312 
REMARKS ON THE SUBJECT OF THE REV. PREBENDARY 
C. A. ROW’S PAPER, 
By the Rey. Professor Challis, M.A., F.R.S., F.R.A.S. 
In bringing before the members of the Institute the following remarks 
relative to the subject of Mr. Row’s paper, namely, “ The Principles of 
Modern Pantheistic and Atheistic Philosophy as exemplified in the last 
Works of Strauss and others,” it is not my intention to criticise the views 
expressed in that paper, the general tenor of which I entirely assent to. . I 
agree also, in almost every instance, with the particular arguments which 
Mr. Row has adduced in support of his views ; as well the arguments that 
rest • on independent grounds, as those which attack the reasoning of the 
opponents on their own principles. The only reservation I have to make is, 
that I think the treatment of the subject is not as complete as it might be, 
and requires to be supplemented. In order to encounter effectually the 
philosophy of such reasoners as Strauss, Mill, Darwin, &c., it seems to me 
necessary, not only to expose the consequences of their reasonings, but also 
to inquire how their modes of thought have originated. This inquiry , as I 
hope to show, turns upon the view that is taken of the essential character of 
physical causation. I ask, therefore, as having devoted a life both to the 
advancement of physical science by mathematics, and to the study of its 
fundamental principles, to be allowed to submit for consideration the 
following arguments . 
1. It is a singular circumstance, not generally recognized, that the phi o- 
sophical systems of the above-mentioned writers have had their origin m 
the great step taken by Newton in physical science by the demonstration 
of the laws of gravitation. Newton proved that two bodies attract each 
other in proportion to their masses, and according to the law of the inverse 
square of the distance between them ; but did not prove that this attraction is 
effected by means of an intervening substance. He has, however, left on record 
that he fully believed in the existence of such intervention, and that he regarded 
as “ incompetent in philosophy ” any one who thought otherwise. Newton a 
discovery was the first instance of a step taken in a philosophy of causes, and 
gave rise to much speculation as to the quality of the force of gravity. 
Notwithstanding the expression by Newton of a contrary opinion, the occu t 
quality of gravity came to be believed, and the actio in distans , as it is called 
by German physicists, was generally accepted. Thus it was admitted as a 
philosophical dogma, that a physical operation might be such as not only not 
to be understood from sensation and experience, but even to be contradictory 
to what we so understand ; for by sensation and experience we understand 
that body acts upon body by contact and pressure. 
