Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T14:04:05.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Newton, the sensorium of God, and the cause of gravity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2021

John Henry
John Henry*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

It is argued that the sensorium of God was introduced into the Quaestiones added to the end of Newton’s Optice (1706) as a way of answering objections that Newton had failed to provide a causal account of gravity in the Principia. The discussion of God’s sensorium indicated that gravity must be caused by God’s will. Newton did not leave it there, however, but went on to show how God’s will created active principles as secondary causes of gravity. There was nothing unusual in assuming that God, acting as the First Cause, operated in nature by means of secondary causes; but it was unusual to devote as much time to discussing God’s precise role as to discussing the secondary causes themselves. It is contended that Newton felt the need to do this to persuade readers that what might seem like a second cause that could not possibly work could be made to work by the omnipotent God.

Keywords

active principlescausationGodgravityIsaac Newtonsensoriumspacethe will
Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , September 2020 , pp. 329 - 351
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, Henry G. ed. 1956. The Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Belkind, Ori. 2012. “Newton’s Scientific Method and the Universal Law of Gravitation.” In Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays, edited by Janiak, Andrew and Schliesser, Eric, 138–168. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Howard R. 1977. “Leibniz and the Sensorium Dei.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 15:171–82.10.1353/hph.2008.0536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Robert. 2000. Works, edited by Hunter, Michael and Edward, B. Davis, 14 vols. London: Pickering and Chatto.Google Scholar
Clarke, Samuel. 1717. A Collection of Papers, Which Passed between the Late Learned Mr. Leibniz, and Dr. Clarke, In the Years 1715 and 1716. London: James Knapton.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. Bernard. 1966. “Hypotheses in Newton’s Philosophy.” Physis: Revista internazionale di storia della scienza 8:163–184.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. Bernard. 1979. “Preface.” In Newton 1979.10.1016/B978-0-12-178250-4.50005-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connolly, Patrick J. 2014. “Newton and God’s Sensorium.” Intellectual History Review 24: 185–201.10.1080/17496977.2014.914644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottingham, John. 1992. “Cartesian Dualism: Theology, Metaphysics, and Science.” In The Cambridge Companion to Descartes, edited by Cottingham, John, 236–257. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL0521366232.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Descartes, René. [1637] 1985. Discourse on the Method. In Philosophical Writings, translated by Cottingham, John, Stoothoff, Robert, and Murdoch, Dugald, Vol. I, 111–151. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Downing, Lisa. 2014. “Locke’s Metaphysics and Newtonian Metaphysics.” In Newton and Empiricism, edited by Biener, Zvi and Schliesser, Eric, 97–118. Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199337095.003.0005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaukroger, Stephen. 2002. Descartes’ System of Natural Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511606229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, Edward. 2007. A History of Natural Philosophy from the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511999871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorham, Geoffrey. 2011a. “How Newton Solved the Mind-Body Problem.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 28:21–44.Google Scholar
Gorham, Geoffrey. 2011b. “Newton on God’s Relation to Space and Time: The Cartesian Framework.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93:281–320.10.1515/agph.2011.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, A. Rupert. 1993. All Was Light: An Introduction to Newton’s Opticks. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Harper, Willliam. 2012. “Newton, Huygens, and Euler: Empirical Support for Laws of Motion.” In Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays, edited by Janiak, Andrew and Schliesser, Eric, 169–195. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heimann, Peter, and McGuire, James E.. 1971. “Newtonian Forces and Lockean Powers: Concepts of Matter in Eighteenth-Century Thought.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 3:233–306.10.2307/27757320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, John. 1986. “Occult Qualities and the Experimental Philosophy: Active Principles in pre-Newtonian Matter Theory.” History of Science 24:335–381 10.1177/007327538602400401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, John. 2009. “Voluntarist Theology at the Origins of Modern Science: A Response to Peter Harrison.” History of Science 47:79–113.10.1177/007327530904700105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, John. 2019. “Newton and Action at a Distance.” In The Oxford Handbook of Newton, edited by Schliesser, Eric and Smeenk, Chris, 1–34, published online, DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199930418.013.17. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 2020. “Primary and Secondary Causation in Samuel Clarke’s and Isaac Newton’s Theories of Gravity.” Isis 111:542–561.10.1086/710320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, John, and McGuire, James E. 2018. “Voluntarism and Panentheism: The Sensorium of God and Isaac Newton’s Theology.” The Seventeenth Century 33:587–612.10.1080/0268117X.2017.1340188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiscock, Walter G. ed. 1937. David Gregory, Isaac Newton and their Circle: Extracts from David Gregory’s Memoranda 1677–1708. Oxford: for the Editor.Google Scholar
Hooke, Robert. 1665. Micrographia: or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies made by Magnifying Glasses: With Observations and Inquiries Thereupon. London: Jo. Martyn and Ja. Allestry.Google Scholar
Hooke, Robert. [1678] 1931. Lectures de potentia restitutiva, or of Spring… In Early Science in Oxford, edited by Robert T. Gunther, 14 vols [1921–45], Vol. 8. Oxford: for the Subscribers.Google Scholar
Janiak, Andrew. 2008. Newton as Philosopher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511481512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kassler, Jamie. 2018. Newton’s Sensorium: Anatomy of a Concept. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-72053-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre. 1957. From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre, and Bernard Cohen, I.. 1961. “The Case of the Missing Tanquam: Leibniz, Newton, and Clarke.” Isis 52:555–566.10.1086/349500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre, and Bernard Cohen, I.. 1962. “Newton and the Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence: With Notes on Newton, Conti & Des Maizeaux.” Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Sciences 15:63–126.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1690. Essay Concerning Humane Understanding. London: Thomas Basset.Google Scholar
Meli, , Bertoloni, Domenico. 2016. “Newton and the Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence.” In The Cambridge Companion to Newton, 2nd edition, edited by Iliffe, Rob and George, E. Smith, 586–596. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, Gemma, William, Harper, and Curtis, Wilson.2011. “Huygens, Wren, Wallis, and Newton on Rules of Impact and Reflection.” In Vanishing Matter and the Laws of Motion, edited by Jalobeanu, Dana and Anstey, Peter, 153–192. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nauenberg, Michael. 2006. “Robert Hooke’s Seminal Contribution to Orbital Dynamics.” In Robert Hooke: Tercentennial Studies, edited by Cooper, Michael and Hunter, Michael, 3–32. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Nauenberg, Michael. 2019. “Visiting Newton’s Atelier before the Principia, 1679–84.” Annals of Science 76:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, William R. 2019. Newton the Alchemist: Science, Enigma, and the Quest for Nature’s “Secret Fire. ” Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, Isaac. [c. 1672, or c. 1684?] 1962. “De gravitatione et aequipondio fluidorum.” In Unpublished Scientific Papers of Isaac Newton, edited by Rupert Hall, A. and Hall, Marie Boas, 89–156. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac. c. 1704–1718. Draft Versions of ‘The Queries’. http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/view/texts/normalized/NATP00055 (last accessed September 1, 2020).Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac. 1706. Optice: Sive de reflexionibus, refractionibus, inflexionibus, & coloribus lucis, libri tres… Latine reddidit Samuel Clarke. London: S. Smith and B. Walford.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac. 1978. Papers and Letters on Natural Philosophy, edited by Bernard Cohen, I., 2nd edition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac. [1717] 1979. Opticks, or a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections and Colours of Light, Based on the Fourth Edition London, 1730. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac. [1687/1713] 1999. The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, translated by Bernard Cohen, I. and Whitman, Anne. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Oakley, Francis.1961. “Christian Theology and the Newtonian Science: The Rise of the Concept of Laws of Nature.” Church History 30: 433–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priestley, Francis E. L. 1970. “The Clarke-Leibniz Controversy.” In The Methodological Heritage of Newton, edited by Robert, E. Butts and John, W. Davis, 34–56. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, Christopher. 1991. Time, Space and Philosophy. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203327272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruffner, James A. 2012. “Newton’s De gravitatione: A Review and Reassessment.” Archive for the History of the Exact Sciences 66:241–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sangiacomo, Andrea. 2018. “Samuel Clarke on Agent Causation, Voluntarism, and Occasionalism.” Science in Context 31:421–456.10.1017/S0269889718000340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuster, John. 2013. Descartes-Agonistes: Physico-Mathematics, Method, and Corpuscular-Mechanism, 1618–33. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-4746-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Alan E. 2004. “Newton’s ‘Experimental Philosophy.’” Early Science and Medicine 9:185–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinle, Friedrich. 1991. Newtons Entwurf “Uber die Gravitation …”: Ein Stück Entwicklungsgeschichte seiner Mechanik. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Wang, Xiaona. 2018. “‘Though their Causes be not yet Discover’d’: Occult Principles in the Making of Newton’s Natural Philosophy.” PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard S. 1971. Force in Newton’s Physics. New York: American Elsevier.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard S. 1980. Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar