[October 2000 journal entry]
In addition to contributing to the demonstration of certain ‘laws of nature’, Newton also addressed the implications for acknowledging such ‘laws’ when he proposed that natural (i.e., ‘from below’) explanations for events/experiences should first be considered and, if adequate, adopted without appeal to supernatural interpretations. This method reverses pre-modern/pre-scientific ‘religious’ methods. Not surprisingly, Newton struggled with the theological orthodoxy of his day (e.g., the ‘Trinity’ doctrine) and faced charges of heresy. In Newton’s time (late 17th century) and for some time thereafter, insight into ‘laws of nature’ did not yet account for many or most events/experiences. A ‘from below’ method for interpreting events/experiences did not for some time filter into public/common reasoning sufficiently for the pre-modern/pre-scientific paradigm to be seriously challenged or to give way.
In addition to contributing to the demonstration of certain ‘laws of nature’, Newton also addressed the implications for acknowledging such ‘laws’ when he proposed that natural (i.e., ‘from below’) explanations for events/experiences should first be considered and, if adequate, adopted without appeal to supernatural interpretations. This method reverses pre-modern/pre-scientific ‘religious’ methods. Not surprisingly, Newton struggled with the theological orthodoxy of his day (e.g., the ‘Trinity’ doctrine) and faced charges of heresy. In Newton’s time (late 17th century) and for some time thereafter, insight into ‘laws of nature’ did not yet account for many or most events/experiences. A ‘from below’ method for interpreting events/experiences did not for some time filter into public/common reasoning sufficiently for the pre-modern/pre-scientific paradigm to be seriously challenged or to give way.
