John Locke’s Natural Philosophy (1632-1671) Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Jonathan Craig Walmsley King’s College London, 1998 (Reformatted 2008) 1 Abstract The thesis concentrates upon John Locke’s early development in the field of natural philosophy. This can be divided up into several distinct stages. Locke’s first serious engagement with natural philosophy was in 1658 to 1664 when he embarked upon an extensive programme of medical reading. In this period he became acquainted with many notable figures, including Robert Boyle. Boyle introduced Locke to the mechanical philosophy and the work of Descartes. From 1664 to 1667 Locke became interested in formulating his own views on medical topics, writing short essays on disease and respiration, in addition to his continued study of medical texts. Through a very detailed analysis of these early medical writings it is shown that Locke was not committed to the mechanical philosophy at this point. In 1667, Locke moved to London and met Thomas Sydenham. This encounter had a huge impact on Locke’s thinking. Locke collaborated with Sydenham and came to share his mentor’s methodological precepts. There is manuscript evidence of this collaboration, which is carefully examined. As a consequence of their working together, Locke eschewed all theorising about aetiology and chose instead to rely upon clinical experience. Locke and Sydenham worked in concert until at least 1671. In 1671 Locke began work on the Essay. In the earliest Draft we can see that Locke was still under the influence of Sydenham, and repeated their shared assumptions. He was not a committed mechanist. Rather, he was agnostic on the question of how nature operates at the unobservable level. In the second Draft of the Essay, however, Locke provided his own variations on Sydenham’s themes. It was at this point that Locke became a mechanical philosopher. 2 Table of Contents Notes on Sources 7 Introduction 12 Early Medical Thought Locke’s Medical Training 18 Respirationis Usus 44 Morbus 67 Locke and Sydenham Methodus Curandi Febres 78 Anatomia 89 De Arte Medica 100 Medical Observations 105 The Natural Philosophy of Draft A The Text 112 The Influence of Sydenham 114 Science 121 Qualities 126 Relations with Descartes 132 Rival Theories 135 The Natural Philosophy of Draft B The Text 142 Experience 144 Causation 154 Scholastic Method 156 The Rejection of Hylemorphism 159 The Acceptance of Mechanism 164 Relations with Descartes 169 The “primary Ideas” of Body 172 Science 183 An Elucidation 188 3 Conclusion 1632-1671 196 1672-1704 200 Appendix I Key to transcriptions 208 Respirationis Usus 209 Morbus 217 Anatomia 221 De Arte Medica 232 Appendix II Locke’s Notebook ‘Adversaria 4’ 241 Bibliography Manuscript Sources 248 Primary Sources 249 Secondary Sources 252 Subsequent Publication 255 4 for Mum and Dad, of course 5 Acknowledgements I would firstly like to thank the British Academy for their generous support in the writing of this thesis. Without their help none of this work could have been undertaken. I would also like to thank my supervisor John Milton, without whose help, encouragement and encyclopaedic knowledge of all things Lockean, I would surely have failed to properly understand this complex subject. Thanks are also due to John Worrall and Nancy Cartwright for their unfailing encouragement and support. I want to thank Paul Schuurman for his generously given time, advice, help and support – “Nihil nisi bene”. Jack Ritchie too, deserves many thanks for all his help in the correction of the manuscript. I am unendingly grateful to Paul Asherson for putting me up and putting up with me. I want to thank Donna Ramnath …. well, for being Donna Ramnath. Finally, I want to thank Sarah Young for being my friend. 6 Notes on Sources All of the references in this thesis are included in the measure of the text. To save on space, the titles of a number of books have been abbreviated to their initials. An explanatory list is included below, just in case there are any difficulties: BW: The Works of the Honourable Robert Boyle Robert Boyle (ed. T. Birch) (London 1772) CHLMP: The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy N. Kretzmann A. Kenny and J. Pinborg (eds.) (Cambridge 1982) CJL: The Correspondence of John Locke John Locke (ed. E.S. de Beer) (Oxford 1978-88) CSM: The Philosophical Writings of Descartes Rene Descartes (ed. J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff and D. Murdoch) (Cambridge 1984-91) CTMPT: The Cambridge Translations of Medieval Philosophical Texts Volume I: Logic and the Philosophy of Language N. Kretzmann, and E. Stump (eds.) (Cambridge 1988) ELN: Essays on the law of nature John Locke (ed. W. von Leyden) (Oxford 1954) H&L: The Library of John Locke John Harrison and Peter Laslett (Oxford 1971) HOP: Harvey and the Oxford Physiologists Robert G. Frank (Berkeley 1980) HW: The English Works of Thomas Hobbes Thomas Hobbes (ed. W. Molesworth) (London 1839-45) IM: Insitutionum Medicinae The Institutions or Fundamentals of the whole Art, both of Physick and Chirurgery, divided into five books Daniel Sennert (London 1656) JLMN: “John Locke’s Medical Notebooks” John Milton in The Locke Newsletter 28 (1997) pp.135-156 JLPP: John Locke: Physician and Philosopher Kenneth Dewhurst (London 1963) LA: “Locke’s Adversaria” John Milton in The Locke Newsletter 18 (1987) pp.63- 74 LAO: “Locke at Oxford” John Milton in Locke’s Philosophy: Content and Context G.A.J. Rogers (ed.) (Oxford 1994) pp.29-47 MCF: Methodus curandi febres, propriis observationibus superstructura Thomas Sydenham (ed. G.G. Meynell) (Folkestone 1987) 7 NEPM: New Experiments Physico-Mechanicall, touching the Spring of the Air, and its effects Robert Boyle (Oxford 1660) OFQ: The Origine of Formes and Qualities, according to the Corpuscular Philosophy Robert Boyle (Oxford 1666) OM: Ortus medicinae J.B. van Helmont (Amsterdam 1652) OPR: Oriatrike, or Physick Refined J.B. van Helmont (London 1662) TLN: The Locke Newsletter ed. Roland Hall 1- (York 1970-) TPP: The Practice of Physick Lazar Riverius (London 1665) TSC: The Sceptical Chymist Robert Boyle (London 1661) TT: Two Treatises of Government John Locke (ed. P. Laslett) (Cambridge 1988) UEP: Some Considerations touching the Usefulnesse of Experimental Naturall Philosophy Robert Boyle (Oxford 1663) References will give both book-title and page number (All the relevant editions are listed in the bibliography). In cases where an edition has multiple volumes, the relevant volume will be indicted by a Roman numeral between the book title and page number, thus (CSM I p.1). References to the main text of the Essay will be in standard form, thus (I.i.1). References to other parts of this book will give the title and page number of the 1975 Nidditch critical edition, thus (Essay p.1). References to the first two Drafts of the Essay will contain the name of the Draft, Section number and page number of the 1990 Nidditch and Rogers critical edition, thus (Draft A, §1, p.1) (Draft B, §1, p.101). Draft C has the same general structure as the completed Essay, so the same form of referencing will be used, but always prefixed by a reference to this Draft, thus (Draft C, I.i.1). References to the Two Treatises of Government will give Book, Chapter and Section number, thus (TT I.i.1). References to Locke’s Correspondence will indicate the letter number only, thus (CJL 1). References to individual items in Locke’s personal library will cite the Harrison and Laslett Catalogue and the book number only, thus (H&L 1). Reference is made to Manuscript sources. Once more, abbreviations are required for brevity’s sake: BL: Bodleian Library BM: British Library 8 MS: Manuscript PRO: Public Record Office RCP: Royal College of Physicians The body of the thesis contains a number of transcriptions of Locke MSS. For the most part these will only reflect a corrected final version of Locke’s text. However occasion will arise when an MS will be transcribed so as to include all of Locke’s corrections and alterations. In these cases the transcriptions will follow the rules set out below: italics = Interlineal/Marginal insertion in the text [word] = Deletion from text [...] = Indecipherable deletion 〈word〉 = Editorial insertion {...} = Unreadable word or part of word w[ei]ord = “ei” was written first, but was overwritten by “o” [this [silly] word] = “silly” was deleted individually before the rest of the text was deleted Locke’s marginal headings are indicated by an italicised first word or phrase in the measure. Locke’s round brackets (…) and his underlining are his own. Locke’s emphatic writing style is rendered as bold, thus word. Thanks to his system of common-placing, Locke’s entries often start on one page, but end several pages later. In these cases an ampersand “&” will be used to indicate that the entry which appears on these separate pages is linked in Locke’s system. So, an entry that begins on the verso of folio one and ends on the verso of folio eight, will be recorded thus: (BM Add MS 32554 ff.1v&8v). References made to Locke’s MSS that begin on one page and end several pages later, but include all the intervening pages, will be recorded with a dash, thus: (BL MS Locke d.9 pp.329-389). Many of the notes from Locke’s earliest reading and writing are in Latin. In the case of short notes, these will be given in the original language, with a translation in the footnotes. However, in the case of longer, or more important points, a translation will be given in the body of the text, and the Latin original will appear in the footnotes.