Chap.m. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 29 



metry, he underftood the fcicnces themfelves and the pradice of 

 them, and has treated of both very accurately. In like man- 

 ner, Sir Ifaac Newton has treated of the motions of the Ce- 

 leftial Bodies, and has explained, moft accurately, by what laws and 

 rules thefe motions are conducted. But he did not underftand the 

 philofophy of Motion : For he could not define it as Ariftotle has 

 done * ; nor did he know that it is a moft wonderful being, (if it 

 can be called a being), having no fixed or permanent exiftencc, nor 

 continuing the fame for two moments together, but exifting only in 

 conftant change and fucceffion. But what is worfe, he did not know 

 what is the caufe of it and produces it, whether mind or body. Now, 

 to know this, is an important point of philofophy, and of the high- 

 eft philofophy, that is theology: For, unlefs we know that mind is ul- 

 timately the caufe of all motion in the univerfe, and that all bodies 

 are moved by mind mediately or immediately, we cannot believe 

 that God is the author of this univerfe, the whole bufinefs of which 

 is carried on by motion ; every body being moved one way or ano- 

 ther, not immediately by the fupreme mind, which it would be im- 

 pious to fuppofe incorporated with body, (in which way only mind 

 can move body,) but by particular minds of number infinite, 

 all proceeding from him, and moving, one way or another, every 

 body in the univerfe ; and as all their motions are directed by 

 fupreme intelligence, or by the miniftcrs of that intelligence, 

 the bufinefs of nature is carried on in the moft regulat and order- 

 ly manner, and fo as to make a moft wonderful fyftem of the whole. 

 But Sir Ifaac, not being a philofopher, did not conceive how mind 

 could move body, nor how body could be at all moved otherwifc 

 than in the way we perceive by our fenfes, that is by the impulfc of 

 other bodies. 



As 



* See vol. I. of this work, p. 13 & 14, 



