Encyclopedia of Early Modern Philosophy and the Sciences

Living Edition
| Editors: Dana Jalobeanu, Charles T. Wolfe

Newton and Spinoza

  • Noa SheinEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20791-9_111-1
  • 4 Downloads

Introduction

It is unclear whether Newton read any of Spinoza’s works. However, two people with whom he was in close contact made substantial efforts to repudiate Spinozism directly: Henry More in The Confutation of Spinoza (More 1991) and Samuel Clarke in A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God: More Particularly in Answer to Mr. Hobbs, Spinoza and Their Followers (Clarke 1998). Although Newton did not always explicitly name Spinoza, it is evident that he had Spinoza or Spinozism in mind (in addition to Epicureanism) when articulating certain objections to this kind of metaphysical view (Schliesser 2012b; Peterman 2018) and formulating his own positive view in contrast. An underlying current in Newton’s arguments against Spinozism was his desire to respond to the threat of atheism. The presence of Newton’s devout upbringing and his own commitment to religion can be seen here, notwithstanding his own radical anti-trinitarian beliefs ((Snobelen 1999) and “Newton’s Theology,”...

Related Topics

Descartes Clarke More Hobbes Materialism Atheism Mechanism 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Biener Z (2017) De Gravitatione reconsidered: the changing significance of experimental evidence for Newton’s metaphysics of space. J Hist Philos 55(4):583–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clarke S (1998) A demonstration of the being and attributes of God and other writings. Cambridge texts in the history of philosophy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. de Spinoza, B (1985) The collected works of Spinoza, vol I (trans: Curley EM). Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  4. Descartes R (1984) The philosophical writings of Descartes (trans: Cottingham J, Stoothoff R, Murdoch D). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. DiSalle R (2006) Understanding space-time: the philosophical development of physics from Newton to Einstein. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Domski M (2010) Newton’s empiricism and metaphysics. Philos Compass 5(7):525–534.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2010.00307.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ducheyne S (2011) “The main business of natural philosophy”: Isaac Newton’s natural-philosophical methodology. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  8. Gorham G (2011) Newton on God’s relation to space and time: the Cartesian framework. Arch Gesch Philos 93(3):281–320Google Scholar
  9. Hegel GWF (2010) The science of logic (trans: Di Giovanni G). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Janiak A (2008) Newton as philosopher. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kochiras H (2009) Gravity and Newton’s substance counting problem. Stud Hist Phil Sci 40(3):267–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Melamed Y (2010) Acosmism or weak individuals? Hegel, Spinoza, and the reality of the finite. J Hist Philos 48(1):77–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. More H (1991) Henry More’s refutation of Spinoza (trans: Jacob A). G. Olms, HildesheimGoogle Scholar
  14. More H (1995) Enchiridion metaphysicum (trans: Jacob A). Georg Olms, HildesheimGoogle Scholar
  15. Nelson A, Smith K (2010) The divisibility of Cartesian extension. In: Garber D, Nadler S (eds) Oxford studies in early modern philosophy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  16. Newlands S (2011) More recent idealist readings of Spinoza. Philos Compass 6(2):109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Newton I (2004) Philosophical writings (trans: Janiak A). Cambridge texts in the history of philosophy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Peterman A (2018 online) Newton and Spinoza. In Schliesser E. and Smeenk C (eds). Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199930418.013.27
  19. Sánchez de León Serrano, José María, and Noa Shein (2019) “The Coincidence of the Finite and the Infinite in Spinoza and Hegel.” Idealistic Studies 49(1):23–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schliesser E (2012a) Newton and Spinoza: on motion and matter (and God, of course). South J Philos 50(3):436–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schliesser E (2012b) The Newtonian refutation of Spinoza: Newton’s challenge and the Socratic problem. In: Janiak A, Schliesser E (eds) Interpreting Newton: critical essays. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 299–319Google Scholar
  22. Schliesser E (forthcoming) Newton’s Polemics against Spinozism in The General Scholium: necessity in Clarke, Toland, and Newton. In: Ducheyne S, Mandelbrote S, Snobelen S (eds) Newton’s General ScholiumGoogle Scholar
  23. Shein N (2012) Newton’s anti-Cartesian considerations regarding space. Hist Philos Q 29(1):21–38Google Scholar
  24. Shein N (2018) The road to finite modes in Spinoza’s Ethics. In: Nachtomy O, Winegar R (eds) Infinity in early modern philosophy. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  25. Snobelen SD (1999) Isaac Newton, heretic: the strategies of a Nicodemite. Br J Hist Sci 32(4):381–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyBen-Gurion University of the NegevBeer-ShevaIsrael

Section editors and affiliations

  • Zvi Biener
    • 1
  1. 1.PhilosophyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA