Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

CLARKE, SAMUEL (1675–1729)

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V06, Page 447 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
» Make a correction to this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

See also:

CLARKE, See also:SAMUEL (1675–1729) , See also:English philosopher and divine, son of See also:Edward Clarke, an See also:alderman, who for several years was See also:parliamentary representative of the See also:city of See also:Norwich, was See also:born on the 11th of See also:October 1675, and educated at the See also:free school of Norwich and at See also:Caius See also:College, See also:Cambridge. The See also:philosophy of See also:Descartes was the reigning See also:system at the university; Clarke, however, mastered the new system of See also:Newton, and contributed greatly to its See also:extension by See also:publishing an excellent Latin version of the Traite de physique of Jacques Rohault (162o–1675) with valuable notes, which he finished before he was twenty-two years of See also:age. The system of Rohault was founded entirely upon Cartesian principles, and was previously known only through the See also:medium of a See also:rude Latin version. Clarke's See also:translation (1697) continued to be used as a See also:text-See also:book in the university till sup-planted by the See also:treatises of Newton, which it had been designed to introduce. Four See also:editions were issued, the last and best being that of 1718. It was translated into English in 1723 by his See also:brother Dr See also:John Clarke (1682–1757), See also:dean of Sarum. Clarke afterwards devoted himself to the study of Scripture in the See also:original, and of the See also:primitive See also:Christian writers. Having taken See also:holy orders, he became See also:chaplain to John See also:Moore (1646–1714), See also:bishop of Norwich, who was ever afterwards his friend and See also:patron. In 1699 he published two treatises,—one entitled Three See also:Practical Essays on See also:Baptism, See also:Confirmation and Repentance, and the other, Some Reflections on that See also:part of a book called Amyntor, or a See also:Defence of See also:Milton's See also:Life, which relates to the Writings of the Primitive Fathers, and the See also:Canon of the New Testament. In 1701 he published A See also:Paraphrase upon the See also:Gospel of St See also:Matthew, which was followed, in 1702, by the Paraphrases upon the Gospels of St See also:Mark and St See also:Luke, and soon afterwards by a third See also:volume upon St John. They were subsequently printed together in two volumes and have since passed through several editions. He intended to treat in the same manner the remaining books of the New Testament, but his See also:design was unfulfilled.

Meanwhile he had been presented by Bishop Moore to the rectory of See also:

Drayton, near Norwich. As See also:Boyle lecturer, he dealt in 1704 with the Being and Attributes of See also:God, and in 1705 with the Evidences of Natural and Revealed See also:Religion. These lectures, first printed separately, were afterwards published together under the See also:title of A Discourse concerning the Being and Attributes of God, the Obligations of Natural Religion, and the Truth and Certainty of the Christian See also:Revelation, in opposition to See also:Hobbes, See also:Spinoza, the author of the Oracles of See also:Reason, and other Deniers of Natural and Revealed Religion. In 1706 he wrote a refutation of Dr See also:Henry See also:Dodwell's views on the See also:immortality of the soul, and this See also:drew him into controversy with See also:Anthony See also:Collins. He also wrote at this See also:time a translation of Newton's See also:Optics, for which the author presented him with X5oo. In the same See also:year through the See also:influence of Bishop Moore, he obtained the rectory of St Benet's, See also:Paul's See also:Wharf, See also:London. Soon afterwards See also:Queen See also:Anne appointed him one of her chaplains in See also:ordinary, and in 1709 presented him to the rectory of St See also:James's, See also:Westminster. He then took the degree of See also:doctor in divinity, defending as his thesis the two propositions: Nullum fidei Christianae See also:dogma, in Sacris Scripturis traditum, est rectae rationi dissentaneum, and Sine actionum huma:tarum libertate nulla potest esse religio. During the same year, at the See also:request of the author, he revised See also:Whiston's English translation of the See also:Apostolical Constitutions. In 17r2 he published a carefully punctuated and annotated edition (See also:folio 1712, See also:octavo 172o) of See also:Caesar's Commentaries, with elegant engravings, dedicated to the See also:duke of See also:Marlborough. During the same year he published his celebrated See also:treatise on The Scripture See also:Doctrine of the Trinity. It is divided into three parts.

The first contains a collection and exegesis of all the texts in the New Testament See also:

relating to the doctrine of the Trinity; in the second the doctrine is set forth at large, and explained in particular and distinct propositions; and in the third the See also:principal passages in the See also:liturgy of the See also:Church of See also:England relating to the doctrine of the Trinity are considered. Whiston informs us that, some time before the publication of this book, a See also:message was sent to him from See also:Lord See also:Godolphin "that the affairs of the public were with difficulty then kept in the hands of those that were for See also:liberty; that it was therefore an unseasonable time for the publication of a book that would make a See also:great See also:noise and disturbance; and that therefore they desired him to forbear till a fitter opportunity should offer itself,"—a message that Clarke of course entirely disregarded. The ministers were right in their conjectures; and the See also:work not only provoked a great number of replies, but occasioned a formal complaint from the See also:Lower See also:House of See also:Convocation. Clarke, in reply, drew up an apologetic See also:preface, and afterwards gave several explanations, which satisfied the Upper House; and, on his pledging himself that his future conduct would occasion no trouble, the See also:matter dropped. In 1715 and 1716 he had a discussion with See also:Leibnitz relative to the principles of natural philosophy and religion, which was at length cut See also:short by the See also:death of his antagonist. A collection of the papers which passed between them was published in 1717 (cf. G. v. Leroy, See also:Die philos. Probleme in dem Briefwechsel Leibniz and Clarke, See also:Giessen, 1893). In 1719 he was presented by See also:Nicholas 1st See also:Baron Lechmere, to the mastership of Wigston's See also:hospital in See also:Leicester. In 1724 he published seventeen sermons, eleven of which had not before been printed. In 1727, on the death of See also:Sir See also:Isaac Newton, he was offered by the See also:court the See also:place of See also:master of the See also:mint, See also:worth on an See also:average from f,1200 to 15oo a year.

This See also:

secular preferment, however, he absolutely refused. In 1728 was published " A See also:Letter from Dr Clarke to See also:Benjamin See also:Hoadly, F.R.S., occasioned by the controversy relating to the Proportion of Velocity and Force in Bodies in See also:Motion," printed in the Philosophical Transactions. In 1729 he published the first twelve books of See also:Homer's Iliad. This edition, dedicated to See also:William See also:Augustus, duke of See also:Cumberland, was highly praised by Bishop Hoadly. On See also:Sunday, the rrth of May 1729, when going out to preach before the See also:judges at Serjeants' See also:Inn, he was seized with a sudden illness, which caused his death on the Saturday following (May 17, 1729). Soon after his death his brother Dr John Clarke, dean of Sarum, published, from his original See also:manuscripts, An Exposition of the Church See also:Catechism, and ten volumes of sermons. The Exposition is composed of the lectures which he read every See also:Thursday See also:morning, for some months in the year, at St James's church. In the latter part of his life he revised them with great care, and See also:left them completely prepared for the See also:press. Three years after his death appeared also the last twelve books of the Iliad, published by his son Samuel Clarke, the first three of these books and part of the See also:fourth having, as he states, been revised and annotated by his See also:father. In disposition Clarke was cheerful and even playful. An intimate friend relates that he once found him See also:swimming upon a table. At another time Clarke on looking out at the window saw a See also:grave blockhead approaching the house; upon which he cried out, " Boys, boys, be See also:wise; here comes a See also:fool." Dr See also:Warton, in his observations upon See also:Pope's See also:line, " Unthought-of frailties cheat us in the wise," says, " Who could imagine that See also:Locke was fond of romances; that Newton once studied See also:astrology; that Dr Clarke valued himself on his agility, and frequently amused himself in a private See also:room of his house in leaping over the tables and chairs ?

" Philosophy.—Clarke, though in no way an original thinker, was eminent in See also:

theology, See also:mathematics, See also:metaphysics and See also:philology, but his See also:chief strength See also:lay in his logical See also:power. The See also:materialism of Hobbes, the See also:pantheism of Spinoza, the See also:empiricism of Locke, the See also:determinism of Leibnitz, Collins' necessitarianism, Dodwell's denial of the natural immortality of the soul, rationalistic attacks on See also:Christianity, and the morality of the sensationalists—all these he opposed with a thorough conviction of the truth of the principles which he advocated. His fame as theologian and philosopher rests to a large extent on his demonstration of the existence of God and his theory of the See also:foundation of rectitude. The former is not a purely a priori See also:argument, nor is it presented as such by its author. It starts from a fact and it often explicitly appeals to facts. The intelligence, for example, of the self-existence and original cause of all things is, he says, " not easily proved a priori," but " demonstrably proved a posteriori from the variety and degrees of perfection in things, and the See also:order of causes and effects, from the intelligence that created beings are confessedly endowed with, and from the beauty, order, and final purpose of things." The propositions maintained in the argument are—" (r) That something has existed from eternity; (2) that there has existed from eternity some one immutable and See also:independent being; (3) that that immutable and independent being, which has existed from eternity, without any See also:external cause of its existence, must be self-existent, that is, necessarily existing; (4) what the substance or essence of that being is, which is self-existent or necessarily existing, we have no See also:idea, neither is it at all possible for us to comprehend it; (5) that though the substance or essence of the self-existent being is itself absolutely incomprehensible to us, yet many of the essential attributes of his nature are strictly demonstrable as well as his existence, and, in the first place, that he must be of See also:necessity eternal; (6) that the self-existent being must of necessity be See also:infinite and omnipresent; (7) must be but one; (8) must be an intelligent being; (9) must be not a necessary See also:agent, but a being endued with liberty and choice; (so) must of necessity have infinite power; (u) must be infinitely wise, and (12) must of necessity be a being of infinite goodness, See also:justice, and truth, and all other moral perfections, such as become the supreme See also:governor and See also:judge of the See also:world." In order to establish his See also:sixth proposition, Clarke contends that time and space, eternity and immensity, are not substances, but attributes—the attributes of a self-existent being. See also:Edmund See also:Law, Dugald See also:Stewart, Lord See also:Brougham, and many other writers, have, in consequence, represented Clarke as arguing from the existence of time and space to the existence of Deity. This is a serious See also:mistake. The existence of an immutable, independent, and necessary being is supposed to be proved before any reference is made to the nature of time and space. Clarke has been generally supposed to have derived the See also:opinion that time and space are attributes of an infinite immaterial and spiritual being from the Scholium Generale, first published in the second edition of Newton's Principia (1714). The truth is that his work on the Being and Attributes of God appeared nine years before that Scholium. The view propounded by Clarke may have been derived from the See also:Midrash, the See also:Kabbalah, See also:Philo, Henry More, or See also:Cudworth, but not from Newton.

It is a view difficult to prove, and probably few will acknowledge that Clarke has conclusively proved it. His ethical theory of " fitness " (see ETHres) is formulated on the See also:

analogy of mathematics. He held that in relation to the will things possess an See also:objective fitness similar to the mutual consistency of things in the See also:physical universe. This fitness God has given to actions, as he has given See also:laws to Nature; and the fitness is as immutable as the laws. The theory has been unfairly criticized by See also:Jouffroy, Amedee Jacques, Sir James See also:Mackintosh, See also:Thomas See also:Brown and others. It is said, for example, that Clarke made virtue consist in conformity to the relations of things universally, although the whole See also:tenor of his argument shows him to have had in view conformity to such relations only as belong to the See also:sphere of moral agency. It is true that he might have emphasized the relation of moral fitness to the will, and in this respect J. F. See also:Herbart (q.v.) improved on Clarke's statement of the See also:case. To say, however, that Clarke simply confused mathematics and morals by justifying the moral criterion on a mathematical basis is a mistake. He compared the two subjects for the See also:sake of the analogy. Though Clarke can thus be defended against this and similar See also:criticism, his work as a whole can be regarded only as an See also:attempt to See also:present the doctrines of the Cartesian school in a See also:form which would not See also:shock the See also:conscience of his time.

His work contained a measure of See also:

rationalism sufficient to arouse the suspicion of orthodox theologians, without making any valuable addition to, or modification of, the underlying doctrine.

End of Article: CLARKE, SAMUEL (1675–1729)

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.

Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.

[back]
CLARKE, MARY ANNE (c.1776–1852) 		[next]
CLARKE, SIR ANDREW (1824-1902)

Site © 2006 - Net Industries