A Short History of Freethought Ancient and Modern, Volume 2 of 2: Third edition, Revised and Expanded, in two volumesRobertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Religion
A Short History of Freethought Ancient and Modern, Volume 2 of 2: Third edition, Revised and Expanded, in two volumes
Robertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Free thought -- History
See the Inquiry concerning Virtue or Merit, pt. iii, § 2; and the
Letters to a Student, under date June 3, 1709 (p. 403 in Rand's
Life, Letters, etc., of Shaftesbury, 1900). The extraordinary
letter of Newton to Locke, written just after or during a spell
of insanity, first apologizes for having believed that Locke
"endeavoured to embroil me with women and by other means,"
and goes on to beg pardon "for representing that you struck at
the root of morality, in a principle you laid down in your book
of ideas." In his subsequent letter, replying to that of Locke
granting forgiveness and gently asking for details, he writes:
"What I said of your book I remember not." (Letters of September
16 and October 5, 1693, given in Fox Bourne's Life of Locke, ii,
226-27, and Sir D. Brewster's Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton, 1855,
ii, 148-51.) Newton, who had been on very friendly terms with
Locke, must have been repeating, when his mind was disordered,
criticisms otherwise current. After printing in full the letters
above cited, Brewster insists, on his principle of sacrificing
all other considerations to Newton's glory (cp. De Morgan, Newton:
his Friend: and his Niece, 1885, pp. 99-111), that all the while
Newton was "in the full possession of his mental powers." The
whole diction of the first letter tells the contrary. If we are
not to suppose that Newton had been temporarily insane, we must
think of his judgment as even less rational, apart from physics,
than it is seen to be in his dissertations on prophecy. Certainly
Newton was at all times apt to be suspicious of his friends to
the point of moral disease (see his attack on Montague, in his
letter to Locke of January 26, 1691-1692; in Fox Bourne, ii,
218; and cp. De Morgan, as cited, p. 146); but the letter to
Locke indicates a point at which the normal malady had upset the
mental balance. It remains, nevertheless, part of the evidence
as to bitter orthodox criticism of Locke.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account