.jpg)
In the excerpt from Newton in the Longman anthology, he responds to four queries from his correspondent. We don't have the text of the queries, but we do have Newton's four answers. Respond to this post by choosing ONE of his answers and explaining what his main idea is--and point to some text that helps to spell it out. You can also answer by suggesting (with kind collegiality, as always) a more accurate explanation of Newton's thinking than a classmate has offered.
Deadline: Wednesday (9/30), start of class.
Posts
10 comments:
In response to Bentley's second query, Newton argues that the existence of God, or a higher power, is evident through the observable patterns of cosmic mechanics. While comets move in an arbitrary manner, the planets, Newton maintains, orbits in a rather definitively uniform and calculated direction only attainable through skilled "mechanics and geometry" (2796). The absolute accuracy in which the planets rotate concentrically is far too meticulous to be decided by some naturally random cause and, thus, determines that there must be some higher power controlling the system.
Newton's response to Bentley's first query suggests that the universe itself is proof of an omniscient creator. Newton further argues that the flawless design of the universe is by no means a random act of nature, but a system intentionally built by skillful hands of a "voluntary agent" (2795). Furthermore, the infinite amount of space created which is inhabited by endless balls of mass is no coincidence. The universe's entire architecture down to the arrangement of the smallest particles was not born of chance, but crafted by a higher power. As Albert Einstein said "God does not throw dice".
The last response that Newton makes into Bentley's query summarizes the 'miracle' or perfection of the timing of monthly and seasonal motions that are too harmonious to be anything but the work of a higher power. "To make up that harmony in the system which (as explained [by Newton] above) was the effect of choice rather than of chance" (2797). He explains this harmony in that Earth is inhabitable in between its poles during all four seasons, and these seasons are divided up so perfectly and coordinated by the rotation of the sun and Earth, this coordination cannot be explained scientifically, by pure luck or chance, but rather that they were established by a deity. This argument seems rather weak, however, as it can really be applied to anything found in nature that is beautiful. For example, a lily is beautiful, or a seashell so well crafted, that it must be the work of an artist that made conscious choices rather than the work of evolution, nature, etc.
Newton's response to Bentley's third question proposes that the planets were not aligned in this fixed distance from the sun from natural causes, but were instead placed there by God. He says that it may be that the composition and density of planets is determined by their distance from the sun, but he goes on to explain a problem with this hypothesis. If the intensity of the sun's heat causes the planets closest to it to, "be better concocted and more condensed by concoction" then the planets closes to the sun would be more dense. Since Earth receives more heat from its core than from the sun and there is no reason to suppose that Jupiter and Saturn don't have the same composition, then there must be another explanation for their considerable differences in density. His explanation is the Creator, who placed Jupiter and Saturn in such a place that their large mass and low densities would balance each other out and create harmony.
Newton presents his scientific discoveries in a very unique way, he uses scientific facts to prove the existence of a Supreme Being. Whereas, most individuals use science to disprove or to challenge religion. In his response to the second query, Newton states, "The motions which with the planets now have could not spring from any natural cause alone but were impressed by an intelligent agent" (2796). He then goes on to explain his scientific theory of the way that the planets move in relation to one another. Suggesting that it is just not scientifically plausible that all of this happen naturally. Saying "nor is there any natural cause which could give the planets those just degrees of velocity in proportion to their distances from the sun and other central bodies about which they move and to the quantity of matter contained in those bodies, which were requisite to make them move in concentric orbs about those bodies" (2796).
I agree with everyone's posts of the main ideas behind the queries. I would also like to point out in the first two queries, while Newton is making a distinct argument, he also makes it a point to say that while he is offering proof for his explanation, it really doesn't need explaining because it really is the obvious choice.
For example, in query 1 he says he is "forced to ascribe it to the counsel and contrivance of a voluntary agent"(2795). The word "forced" implies he has no other option but to claim there was a creator of the universe.
In query 2, Newton claims that "it's plain that there is no natural cause which could determine all the planets [...] to move the same way and in the same direction" (2796). Again, with the use of "plain" he is appealing to the idea that this information should go without saying because it is so clear to the eye.
He explicitly states it in the first two queries, but only implies it in the second two. This intrigued me and made me wonder if Newton was actually stating the obvious to his readers, or if he was presenting them with new information and using this style as a persuasive technique. I would have to think he would be using it more so as a persuasive technique because he is combating the arguments of others, such as Descartes; and he is responding to a letter in the first place.
I think Julia does a great job summarizing what Newton did in his fourth query, yet I think she is looking at his argument of our system "was the effect of choice rather than of chance" (2797) in the wrong way. At the time, I would think that religion and science were not separated. In fact, I would go as far as to say if they had trouble figuring out something scientifically, that they would figure that a deity would be the only logical reason a certain phenomenon is occuring.
I like what everyone else has said but when reading this I felt like I saw the same thing as Lauren. Newton's answers to the queries seemed to easy to explain, almost as if we should just accept his answers for fact. When I read this though, I was persuaded by what Newton wrote and therefore, I suppose, he accomplished his goal. I was wondering if Newton somehow 'dumbed down' his explanations because readers might not understand what he was really trying to say. Either way, Newton was able to convince me of his beliefs without really showing me a lot of facts to back up his answers, which makes me think he was just trying to get people to think in a logical way about things they don't fully understand.
I agree with what has been said about the second query. "And to compare and adjust all these things together in so great a variety of bodies argues that cause to be not blind and fortuitous, but very well skilled in mechanics and geometry" (2796). He is saying that the way things move in space, is not by chance, rather it is constructed by a higher power who has great skill in geometry and mechanics.
Post a Comment