Motion in Aristotle, Newton, and Einstein

Part of the Philosophers in Depth book series (PID)


In Book VII of the Physics, Aristotle famously maintains that “everything that is in motion must be moved by something.”1 This serves as a crucial premise in his argument for an Unmoved Mover. Aquinas’s related First Way of arguing for the existence of God rests on a variation of the premise, to the effect that “whatever is in motion is moved by another.”2 Let us call this the “principle of motion.”3 Newton’s First Law states that “every body continues in its state of rest or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.”4 Call this the “principle of inertia.”


Local Motion Modern Physic Real Change Uniform Motion Natural Place 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aristotle. 1930. Physics, trans. R. P. Hardie and R. K. Gaye. (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
  2. Aquinas, Thomas. 1952. On the Power of God, trans. English Dominican Fathers (Westminster, MD: The Newman Press).Google Scholar
  3. — 1964. Exposition of Aristotle’s Treatise On the Heavens, trans. Fabian R. Larcher and Pierre H. Conway (Columbus: College of St. Mary of the Springs).Google Scholar
  4. Ashley, Benedict. 2006. The Way toward Wisdom (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press).Google Scholar
  5. Asimov, Isaac. 1993. Understanding Physics: 3 Volumes in 1 (New York: Barnes and Noble Books).Google Scholar
  6. Augros, Michael. 2007. “Ten Objections to the Prima Via,” Peripatetikos 6: 59–101.Google Scholar
  7. Braine, David. 1988. The Reality ofTime and the Existence of God (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
  8. Buckley, Michael J. 1971. Motion and Motion’s God (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  9. DeWitt, Richard. 2004. Worldviews: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
  10. Earman, J. and M. Friedman. 1973. “The Meaning and Status of Newton’s Law of Inertia and the Nature of Gravitational Forces,” Philosophy of Science 40: 329–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eddington, Arthur. 1963. The Nature of the Physical World (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press).Google Scholar
  12. Einstein, Albert. 1988. The Meaning of Relativity, Fifth edition (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  13. Ellis, Brian. 1965. “The Origin and Nature of Newton’s Laws of Motion.” In Robert G. Colodny, (ed.) Beyond the Edge of Certainty: Essays in Contemporary Science and Philosophy (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).Google Scholar
  14. — 2002. The Philosophy of Nature: A Guide to the New Essentialism (Chesham: Acumen).Google Scholar
  15. Feser, Edward. 2009. Aquinas (Oxford: Oneworld Publications).Google Scholar
  16. — 2011. “Existential Inertia and the Five Ways,” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 85, No. 2.Google Scholar
  17. Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald. 1939. God: His Existence and His Nature, Volume I (London: B. Herder).Google Scholar
  18. Hanson, Norwood Russell. 1963. “The Law of Inertia: A Philosophers’ Touchstone,” Philosophy of Science 30: 107–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. — 1965a. “Newton’s First Law: A Philosopher’s Door into Natural Philosophy,” in Robert G. Colodny, (ed.) Beyond the Edge of Certainty: Essays in Contemporary Science and Philosophy (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).Google Scholar
  20. — 1965b. “A Response to Ellis’s Conception of Newton’s First Law,” in Robert G. Colodny, (ed.) Beyond the Edge of Certainty: Essays in Contemporary Science and Philosophy (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).Google Scholar
  21. Joyce, George Hayward. 1924. Principles of Natural Theology, Second edition (London: Longmans, Green and Co.).Google Scholar
  22. Keck, John W. 2007. “The Natural Motion of Matter in Newtonian and Post-Newtonian Physics,” The Thomist 71: 529–54.Google Scholar
  23. — 2011 “The Messiness of Matter and the Problem of Inertia.” Paper presented at the Society for Aristotelian Studies Meeting, June 17, 2011, Santa Paula, California.Google Scholar
  24. Kenny, Anthony. 1969. The Five Ways: St. Thomas Aquinas’ Proofs of God’s Existence (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).Google Scholar
  25. Koren, Henry J. 1962. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Nature (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press).Google Scholar
  26. Lockwood, Michael. 2005. The Labyrinth of Time (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  27. McLaughlin, Thomas. 2004. “Local Motion and the Principle of Inertia: Aquinas, Newtonian Physics, and Relativity,” International Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 1.Google Scholar
  28. McLaughlin, Thomas J. 2008. “Nature and Inertia,” Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 62, No. 2.Google Scholar
  29. Moreno, Antonio. 1974. “The Law of Inertia and the Principle ‘Quidquid movetur ab alio movetur’,” The Thomist, Vol. 38.Google Scholar
  30. Oderberg, David S. 2007. Real Essentialism (London: Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Popper, Karl. 1998. “Beyond the Search for Invariants,” in Karl Popper, The World of Parmenides (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  32. Russell, Bertrand. 1985. My Philosophical Development (London: Unw in Paperbacks).Google Scholar
  33. Sachs, Joe. 1995. Aristotle’s Physics: A Guided Study (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press).Google Scholar
  34. Schrödinger, Erwin. 1956. “On the Peculiarity of the Scientific World-View.” In Erwin Schrödinger, What is Life? and Other Scientific Essays (New York: Doubleday).Google Scholar
  35. — 1992. “Mind and Matter,” in Erwin Schrödinger, What is Life? with Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Simon, Yves R. 2001. The Great Dialogue of Nature and Space (South Bend, Indiana: St. Augustine’s Press).Google Scholar
  37. Sklar, Lawrence. 1985. “Inertia, Gravitation, and Metaphysics,” in Lawrence Sklar, Philosophy and Spacetime Physics (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  38. Smolin, Lee. 2007. The Trouble with Physics (New York: Mariner Books).Google Scholar
  39. Van Melsen, Andrew G. 1954. The Philosophy of Nature, Second edition (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University).Google Scholar
  40. Wallace, W. A. 1956. “Newtonian Antinomies Against the Prima Via,” The Thomist 19: 151–92.Google Scholar
  41. Wallace, William A. 1983. “Cosmological Arguments and Scientific Concepts.” In William A. Wallace, From a Realist Point of View: Essays on the Philosophy of Science, Second edition (Lanham, MD: University Press of America).Google Scholar
  42. Weisheipl, James A. 1985. Nature and Motion in the Middle Ages, (ed.) William E. Carroll (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press).Google Scholar
  43. Weyl, Hermann. 1949. Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  44. Whitehead, Alfred North. 1948. Essays in Science and Philosophy (New York: Philosophical Library).Google Scholar
  45. Wippel, John F. 2000. The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press).Google Scholar
  46. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1961. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, trans. D. F. Pears and B. F. McGuinness (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Edward Feser 2013

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations