immanentist reading of this passage. In fact, Newton believed that God's potentia ordinata, or “ordinary power”, was required to continually maintain the world as it was established by him at the Creation by his potentia absoluta, or “absolute power”. The active principle of gravity was endowed upon matter at the Creation, we can suppose, by God's absolute power and can then act constantly according to the laws laid upon it at the Creation. Nevertheless, God's ordinary power is required to be continually active to maintain the laws and the very existence of matter. The implication of this theological view is that the world is so unlikely a set of circumstances that it simply could not continue to exist without God. This is, of course, a voluntarist theological position. For a fuller discussion of this and its relevance to a correct understanding of Newton's ideas on gravity see my “‘Pray do not ascribe that notion to me’” (ref. 26).

Bentley Richard , A confutation of atheism from the origin and frame of the world…. Being the seventh of the Lecture founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle, Esquire (London, 1693), 29. This is conveniently reprinted in Cohen (ed.), Newton's papers and letters (ref. 25), 313–52, seep. 341.

Bentley , Confutation of atheism (ref. 28), 29 (p. 341 in Cohen edition).

Turnbull H. W. , (eds), The correspondence of Isaac Newton (7 vols, Cambridge, 1959–71), iii, 246–53, p. 249.

See, for example, Koyré Alexandre , “Gravity an essential property of matter?”, in idem, Newtonian studies (London, 1965), 149–63, p. 149; Miller Perry , “Bentley and Newton”, in Cohen (ed.), Papers and letters (ref. 25), 271–78, pp. 274, 277; and Professor Hall as we shall see immediately.

Bentley , Confutation of atheism (ref. 28), 30 (p. 342 in Cohen edition).

Hall Hall , (eds), Unpublished papers (ref. 11), 139, 142, quoted in Henry More, 236.

I have tried to deal with these other pronouncements, showing that they too have been misread by Newton scholars in my “‘Pray do not ascribe that notion to me’” (ref. 26).

More , Antidote against atheism , 44, 46, and Immortality of the Soul , 13, in Collection (ref. 9).

[ Newton Isaac ], “An account of the book entituled Commercium epislolicum”, Philosophical transactions, xxix (1715), 173–224, p. 223.

Brooke John H. , Science and religion: Some historical perspectives (Cambridge, 1992), 6–11.