214 LIMITS AND FLUXIONS 



by some magic Art, without any Fluxion ? I believe 

 not. . . . For my Part, l know of no Body that 

 ever saìd, that the Parts of the Fluent that went 

 before were generated by the Fluxion that is to come 

 after, but every Part by its proper Fluxion. ..." 

 To Turner's reply to the second criticism, ''X 

 Primus " makes rejoinder : 



'* If there be no Magnitude by which the flowing 

 Ouantity is really increased, such a Magnitude is not 

 real, but an imaginary Thing only . . . But John 

 thinks, that every Thing that exists in his Imagina- 

 tion, really exists in Nature . . . Sir Isaac Newton 

 defines PTuxions by the Velocities of the Motions. 

 But Mr. Simpson declares against this, and likewise 

 tells US, that by taking Fluxions for mere Velocities, 

 the Imagination is confin'd, as it were, to a Point. 

 How /lis Imagination is confin'd I don't know ; but 

 Sir Isaac Newton chused to define it thus, as very 

 well knowing, that this is the only soà'd Foundation 

 upon which it could be defended against ali the 

 impertinent Cavils of ignorant or weak Pretenders. " 

 The parting shot by " X Primus" is — your Great 

 Master will not ^'think you a fit Champion to 

 engagé in his Cause for the future ; so, good Night, 

 John." 



i88. The reply made by '* Y Secundus " is to the 

 effect that the defender of Simpson is ''equally in 

 the Dark" with Simpson himself, ''otherwise he 

 would not have gone about to defend so defenceless 

 a Cause, as to vindicate an Absurdity, by repre- 

 senting a Pluxion to be of the same Kind with the 



