Advertisement

Henry More and the Scientific Revolution

  • A. Rupert Hall
Chapter
Part of the International Archives of the History of Ideas/Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées book series (ARCH, volume 127)

Abstract

The relation of Henry More to the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century has been a matter of greater interest to historians of philosophy than to historians of science. The same remark might be applied, indeed, to other philosophers who have reflected critically or otherwise upon mathematics and natural science — George Berkeley, to cite another English example. However, the case of More is a little different in that positive influence upon the greatest of English scientists has been more than once confidently claimed for him. The writings of More perhaps most frequently considered by historians of philosophy are his his four letters to Descartes written in 1648–9. Without by any means belittling their importance as indications of contemporary idealist response to Descartes’s philosophy, there are good reasons for not giving them great prominence when thinking about More in relation to science. In them More himself gave pride of place to the epistemological and metaphysical problems he found in Descartes’s writings; although he does raise scientific objections to Descartes’s treatment of the planetary motions, of optics, of magnetism and so forth, not to say of Descartes’s fundamental theory of motion (but perhaps this is as much a matter of metaphysics as of science), these do not inhibit him from declaring in later writings that Descartes had constructed as perfect an explanatory mechanism for the universe as anyone could hope to meet with.

Keywords

Royal Society Active Principle Scientific Revolution Natural Theology Absolute Space 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    More, CSPW, Preface p. xii.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    More, Poems, Psychathanasia, 3, stanza 44.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ibid., stanza 37.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ibid., 388.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ibid., 389, 390.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ibid., 390–1.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibid., 401.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ibid., 390–400.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ibid., 391–5.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ibid., 396.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ibid., 385.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ibid., 425.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wallace Shugg et al., “Henry More’s Circulatio Sanguinis.” Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. H. Nicolson(ed.), Conway Letters, pp. 393,395, 397.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    F. B. Burnham, “The More-Vaughan Controversy,” quotes More’s Observations upon Anthroposophia Theomagica (1650): ‘There never was anything proposed in the world in which there is more wary, subtil and close texture of reason, more coherent unity of all parts with themselves, or more happy uniformity of the whole with the phenomena of Nature’ than in the Cartesian philosophy.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Charles Webster, “Henry More and Descartes,” 365.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Ibid., 369.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ibid., 371.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    More, ET, 36 in CSPW. Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Conway Letters, pp. 481–3.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    More first made use of some of Boyle’s experiments from New Experiments Physico-Mechanical (1660) in the 1662 edition of AA (in CSPW) and again in Enchiridion Metaphysicum (1671). Boyle replied to More in An Hydrostatical Discourse (1672), which More answered in Remarks upon Two Ingenious Discourses (1976). See John Henry’s article in this volume.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    More, AA, 44–6 in CSPW. Also EM, chap. 12.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    Boyle, Hydrostatical Discourse, in Works, 3: 622–3.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    A Letter from Dr. More to J. G. giving him an Account how M: Stubb Belies him, in Joseph Glanvill, A Prefatory Answer to Mr. Henry Stubbe, 155.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ibid. For further discussion, see Allison Coudert’s paper in this volume.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    A Letter from Dr. More, 156.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
    More,“Ad Artic. 35”: “Qui fit ut Planetae omnes in eodem non circumgyruntur piano (videlicet in piano Eclipticae), maculaeque adeo solares, aut saltern in planis Eclipticae parallelis; ipsaque Luna, aut in Aequatore aut in piano Aequatori parallelo, cum a nulla interna vi dirigantur, sed externo tantum ferantur impetu?” AT (NP), 5: 386.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    More, A Letter... to J.G., 156–7.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    More, DD, I: 34, 39.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    More, IS, 275.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    e.g. Conway Letters, p.269.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    [Isaac Newton], “An Account of the Book entituled Commercium Epistolicum,” Philosophical Transactions, 29 (1715): 223. Facsimile in A. Rupert Hall, Philosophers at War: the Quarrel Between Newton and Leibniz (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 313.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rohault’s System of Natural Philosophy, illustrated with Dr. S[amuel] Clarke’s Notes, trans. John Clarke (London, 1723), 1: 45, note.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    The loci classici are E. A. Burtt, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science and Koyré, Closed World.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Isaaci Barrow Lectiones Mathematicae XXIII, (London 1684), translated by John Kirby as The Usefulness of Mathematical Learning Explained and Demonstrated (London, 1734). See W. Whewell, Mathematical Works of Isaac Barrow, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1860).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    J. E. McGuire and M. Tammny, Certain Philosophical Questions: Newton’s Trinity Notebook (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Richard S. Westfall, Force in Newton’s Physics (London: MacDonald and Co., 1971).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ernan McMullin, Newton on Matter and Activity (Notre Dame and London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1978).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Marie Boas Hall, The Mechanical Philosophy (New York: Arno Press, 1981; reprint from Osiris 10(1952) and, Isis 40(1949)).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Newton, Opticks, 4th ed. (London 1730; reprint New York: Dover Publications, 1952), 388–9.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ibid., 400–1.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Westfall, Force, 377–8. I first drew attention to More’s name in this notebook more than forty years ago, Cambridge Historical Journal 9 (1948): 238–50.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Westfall, Force, 337.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    More, CSPW, Preface, xiv-xv. This quotation gives occasion to remark upon the (to me) strange infrequency of references to Kenelm Digby in More’s works. ‘Sympathy’ for More embraced what we still call the sympathetic vibration of two strings in resonance — yet another physical phenomenon that he regarded as inexplicable upon mechanical principles.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    See Hall, Philosophers at War, 314.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Newton, Opticks, note 29, 401–2.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
  51. 51.
    Westfall, Force, 398.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Principia (1713) ad fin.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hélène Metzger, Attraction universelle et religion naturelle chez quelques commentateurs anglais de Newton (Paris: Hermann & Cie, 1938), 75, note 6.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Koyré, 160.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    S.E. Toulmin, “Criticism in the History of Science: Newton on Absolute Space, Time and Motion,” Philosophical Review 68 (1959): 214.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
  57. 57.
    W. Von Leyden, Seventeenth-Century Metaphysics, 259–60.Google Scholar
  58. 58a.
    R. S. Westfall, “Newton and the Hermetic Tradition,” in A. G. Debus (ed.) Science, Medicine and Society in the Renaissance (London: Heinneman, 1972), 2: 183–98;Google Scholar
  59. 58b.
    idem, “The Role of Alchemy in Newton’s Career,” in M. L. Righini Bonelli and W. R. Shea (eds.) Reason, Experiment and Mysticism in the Scientific Revolution (New York: Science History Publications, 1975), 189–232.Google Scholar
  60. 59.
    J. E. Mc Guire, “Neoplatonism and Active Principles,” 132.Google Scholar
  61. 60.
    Ibid., 104.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Rupert Hall

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations