Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Duke University Press and Philosophical Review are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Philosophical Review.
http://www.jstor.org
NEWTON AND LEIBNIZ
HE controversybetweenNewton and Leibniz is one of the
most important phenomenain the historyof modernthought.
If we follow this controversystep by step,if we studythe cor-
respondencebetweenLeibniz and Clarke,who acted as spokesman
for Newton,we are immediatelyaware that much more was at
stake than the particular physical and metaphysicalquestions
which are explicitlytreatedby the two adversaries.Newton and
Leibniz disagreednot merelyas to the solutionof thesequestions.
They not only had different views on the nature and properties
of God, on the structureof the materialuniverse,the conceptsof
space and time,and the possibilityof an "action at a distance".
However importantall these questions may be, they have here
only a mediate and subordinatesignificance.They are over-
shadowed by anotherproblemwhichwas of vital interestfor the
futuredevelopmentof scientific and philosophicthought.Modern
thoughthad reacheda partingof the ways whereit had to choose
between two alternatives.In the dispute between Newton and
Leibniz thesealternativeswere clearlyindicated.The two oppos-
ing theses were representedand defendedby two powerfuland
originalthinkerswho stoodwithouta rivalin contemporary science
or philosophy.1 This is not, therefore,a mere scholasticdisputa-
tion.For behindthe catchwordsof the two schoolsof thoughtwe
feeltheclash and trialof strength of two greatintellectualforces.
Nor is thissimplya controversy betweenindividualthinkers;it is
rathera collisionbetweentwo fundamental philosophicalmethods.
And it is thisfeatureof the disputewhichmakes it importantand
interesting even for the present-dayreader.
Perusal of the various papers which passed betweenLeibniz
and Clarke in the years I715 and 17162 does not sufficefor an
understanding of the fullmeaningand purportof thispolemic.At
firstsuch a perusal is very disappointing.Both sides repeat the
1 The fullauthenticityof the Clarkepapersis provedby the factthatthe
outlinesof Clarke's replieshave been foundamongNewton'smanuscripts.
2 In the followingI referto the EnglisheditionpublishedafterLeibniz'
death: A Collectionof Papers whichPassed Betweenthe Late Learned
Mr. Leibniz and Dr. Clarke in the Years 17-5 and T716. Relatinq to the
Principlesof Natural Philosophyand Religion.By Samuel Clarke,Lon-
don I717.
366
GALILEO AND THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION 367
MemoirsI 319.
57Brewster,
"Manchester Guardian,March i9, 1927.