544 DISSERTATION ON 



CHAP. V. 



Sir Ifaacfuppofesy in his Friiicipia^ that the Firjl Mover is a Material 

 Caufe ; that therefore nothing moves but ivhut is moved — This the 0- 

 pinion qfjome antient Philojophers that are refuted by Arijlotle — Sir 

 Ifaac an excellent Mathematician and Scientijical Mechanic — but not 

 learned in the Firjl Philofophy — This appears from the Inconfijlency of 

 his Opinions concerning the Origin of Motion — Difference betiveen his 

 Philofophy on this SuLjccl in his Principia and his Queries — Even 

 in his ^teriesy his Philofophy not conjifient nvith itfelf- — Apology for 

 his Mechi^nical Philofophy — His ivhole Syflem founded upon the Ana- 

 logy bet'U'ixt the Motion of ProjeSliles here on Ear t hi and that of the 

 Celtfial Bodies — But the Conclufton too hajly^ that they are produced 

 in the fame Manner — The Rea/oning of the Newtonians, that the fame 

 Effe^ls mufl be produced by the fame Caufes, mifapplied — Sir Ifaac* s Phi^ 

 lofophy^ as it ft and s, founded upon four Hypothefes^None of thefe ne^ 

 ceffary — Therefore they ferve 7io Purpofe but to incumber his Syftem— 

 The Hutch fonian Philofophy alfo Mechanical — Prejudices in favour 

 of the Mechanical Philofophy not eafily to be furmounted—They take 

 their Rife from the Experinuntal Philofophy. 



BU T, fuppofing this doctrine, of the continuance of motion 

 by a power effential to matter, not to be fo dangerous to the re- 

 ligion of nature as I would make it appear — and fuppofing it could be 

 admitted as a probable hypothefis, which is all, I think, that a reafon- 

 able Newtonian can dtfire, what fhall we fay of a fyftem of natural 

 philofophy, in which there is no mention of any moving power, ex- 

 cept body. Sir Ifaac, indeed, in his Scholium Generale, profefles his 



belief 



