Note 15 — LA METTRIE’S RELATION TO HIS PREDECESSORS AND TO HIS SUCCESSORS.

The point most emphasized in Toland’s teaching15 is that motion is an attribute of matter. He argues for this belief on the ground that matter must be essentially active in order to undergo change,16 and that the conception of the inertness of matter is based on the conception of absolute rest, and that this absolute rest is nowhere to be found.17 Since motion is essential to matter, there is no need, Toland believes, to account for the beginning of motion. Those who have regarded matter as inert have had to find some efficient cause for motion, and to do this, they have held that all nature is animated. But this pretended animation is utterly useless, since matter is itself endowed with motion.18 The likeness to La Mettrie is evident. La Mettrie likewise opposes the doctrine of the animation of matter, and the belief in any external cause of motion.19 Yet he feels the need of postulating some beginning of motion,20 and although he uses the conception so freely, he does not agree with Toland that the nature of motion is known. He believes that it is impossible to know the nature of motion,21 while Toland believes that the nature of motion is self-evident.22