John Locke: Drafts for the "Essay Concerning Human Understanding" and Other Philosophical Writings (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 459 Force shows that Newton held doctrines which were incompatible even with the minirealist views of the latitudinarians, and that his relations with that group and with the Deists must be examined most cautiously. Force carries the story to the breakdown of the Newtonian synthesis, especially in the light of David Hume's attack on miracles, which demolished Newton's conviction that the historical creation of gravity demonstrates God's general providence, while its continuous operation shows his special providence, a miracle. In that way, Newton's miracles were not necessarily a transgression of natural law, but rather its sustained operation. After Hume, it became more difficult to accept the Newtonian synthesis, based as it was on the two types of providence , and the demonstration of fulfilled prophecy. In a final chapter, Force looks at the eleven known references in Hume to Newton and shows that despite what has sometimes been claimed, Hume was influenced by Newtonian ideas. As should already be apparent, this is a gripping book which will go a long way towards directing scholars to a deeper understanding of Newton's thought. Some of these essays have been published elsewhere, and there is naturally a good deal of repetition. Although great efforts have clearly been made, there is also some inconsistency in footnote citations. More substantially, as befitting a book which in some ways is a report on research in progress, it would have been extremely useful to have had a comprehensive introduction which summarized succinctly the state of play. Even less of a believer in prophecy than the great scientist himself can see that taking Newton's theology seriously is the wave of the future. DAVID S. KATZ Tel-Aviv University John Locke:Draftsfor the "EssayConcerning Human Understanding" and Other Philosophical Writings. Volume I: Drafts A and B. The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke. Edited by Peter H. Nidditch and G. A. J. Rogers. New York: Oxford University Press, 199o. Pp. xxvi + 299. Cloth, $92.oo. Early in 1671, when a few friends were discussing morality and religion,' John Locke found that, in his words, "it was necessary to examine our own Abilities, and see, what Objects our Understandings were, or were not fitted to deal with.TM And so began the development of what would become the Essay Concerning Human Understanding, published some twenty years later. With the publication of this first in a three-volume series to be devoted to the drafts of the Essay and associated writings, we have the results of Locke's initial efforts to work out the difficulties he had described. Volume I consists of the two drafts of 1671 The topic of the discussion was provided by James Tyrrell, one of those present. See Alexander Campbell Fraser's edition of the Essay(New York: Dover, 1959), Vol. I: 9, n. z. ' John Locke, An EssayconcerningHuman Understanding, Peter H. Nidditch, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), 7. 460 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 30:3 JULY ~99~ that have come to be known as Drafts A and B.s Peter H. Nidditch, the first General Editor of Oxford's Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke, had almost completed work on Drafts A and B at the time of his death in 1983. Volume I was completed by G. A. J. Rogers, who will edit Volumes II and IIl. Volume II is to contain Draft C, of 1685 (consisting of Books I and II), the 1688 Epitome, and other Essayrelated papers in addition to a "History of the Writing of the Essay." The third volume will include papers prepared as possible additions to the Essay, and others on related topics. When all three volumes are available and combined with the Nidditch edition of the Essay,we shall have the record of this landmark work of modern philosophy from its inception through the editions prepared in Locke's lifetime. Students of the Essay and of Locke have an extraordinary opportunity to explore the development of the work and of the mind that produced it by comparing Draft A with Draft B, and both with the published Essay. Draft A reads as the first, almost random...