182 SCIENCE AND MORALS. in 



nitz or of Newton.* To iiie the '' chiiiuvra, ])om- 

 biiians in vacuo (juia coniedit sccundus inlcn- 

 tiones " of the school men is a familiar and do- 

 mestic creature compared with such " forces." 

 Besides, by the hypothesis, the forces are not mat- 

 ter; and tlius all that is of any particular conse- 

 quence in the world turns out to he not matter 

 on the Materialist's own showing. Let it not be 

 8Up})osed that 1 am casting a doubt upon the pro- 

 priety of the ejnj)loyment of the terms "atom" 

 and "force," as they stand among the working 

 hy})othescs of physical science. As formuhe which 

 can be a])])lied, with perfect })recision and great 

 convenience, in the interpretation of naiure, their 

 value is incalculable; but, as real entities, having 

 an objective existence, an indivisihle })article which 

 nevertheless occupies space is surely inconceiv- 

 able; and with respect to the operation of that 

 atom, where it is not, by the aid of a " force " 

 resident in nothingness, I am as little able to im- 

 agine it as T fancy any one else is. 



Unless and until anybody will resolve all these 

 doubts and difBculties for me, I think I have a 

 right to hold aloof from Materialism. As to 



* Soo iljo famous Cnllcction of Paprra, publisliod by 

 Clarke in 1717. Loibnilz says: " "i'is also a siipoinatural 

 thiii^ that bodies should (ittnict one anollu'i- ai a dis- 

 iance wilbout any iiilenn«>diiHe iiicmis." And Chirko, on 

 bolialf of Newton, caps this as follows: " That one body 

 Rbonld attract another without any intcrnu'diatc wcanft 

 is, indeed, not a miraclv, but a contradiction; for 'tia 

 supposing aomething to act where it is not." 



