71-86

A Difference berween Newton and Democritus : The God, Creator of the "Particles" and provider of their Mobility

• Δελλής, Ιωάννης Γ.

This paper is divided into four parts: In the first part, on one hand we make a research on the revival of the atomic theory between 1600 and 1650, confirming at the same time its two aspects, the theistic and the atheistic one, while on the other hand, we look upon to what extension was Newton aware of the ancient atomism through the ancient texts, in greek and latin, and especially through the "Vitae" of Diogenes Laertius, as well as Lucretius' Poem. We also prove that the revival of the atomic theory, during that period of time, has been deeply, influenced by the existance of essays by writers who did know the original sources, that is to say the ancient texts. R. Burton in his essay: "The anatomy of melancholy" (1621), exposes clearly Epicurus' and Lucretius' views, and he considers them as atheists. No less has Nicholas Hill's essay "Philosophia Epicurea" helped in the spreading of the theory of atomism. The former, supports a materialistic atomism and foundates with his ideas the corpuscular natural philosophy. At the same time, Jean Magnen's "Democritus sive de atomis", (Pavia 1646), is found widely known by the members of the Royal Society. This work is followed by W. Charleton's important essay "Epicuro-Gassendi-Charletiana" (1654). W. Charleton seems to be deeply influenced by P. Gassendi's theories, as his basic view is that the particles are divine creations and their motion is an expression of His desire. Newton's friend, R. Boyle, accepts W. Charleton's theistic atomism. In the second part, we search the sources from which Newton has derived the elements, used in the formulation of his theory. We believe that: a) Newton did know the works of all the searchers, to whom we have so far refered, as well as the tradition beginning from Descartes. However, the fact that arises from the notebook "Certain Philosophical Questions "is that what he knew really well was W. Charleton's "Physiologia". b) He was also influenced by both his friend's R. Boyle's views and by those ones of his teacher, Isaac Barrow. c) He had Diogenes Laertius' view in mind. In the third part of the paper, based on some reports on "Principia" and "Optics", we come up to the conclusion that Newton was aware of Democritus' theories. Nextly, we both analyze Newton's belief on God having created the particles and provided them with the motion, and, helped by the texts, we prove Democritus' opposite view. The last one does't explain the problem of the creation of the particles and their motion. So, we conclude that Newton believes in some kind of theistic atomism. In the fourth and last part, we focus our efforts on finding out what pushed Newton into believing that God is the creator of the atoms, being at the same time the one who turned them into motion. On this problem, we are to express the two following aspects: Firstly, Newton believes in theistic atomism, just in order not to oppose himself against the theological aspect which considers atomism as an atheistic theory. Secondly, this particular theory of his, is not the result of a compromise, on the contrary the result of a deep religious faith. We accept that Newton introduces a creator God and instructor of the atoms in his theory, because he, himself believes in God. This last sentence is confirmed by the fact that the context of works is mostly theological.

• Languages and Literature

• Classical philology