Ralph Cudworth was a Cambridge Platonist. The Cambridge Platonists were a significant group of philosophical thinkers in the 17th century. Naturally they were interested in the works of thinkers like Plato himself and his followers like Plotinus. The Cambridge Platonists dedicated themselves to reconciling Platonic Ideas with those of Christianity. The emanationionist ideas that platonic thought is founded upon are crucial to the ideas of thinkers like Cudworth.
Platonic Friends.
Within the circle of the Cambridge Platonists, Cudworth had a colleague and even a friend, Henry More. Cudworth, like many thinkers in his circle, was a staunch defender of the existence of God and More is no different in that regard. The Cambridge Platonists were strongly aware of Descartes’ conceptions of God and his influence upon the material world. Cudworth seemingly exhibited Cartesian thought in his writings, specifically those of dualism and the distinctions between spirit and matter. More in turn is known for his direct correspondence with Descartes.
More’s Ideology.
It is important to note that the driving force behind More’s philosophical ideologies was actually an incongruity he found within Cartesian thought. While he agreed with Descartes on the notion that matter can act upon matter after being acted upon, he disagreed that matter can act upon itself. That is in Descartes’ thought, the motion of the material world is determined by the initial ‘push’ by God and this motion is allegedly maintained by him. This maintained motion, More notices, is described mostly in terms of material objects acting upon each other, thus the secondary cause seems to be a material one.
This poses a risk to the dualistic theory of spirit and matter since if the world operates by consequences of secondary causes, by the above thinking, it operates entirely on a material basis, God is simply out of the equation. Here More begins to conceptualise a secondary cause that is a direct consequence of God. A force acting on material objects that is not material itself, a force that he calls Spirit of Nature.
More Platonism.
Once again a digression is in order. A connection back to Plato needs to be made. Plato conceived the notion of an Anima Mundi, the world soul, a guiding force that connects all phenomena together with guiding principles according to which they all play out. This world soul is a component of a living organic cosmos created by a Demiurge, the Grand Artificer, the Supreme Mover or more commonly God. Similar to souls of existing bodies, the world soul is not divisible. It is evident that More draws on this concept of a world soul to develop his idea of the Spirit of Nature.
It is no coincidence that Cudworth himself also drew from the same concept. Cudworth conceived of Plastic Nature, a force that acts separate from the end goal, yet as a direct immaterial emanation from God. Here an analogy frequently used can be helpful in thinking of these ideas. There exists a sun, a huge orb of scalding light, yet the sun acts upon the material world through rays of light that carry its essence of enormous heat yet diminished. These rays cannot be cut or separated, their essence total remains the same. Thus similarly to these rays, the World Soul, Plastic nature and the Spirit of Nature act upon the material things.
Demonstrated above is another significant idea behind Platonic thought. Although not attributed to Plato himself but a student of his, Plotinus. Plotinus posited an idea that can be seen as an alternative to the christian creation ex nihilo (from nothing) argument. To Plotinus, all that exists, exists as a consequence of emanation which in no way diminishes or changes the identity of what it emanates from. As a reflection in the mirror depends on the existence of objects to be reflected, the thing being reflected does not change as a result of reflection. Thus as there exists an unchanging Demiurge, there must exist its reflections in the material world, but in a certain hierarchy.
Cudworth and More
Now the parallel between Cudworth’s Plastic Nature and More’s Spirit of Nature is evident. Similarly to Cudworth, More insisted that the Spirit of Nature operated without intention, it simply did, with no reason or perception of any reasons above. The difference in these two is subtle and is revealed in how the authors arrived at the thought. While Cudworth chose to lead his attack against certain forms of mechanical atheism with his theory of Plastic Nature, More wanted to reconsider the dangers of Descartes theory of secondary causes and the potential consequences of them as manifest in a purely mechanical account of how the world functions. In other words Cudworth argued against theism with his theory while More worked to prevent the possibility of such atheism even arising.
Consequently, More seems to deliver a more true form of Platonic Reasoning in his theory of the Spirit of Nature. Specifically he appeals largely to the idea of emmanation as seen in the works of Plotinus as an explanation of how his Spirit of Nature came to be. It comes with no surprise then that More came up with such an idea before Cudworth conceived of Plastic Nature. Presumably, More assisted Cudworth in developing his idea as related to Platonic thought.
Final Remark on Rationalism.
The Cambridge Platonists however seemed to suffer similar pitfalls, within their ideas which in spirit tried to emphasise the necessity of God’s existence, religious scholars frequently found signs and hints of atheism in disguise. Whether this was based in interpretation is a different question entirely yet if one was to wager a guess these suspicions of atheism arise when one considers existences of immaterial and sublime phenomena through a rationalistic lens, a curse many rationalist theologians struggled with, thanks to Descartes.