Margaret Cavendish · 1666 (2nd ed. 1668); file is a 15-page bilingual éditions Clinamen extract · PDF · Calibre ID 349
Resurfaced in The Flea Under Glass (2026-09-29).
Role in the triad
The philosopher’s refusal: the glass deludes; natural eye plus regular reason.
Why this book
‘Of Telescopes’ argues the case the other two dramatize: sight works only within ‘a certain proportion of distance betwixt the Eye and the Object’, past which a glass gives pictures, not natures. The flight section adds the shared frame: ‘Art cannot give new motions to natural parts’. Note: the file is only a 15-page extract (four sections), not the Cambridge edition the record describes.
Quotations
Verified against the book’s own text on the day of the reading.
- “how these actions are performed inwardly, no Microscope is able to give us a true information thereof.” (Of the Celestial Parts, p. 6)
- “put the case, the Moon, or any other of the Planets, were inhabited by animal Creatures, which could see as much of this terrestrial Globe, as we see of the Moon” (p. 5)
- “Man is apt to run into extreams, and spoils Nature with doting too much upon Art.” (Of flying, p. 4)
- “whether it be onely a delusion of the glasses, I will not dispute” (Of Telescopes, p. 8)
- “I chose rather to follow the guidance of regular Reason, then of deluding Art.” (Of Telescopes, p. 8)
- Excerpt: ‘Of Telescopes’, opening, p. 8
Themes
art vs nature · experimental philosophy · microscope · natural eye · proportion of distance · Royal Society · self-moving matter · telescope