Draft of Letter from Sir Isaac Newton to the Editor of Memoirs of Literature Isaac Newton c. 1,340 words The Newton Project Oxford 2020 Newton Project, University of Oxford

This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

 17 May 1712, in English with some Latin, c. 1,340 words, 1 f. 1 f.

in English with some Latin

 MS Add. 3968, f. 257r-257v, Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, UK UKCambridgeCambridge University Library Portsmouth Collection MS Add. 3968, f. 257r-257v 17 May 1712 England English Latin Isaac Newton Unknown Cataloguer (2) ScienceMathematics Transcription by Marie Soulier Transcription by Michelle Pfeffer Transcription continued by Robert Ralley Transcription completed by Robert Ralley. Code audited by Michael Hawkins.
257

SrSir

In your weekly paper dated May 5 1712 I meet wthwith two Letters, one written by Mr Leibnitz to Mr Hartsoeker the other by Mr Hartsoeker to Mr Leibnitz in answer to yethe former. And in the Letter of Mr Leibnitz meeting wthwith some things in wchwhich I wish the author had behaved himself wthwith more candor & decency towards the English forbore to attack the reflecting upon the English I hope you will do them the justice to publish this vindication as you have printed the reflexion. He writes thus. It may be said in a very good sense that every thing is a continual Miracle, that is worthy of Admiration: but it seems to me that the examples of a Planet that wchwhich goes round & presents it motion in its Orb without any other help but that of God, being compared wthwith a Planet kept in its Orb by ytthat matter wchwhich constantly drives it towards yethe Sun, plainly shews what difference there is between natural & rational miracles & those that are properly so called or supernatural, or rather between a reasonable explication, & a fiction invented to support an ill grounded opinion. Such is the method of those who say, after Mr de Robervals Aristarchus, that all bodies attract one another by a law of nature wchwhich God made in the beginning of things. For alledging nothing els to obtein such an effect & admitting nothing that was made by God whereby it may appear how he attains to that end, they have recourse to a miracle, that is, to a supernatural thing, wchwhich continues for ever, when the Question is to find out a natural cause. Thus far Mr Leibnits I know not what just occasion there was for this reflexion upon in a discourse bettween foreign to this matter but its plain that this was intended against some in England & therefore look upon it as proceeding from & something: else their candor & reason a pique & I hope to make it as plain that it was understood. For The true state of the case is this. It has been proved by some that all bodies upon the surface of the earth gravitate towards the earth in proportion to yethe quantity of matter in each of them: That the Moon tends towards the earth by the & all the Planets towards one another by the same law; & that by this tendency all their motions are performed. But These things have been proved by de mathematical demonstrations grounded upon experiments & the phænomena of nature: & Mr Leibnitz himself cannot deny that thatey they have been proved. But he objects that because they alledge nothing else to obteine such an effect [he means a tendency of all bodies towards one another] besides a law of nature wchwhich God made in the beginning of things (he means gravity) & admitto nothing that was made by God (he means no vortices) whereby it may appear how God attains to that end, they have recourse to a Miracle, & that is, to a supernatural thing wchwhich continues for ever, when the question is to find out a natural cause. He doth not change then wthwith maintaining the gravity cannot be explained mechanically but such an effect besides gravity B Because they do not explain gravity by a mechanical hypothesis & a fiction invented to support an ill grounded opinion, he charges them wthwith making it a supernatural thing, after Mr de Robervals Aristarchus a miracle & a fiction invented to support an ill grounded opinion a fiction invented to support an ill grounded opinion & compares their method of philosophy to that of Mr de Robervals Aristarchus, wchwhich is all one as to call it Romantic, They shew that there is an universal gravity & that how all the phenomena of the heavens are the effect of gravity but meddle not it, but they & with yethe cause of gravity they meddle not but leave it to be explained found out by them that can explain it whether by matter mechanically or otherwise. And is this doth deserve to be represented a Romantic way of method of philosophy. Some men may And doth this methodphilosophy deserve to be represented scoured with the language of a supernatural thing, a miracle, a fiction invented to support an ill grounded opinion, & a Romantic method of philosophy, some men may Men may differ in their appinions about the cause of gravity without after Mr Robervals Romance. When Men may differ in their opinions about yethe cause of gravity

But Mr Leibnitz goes on. The Ancients & the Moderns who own that gravity is an occult Quality, are in the right, if they mean by it, that there is a certain Mechanism unknown to them whereby all bodies tend towards the center of the earth. But if they mean that the thing is performed without any mechanism by a simple primitive quality or by a law of God which produces that effect without using any intelligible means it is an unreasonable occult Quality, & so very occult that it is impossible that it should ever be clear tho an Angel or God himself should undertake to explain it The same ought to be said of hardness. So then gravity & hardness must go for an occult qual unreasonable occult qualityies unless thatey can be explained mechanically. And why may not the same be said of the vis inertiæ & the extension the duration & mobility of bodies, For & yet no man ever attempted to explain these qualities mechanically, For or took them for miracles or supernatural things or fictions or occult qualitaies. They are the natural real reasonable manifest qualities of all bodies seated in them by the will of God from the beginning of the creation & perfectly uncapable of being explained mechanically, & so may be the hardness of primitive particles of bodies. And therefore if any man should say that bodies attract one another by a power whose cause is unknown to us or by a power seated in the frame of nature by the will of God, or by a power seated in the an material a substance in wchwhich bodies move & flote without resistance & wchwhich has therefore no vis inertiæ, I td but acts by other laws then those that are mechanical. I: I know not why he should be said to introduce miracles & occult qualities & fictions into yethe world. For Mr Leibnitz himself will scarce say that thinking is mechanical [& think to deny this would be to introduce miracles & occult qualities & fictions into yethe world] as it must be if to explain it otherwise be to make it a miracle an occult quality & a fiction.

But he goes on & tells us that God could not create Planets that should move round the of themselves without any cause that should prevent their removing through the tangent: For a Miracle at least must keep the Planet in. But certainly God could create Planets that should move round of themselves without any other cause then gravity that should prevent their removing through yethe tangant. For gravity without a miracle way keep the Planets in. And to understand this wthwithout knowing the cause of gravity, is as good a progress in philosophy as to understand the frame of a clock & the dependance of yethe wheels upon one another is without knowing the cause of the gravity of the weight wchwhich moves the former machine is in the former f philosophy of clockwork, or the understanding the frame of the bones & muscles & their connection in the body of an animal is in without known & how the bones are moved by the contracting or dilating of the muscles is in the bod without knowing how the muscles are contracted or dilated by the power of yethe mind, is the philosophy of animal motion.