k^/i* -.>'*■
mMi.
)utherni
HIDING
Milton,
Pctcrhorongh.
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
A N T I E N T
METAPHYSICS:
OR, THE
SCIENCE OF UNIVERSALS,
CONTAINING
A FURTHER EXAMINATION OF THE PRINCIPLES
OF SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S ASTRONOMY*
VOLUME SECOND.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR T.CADELL, IN THE STRAND;_AND J. BALFOUR AND CO. EDINBURGH^
M,DCC,LXXXII.
///
V /^
O N T E N T S.
BOOK I.
/^F the Diftindtion betwixt Mind and Body, and of the Properties
of each.
CHAP. I.
The Foundation of all Philofophy, that there are two Subftances in the Univerfe
Three Opinions upon this Subjcd — The Patrons of two of thefe— The laft revived
of late by Dr. Prieflley—Th^ Confequence cf this Opinion — The Philofophy of Me-
taphyfics not to be invented by any one Man— only to b« learned from anticnr
Books. Page ,
CHAP. IT.
ilf/Wand Body are each of them SubJJances- hW TW[n^^^ Subjlatices or Acidents—Sub-
Jlancn known to us only by their Operations— Definition given of £*^_)/ and of ^/W—
Advantages of thofe Definitions — Alind does not always move, nor is Body always
moved—hut the Definition is from the Power — Difficulty of defining iW/W acknow-
ledged by the Antients. p_ g
CHAP. III.
Properties of Body refulting from its Definition— ift, Having Parts, and being divifible
—2d, Occupying Space, or Extenfion — Extenfion not being the EfTence of Matter
fuppofes Matter not extended— 3d, Refifieme another Property of Body—i^\.\i, Impe-
netrability— 5th, Solidity— 6th, Continuity— Dr. Prieftley's Notions concerning Body
refuted — Laftly, Bodies ad upon one another by their Surfaces. p. 12
CHAP. IV,
Ol Mind, and its Qualities— yI//W only aaive—Bidy paffive— The Nature of ^J7/;«
and Paffwn-Of the Fis Inertia of Body— Of Jition and Reaction— Body does not pro-
perly move— Ths Cohefwn of Body produced by Mind— Mind not extended, figured, or
divifible, according to Dr. Clarh's Nouon—AIind, neverthelefs, exifts in Space, but
not as Body does — Infinite Space no Attribute of the Deity, p j g
A 2 G H A P
r«/i s;.^*:^
CONTENTS.
CHAP. V.
or space — Spaa a third thing in Nature befides Body and Mind, according to fome Phi-
lofophcrs — According to Epicurus, Space and Body the only two things in Nature —
Strange Confcquences from the Notion of Space being a thing exifting by itfelf—
Space maintained by the modern Theifts not to be a Subftance, but a Quality of Di-
vinity— Strange Confequenccs of this Notion — If it be true, intirely a modern Dif-
covery — If Space be any thing, it muft be either Subjlance or Accident — not Suhjiance
not Accident — not mere Capacity — which is nothing — Space fuch a Principle of Na-
ture as AriJlotWs Privation — Space has no Properties — Not extended therefore, nor,
properly fpeaking, meafured— Duration, Time, Eternity, no Properties of things,
though neceflary for their Exiftence. Page 25
CHAP. VI.
Proved that Body cannot move itfcif— Objeflions anfwcred from the Intelleftual Mind,
which can reflect upon itfelf — Two Authorities quoted for this Opinion ; one from
yirijiotle, and one from 77;^»///?;«i— If Matter moves itfelf, there muft be Intelligence
in Matter, as well as Self-Motion — If the Mover and moved be different, there cannot
be an infinite Series o( Movers, of Caufes, and EfFeiSls — Still lefs, if the Movement
be circular— If Body cannot aft, it cannot think — To think, therefore, contrary to
its Nature — Deficiency of Dr. C/ar^^'s Argument againft Matter moving itfelf, fup-
plied— Dr. Pric/r/ey's Notion of Matter ftill more extraordinary than the Notion of
thofe who fay that it moves itfelf — Of the Hypothefis of Body moving Body by other
Bodies interpofed — If Body is moved by a vis infita, it muft be intelligent — Body and
Mind petfe&\y difcriminated by the Definition given of them. p. 34
CHAP. VII.
Of the Immateriality of Mind — Difficulty to conceive an immaterial Subftance — This
to be done by the Method oi Abjlraiiion, as we conceive a Point, Line, Sic. ~ Power,
Energy, Activity, eflentlal Qualities of Alind — That Power beft feen in Motion —
therefore Mind defined by the Poiucr of moving — Confcquences of Mind being an im-
material Sub/lance— hz% no Parts — is indivifible, and immoveable — Another Confe-
quence is, that AIi?id moves Body in a Manner quite diftl-rent from that in which
Body moves Body — It moves unorganized Bodies in the fame Manner as it moves Ani-
mals and Plants — The Deity cannot be fuppofed to move Body in that Way — Reafon-
ing from Analogy on that Subjefl: Mind moves Body in a Manner quite different
6 from
CONTENTS.
from that in which Body moves Brdy — Confequences of that DifFerenct — We know,
therefore, in fome refpedl', how Alind moves Body. Page 43
BOOK ir.
Of the feveral Kinds of Mind.
CHAP. I.
As there are different Motions, Co there are different Minds Of the lovi'efl or elemen-
tal Afield — Proclus's Notion of that Mind — Of Gravitation, compared with other
motive Principles — Mind not always moving, nor Bo— Difference, in this refpeiS,
betwixt the Senfuive and Vegetable Part of us— What Arijlotk means when he fays,
that the Soul, in 2. fepurate State, does not remetnber, rcafon, love, or hate — Wondur
that AriJIotle's Meaning fliould have been miftaken — The Reafon of the Mifl^ake
Obfervations on the DocSlrines of this Chapter — as to the Mind's intuitive Perception
in a ftpcn-ate State, and as to its conjlant Aciivity — the Mind's Sympathy with the
[A] Bcay
CONTENTS.
Body in this State— what AriJloiU means by the ^outi not hvhig or hating in iftparatt
Stait. Page 160
BOOK IV.
Of the Origin of our Ideas and the feveral Properties of Mind.
C H A P. I.
jirljiotle has faid nothing of the Origin of our Ideas — Different Opinions of his Com-
mentators upon the Subjeft — Mr. Lode's Difcoveries upon this Subje<9:— All our
IJi-js, according to him, derived from Corporeal Ohje£ls that are in perpetual Change—
This material Origin of our Ideas degrades the Human Mind — fuppofes that the Soul
had no ExiJIence before it came into this Body — All Ideas not derived from Mattery
particularly the Ideas of Mind — Our Mind, being after the Image of God, has fome
of thofe underived Ideas — All Ideas that arc not, originally. Perceptions of Senfe, can-
not be derived from Senfe — Examples of original Ideas in our Minds — The Idea of
Suljlance one of thefe — Mr, Locke's Notion of Suhjlance—'i^o Knowledge of any Thing
without the Idea of Subjlance — The Idea of Matter and Form^ another Example —
alfo of Caufe and EffeSi — Mr. Hume nrgued well, when he denied, upon the Prin-
ciples of Mr. Locke's Philofophy, that there was any Idea of Caufe and EffeH — alfo
the Ideaoi Beauty — Mr. Locke's imperfe£t Notion of Beauty — Alfo the Idea of Good,
not derived from Senfe ot Rejiefiion — Alfo the whole Clafs of Ideas of Relation — The
antient Divifion and Claflification of Ideas, different from Mr. Locke's — The new
Language, that Mr. Locke has introduced into Philofophy, not fo good as the an-
tient;— obfcure and complexed, compared with the antient — Two Reafons for infift-
ing fo much upon the Defefls of Mr. Locke's Philofophy, P- '73
CHAP. II.
The general Propofition maintained in this Chapter, That all Ideas are originally in the
Mind, is demondrated from the Nature of Ideas, and the Diftinftion betwixt them
and Senfations — All Ideas muft originate either from Mind or Body — The Ideas of Ex-
ternal Forms f\xi\. confidered — The Senfations which thefe Forms produce, not Ideas,
however much generalized or abftrafted they may be — Our 5^»/a/M«j not the Mate-
rials out of which Ideas can be made — Ideas refemble the Form of any Piece of Work-
manfhip, which is not from the Matter but from the Mind of the Artift — Without
Senfations we cannot have Ideas ; but Senfations, therefore, are not the Caufe of our
Ideas— 'They are excited by Stnfations — are lefs perfect at firft — more perfect after-
wards
CONTENTS.
wzrds — Some fo perfefl as not to exift at all in Matter — Of Ideas of RefteSlion — Every
individual Perception of the Operation of our Mind, is, according to Mr. Locke, ^a
Idea — Tliis not true — There muft be the Knowledge of the Nature of the Operation —
This cannot be without the Knowledge of the jigent — This Knowledge c&n only be de-
rived from Mind — The only Q^ieftion remaining is. Whether our Mind creates its
Jfleas — This cannot be conceived — Ideas cannot be difcovercd in the Objects in which
they are inherent, unlefs they be previoufly known — The Soul being a diftindl Sub-
Jlance, puts this Matter out of doubt — No Soul can be without Ideas — If it creates
Ideas, it creates it/elf— This impoflible— All our Ideas, as well as our Minds, are
from God — In his Mind the Ideas annot be abftra(Sled from Matter — This Origin of
our Ideas much nobler than that alTlgned by Mr. Locke — is the Confequcnce of our
being made after the Image of God — No innate Ideas in one Senfe — A previous State of
the Human Soul — The latent Ideas in us not called up by an A£l of the Mind, like
the Ideas we have already acquired. — That we have no Confcioufnefs of any Thing
in a State of pre-exiftence, no Proof that there was no fuch State — Mr, Locke's Error,
in confounding Confcioufnefs and Identity — The IntelleElual Part of us may be dormant
and quiefcent for fome time— This agreeable to the Analogy of Nature — Inflances of
fuch a State, both in the Vegetable and the Animal— O^x Intelltiluul Part fomctimes
quiefcent, even after we are grown up — Ideas even then lie dormant in our Minds for
Years. Page i86
CHAP. III.
Of the Difference of Minds — Great Errors proceed from not knowing accurately that
Difference— The Vegetable differs from the Elemental Life, as to the Lody moved— the
Motion — the Growth — and the Fi"al Caufe — Difference betwixt the At'imal and Vege~
fable — The Animal fen/itive— the Vegetable not — Reafon for this Difference — The A.vi-
mul has a Feeling of Pleafure and Pain — the Vegetable not — This Difference betwixt the
Animal and Vegetable proved by Experiment — The Vegetable propagated many more
ways than the Animal — The Vegetable Life fubfervient to the Anival — Rc-naikible
Inftance of this in the ConJlruSiion of the Vegetable Part of Animals — The Vegetable di'iiA
Animal Life come very near one another. p. 205
CHAP. IV.
The Importance of the Doftrine of Caufe: — Ariflotk\ Account of Caufes, full and
complete — Plato's Addition of two other Caufes, not neceflary— Abufe of the Term,
Caufe— Things faid to be Caufes, which are only the Removal of Impediments that
•hinder the real Caufe to operate — The Power of the Mind without the Organs of
Senfe, evident in Dreaming zni Night-walking, or when the Bot^ is affefted by certain
[A] 2 Difeafes
CONTENTS.
Difeafes— The Internal Organs, fuch as the Brain, not properly Caufes, any more
than the External— The Intellcilual Mind, not immediately conneaed at all with the
Body or its Organs— Hot and Cold, Moijl and Dry, no Caufes of Things— The con-
fidering fuch Things as Caufes, leads to great Errors — The common Diftinflion be-
twixt Firft and Second Caufes, not fufficiently attended to by our modern Philofophers,
particularly the Newtonians. p. 212
CHAP. V.
The Seat oi Dreams is iht Phantafia—Tht Phantafsa belongs to the jfnimal Nature, for
the Prefervation of which it is abfolutely neceflary — Diftinflion of the Human Imagi-
nation! into thofe of which we perceive the Delufion, and thofe which we believe to be
Realities — This Diftin£lion applied to our luaking Imaginciiions — Diilinflion of our
Imaginations into Voluntary and Involuntary — Of.this latter Kind, the Phantafms that
appeared to Bonnet^s old Alan — Another Inftance of the fame Kind — Oi waking Phan-
tafms, which we miftake for Realities — This the Cafe of the Madman — Difference hc-
tw'iKt Madiiefs and Folly — Difference betwixt a lively Imagination and A.'adnefs-Oi
our fleeping Phantafms, or Dreams — Ditfeience betwixt Dreaming and Nigbt-waUing
— Of the Authors who have written upon the Subjeft of Dreams — viz. Arijhtle, Sy-
nejius-, and Baxter — Fafts concerning Dreaming — The Dreamer is afleep — Diftinc-
tions hctw'ixt Jleepiag and waking made by Arijiotle — Diftinflion betwixt Z);y(7otj and
other Appearances in our Sleep Definition of Dreams — Certain PofKions laid down
coT\ceTn\ng Dreaming — Inquiry into the Philofophy of Dreaming, that is, the Ccz^\s of
it — ift-, The Opinions ftatcd of the three Philofophers above mentioned who have
written upon this Subject, beginning with Arijiotle— Wis Theory of Drcains — They
are, according to him, the Reli£ls of our Senfitions during the Day — Dreams not
prophetic, according to him, though there may be a fortuitous Concourfe of the
Event with the Dream — Objcdiions to Ari/lotle's Syftem of Dreaming — It can only
account for our Dreams of Things recent — It does not define the Phantafta nor a
Phantafm properly — General Obfervaiions upon his Philofophy — Of Synefius's Syftem
of Dreaming — Account of the Author — A great Believer in Divinationhy Dreams —
kept a Journal of his Dreams — The Seat of Dreams, according to him, is the Phan-
tafta— It contains the Forms of all Material Things, and is the Organ by which the
ylf/«fl' perceives them — In the Phantafa, fays Synsfius, are the Forms of all 7'hings
pajl, prefent, Tind future — Thefe the Materials of our Dreams — Our Dreams are of
two Kinds — plain and direSl — or myjlerious ^nd fymbolical — The latter .Kind the more
common — Thefe accounted for — Of the Art of interpreting them — No common Art
for interpreting all Dreams, but an Art peculiar to each Man, which he muft learn
by Experience — Objedlions to Syneftus's Syftem— Apology for Syncfius — Baxter's
I Opinion
1
CONTENTS.
Opinion concerning Dreams — The Author's Syftem upon the Subje£l— An Account
oi thz Phantafta, which is divided \nx.o retentive and active — diftinguifhed from Body —
from the Vegetable — from the Int^lIe,fJuaILi/e—he]oDg\pg therefore to the Animal Na-
ture— That Nature not to be divided into three Parts, but one Nature operating dif-
ferently— Neceffity of thefe different Operations — Progrefs of the Animal Nature in
Man — The P/jij/z^iT/M exceedingly imperfect at firft — Definition of the Phantafia —
The fame with the Common Sei:fc of Ariflctle — It has a Power of perceiving Likene'Jir
and Differences in Objeils of Senfe — This comparative Faculty is what is called the
Reafon of Brutes — Of the Hutnan Phantaf,a — An6, ift, Of cur Phantafia, when
waking — The Images in it exceed the Reality of Nature — Much iiifluenccd by the
Habit of the Body — By the Love of Beauty it is diftinguiflicd from the Phantafia of the
Animal — The Perception of Beauty in the Intellect — The Phantafia fubfervicnt to 7^2-
tdlc^, as the higher Pawvr -Difference betwixt Genius and Tafle — The Influence of
the Ridiculous upon the Imagination — Of other Difpofitions of Mind— The Influenca
of the Studies and the Purfuits of Life upon the Lnagination— Our v.aking Phantafia
under the Controul of our governing Power — but that Power not alfolute or unlimited
— Of our Sleeping Phantafms, as diftinguifhed from the Operations of our httelleSf in
Sleep — Thefe like wife under the Influence of jhe Habit of the Body— Of the Phantafms
in our Sleep confidered as difl:in(St from our Reafonings at that Time — Such Phantafms
muft neceflarily exifl Confequences of our Dreams being the Operation of our
Phantafia, and not our htelleSl — The JForld \n our Phantafia very much finer than
the Natural IVorld — Of the Dreams of Poets—ofPhihpphers—Of the Dreams of the
wicked — Thefe a great Addition to their Mifery — The Dreams rf the Generality of
Men, betwixt thefe two, neither happy nor miferable — No Order or Regularity in the
Phantafms of a vulgar Man, feeping or icu/t//?^— Otherwife in the Brute and the per'
feci Man — Baxter's Account of the Origin of Dreams refuted — Of Prophetic Dreams
1— Objedlions to Synefus's Syfl:em concerning them— All PrcpLtic Dreams plain and
direfl, and proceeding from Minds fuperior to ours— Such Minds may communicate
with ours, though embodied — The Revelation by Dreams in one of two Ways— .
Fafls concerning Z))Vi7wx— Particular Account of the Dreams of Ariflides during 13
Years — Cured of a Difeafe, that lafted fo long, by Advice that he got in Dreams
Delivered from other Dangers in that Way — Nothing incredible in the Narrative of
Ariflides — Reafons for believing it to be true — Objections anfwered, to the Tefti-
mony of Ariflides — The Authority of Synefius in favour of Dreams — His whole Life
ConduiSled by them — Of the Final Caufes of Dreams — The Philofophy of Human Na-
ture very imperfedt without the Knowledge of that Caufe— That Caufe the Happinefs
of Senfttive Intelligent Beings during their whole Lives — The virtuous happy in that
Way, as the vicious are miferable ~ Another End of Drea/ning, to convince us that
we
CONTENTS.
we are to exift in a Future State — The Final Caufe of Supernatural and Prophetic
Dreams is the Diredion of Human Life, which otherwife cannot be properly direfted.
Page 229
CHAP. VI.
Oi InfttnSf, and the Nature of it — different from every other Power of Mind hitherto
mentioned — It is (hown chiefly in the Generation and the Education of the Young —
Shown in Incubation -in the Flights of Birds of Pajage—Injlinii flrongcr in the Na-
tural State of the Animal, but wonderful Examples of it even in the Tame State —
This In/linH of Animals, fupcrior to Human Intelligence -What Injlinif Man had in
his Natural State — Not fo much ncceflary to him as to other Animals in that State —
His prefent State is dire£led by Intelligence, inftead of In/lin£f —That not fufScient to
make Men happy, without the Affiftance oi Superior Powers — This the Origin of Re-
ligion. P- 294
CHAP. VII.
A wonderful Quality of Mind not hitherto mentioned — It exifts in no particular 7/w^ or
Place —is not in the Body, as in a Fejel which contains it — It is, however, fomeivheie,
and in/ome Time— It is in Space and Time, but not as Body is — is converfint with Ob-
■ie£ls diftant in Time and Place — therefore muft exift in thofe diftant Times a.id Places
Difference betwixt us and the Brutes in this refped — In what Stnfe the Alind is
confined to the Body — Anfwer to the Objection of our feeing Things at grcu Dif-
tances D.ff.rence betwixt our yl/(Wand the Divine in this refped— The Study of
-our own Minds may give us fome Conception even of the Ubiquity of the Deity — Oi
the Knowledge of the Future — not fo different from the Knowledge of the P^Jl as is
commonly imagined — The Brutes have it in their natural State as far as is nereffary
for the Oeconomy of their Lives— they have it even in the domejllcated State— h FaifV
concerning the Hanoverian Boy — Alteration made, as to the Divining Power of the
Human Mind, by Society ind Civilization — ^ hat Aittration ftiil greater in the dgene-
rate ctate of Socitt) — Of the Difference betwixt the M'.nusoi Savages a;;d ^f Civilized
Nations i ifference betwixt the Animal znA IntelUnual Afmds and the Vegetable — Ne-
ceffity that the Vegetable Part of the Anmal fhould be alwajs atV/w, and lievcr abroad
— Thefe M.nds have no Situation in any Part of the Body. p. 303
BOOK
CONTENTS.
BOOK V.
Of the Principles of Sir Ifaac Newton's Aftronomy.
CHAP. I.
Of J/ironomy, and the DifFerence betwixt it and Philofopljy—Sir Ifaac Newton's Princi'
pia aWoric of Ajironomy, not Philofophy — Sir Ifaac, however, has philofophifed con-
cerning the Beginning and Continuation of Motion —If he is in an Error in this Philo-
fophy, it belongs to this Work to taice Notice of it — Short Account of Sir Ifaac' s
Syjiem — The Motion of the Planets compofed of Projeiiion anJ Gravitation both thefe
Powers a£ling in Right Lines— Their Eliiptical Motion, therefore, to be analyfed into
a Polygon of an infinite Number of Sides — ji> ^at thought that both the Motions
were produced by Bodily Impulfe —Re if ons for aflerting this to be his Opinion — Sir
Ifaac, when he wrote his Principia, did not thinkof Af/'Was a /Moving Power ■ — two
Reafons for that — Therefore made a Machine of the Heavens— Has laid it down that
Body is indifferent to a State of Motion or ReJ}—TW\s fubverfive of the antient Philo-
fophy of the Diftin£lion betwixt Mind and Body — Dangerous alfo to the Syflem of
Tbcifm, by denying the Providence of God over the Works of Nature — The Alecha-
nical Syflem cannot be confined to the Heavens, but muft defcend to the Earth— rrwxfk.
go even the Length of Dr. Pricf ley's Philofophy — But Sir Ifaac's Machine of the
Heavens, not a perfect Machine — liable to two Defers, which even Human Machi-
nery may be free of. p, ,16
CHAP. II.
Comparifon betwixt the antient and modern Materialifls — Sir Ifaac's Firji Law of Mo-
tion, the Foundation of all the Mechanical Philofophy of modern Times— Ought there-
fore to be moft carefully examined — That this Axiom fhould not be known to the
Antients, extraordinary — To judge of the Truth of it, belongs to the Firfi Philo-
fophy— Of the Nature of Motion ; — a Thing of conftant Change and Succejfon Refl,
the oppofite of Motion — Improper, to apply the fame Terms, and draw the fame
Conclufions, concerning Oppofites — Other Improprieties of Expreflion by which
moving and being moved are confounded, and Vis Inertia applied to Body in a Stateof
ReJ} and in Motion— Of the feveral Ways in which the Motion can be fuppofcd to. be
carried on after the Impulfe has ceafed — Thefe are four — It is generally underflood
by the Newtonians to go on by virtue of one of thefe, viz. Impulfe— If fo. Sir Ifaac's
Term
CONTENTS.
Term of Vis Infita unnccclTary and improper ;— not to be underftood of Miml—T\\K
Firjl Laiv o( Motion not a general Propofition, bccaufe not app'icablc to Motion begun
by -WW— only to Motion begun by £w/j— nor to all Motion of that Kind— only to
Piilfion~'D\ii\nQ\on betwixt Pulfion and Trufioti—T vro Kinds of Trufion alfo to be
diflinguiflied- Similarity hG\.w\xi Ahtion by Mind, and Motion by 7j«//w- Objec-
tion, that there can be no Motion by Trufion in Vacuo, anfwered. Page 333
CHAP. III.
The fimple State of the Queftion— The ftrange Confequences of this Axiom— It cannot
be proved by Experiment — muft necefTarily be proved, a priori, by Metaphyftcal Rta-
foning — The Falfehood of it proved from three Principles, that cannot be contto-
verled — Motion not one, but >?i(iny, as many as there are Changes of Place— It is only
Continuity that makes one of many Motions — Of Communication of Motion — The.New-
tonians have erred in this Matter from not confidering two Things, viz. the Nature
of Motion, and the Doctrine oi Firjl and Second Caufes — The Newtonians ought not
to be angry that the Metaphyfical Principle, upon which Sir Ifaac has built his Aflro-
jiomy, has been fo freely examined — Authorities in Support of the Author's Opinion
— Antient Authorities — Authority of /iriJ?otle—Moiieri\ Authorities — Leibnitz —
Dr. Clarke— T)r. HcrJIey— Sir Ifaac himfelf — True Account of the Continuation
of the Motion of a Body impelled is by Mind — This according to the Analogy of
Nature, as Nature is defined by Arifotle ~ Other Motions o{ iht fame Kind in Nature,
fuch as the Motions of Jnimals, Vegetables, and the Loadjhne and Iron — The Impulfe
iiot the Caufe properly of the Alotion, but the Occafan — Of the Duration of the
Motion by Impulfe — It decays by Degrees — This likewife agreeable to the Analogy
of Nature. p. 347
CHAP. IV.
An Inquiry concerning the Principle oi Alotion oi the Celeflial Bodies, not concerning the
Laws of their Motions — The Q^ieftion ftatcd concerning the Eternity of the JVorld —
We can only judge of the Motions in the Ueavj^ns by thofe on Earth — Thofe can
only be produced in one or other of three Ways — The frjl is by the Body moving itfef
— This Hypothcfis examined — fliown that it confounds all Diflinfiion between Alind
and Body, and has a Tendency to downright Atheifm—id Hypothefis, That Bodies
here are moved by other Bodies — This Movement either by Trufion or Impulfe — Gra-
vitation net to be accounted for in either of thefe Ways — Of /ttraSlion, and the
Abufe of that Word — Of the Motion of the Tides — not to be accounted for by Pro-
je£}ion i>r\ii Gravitation, nor otherwife, except hy Alind— Oi the third Motive Power
on
CONTENTS.
on Earth, viz- Mind — All Animal Motion of thid Kind mediately or immtdiatdj — The
Manner of Mind moving Body — The Motions of Bodies towards one another mutual.
Page 3&7
CHAP. V.
A Conformity betwixt the Motions on Earth and the Motions in the Celejlial Regions
That Conformity will go no farther than the Nature of Things requires — The Ce-
Itflial Bodies not moved by Inipulfe oi o\.\\tt Bodies, as the Bodies on Earth are — nor by
Trufion — The Suppofitions of all fuch Bodies, only fet Mind z\. z greater Diftance
No Motion of Body by Body in the Heavens — The Reafoii of the Difference, in this
refpedV, betwixt Heaven and Earth — So far as the Amotions on Earth are by Mind
there mufl be a Conformity betwixt them and the Afotions of the Heavens — Some oeneral
Things in which thcfe Afotions agree. — The Queflion concerning the Compofition of
the Aiotion of the Celeflial Eodies — This Queftion conned^ed with the other Queftion
concerning the Eirfl Lazv of A'lotion — If that Law be true, the Alot'm of our Bodies
is neceflarily compounded : But, if it b* not true, no NeceJJiiy for any rtich Compofition
— Proved from Confcioufnefs, that Mind may move Body in a Curve Line, without any
Compofition of the Motion— This demonftrated likewife a prioriy from the Nature of
Motion by Mind — The Queftion examined. Whether the Aiotion of the Planets
though produced by Af.nd, may not be compounded — General Pofitions concerning
Sinip'e and Compounded Motion — Simple Motion defined — Three Kinds of Compounded
Aiotion — Firfl, When the Compofition is by the Aflion of different Bodies upon the
Body in Motion — Secundo, By the Anion both of Body and AJind upon it — Tertio, By
the Action of two or more Atllnds upon it, in different Directions— The two firft
Kinds of Compofition cannot apply to the Planets — The laft, therefore, only can be
applied — If the Planets be fo moved, it is a Motion without Example — All the Mo-
tions, we know, hy Alind, are fimple and compounded — ObjeCiion, that the C;Vc»/(?r
or Elliptical Motion is iTCceffarily compounded — Anfwer to this Objection The Ar-
gument for the Compofition of the Motion of the Planets from the fuppofed Compofition
of the Motion of Projei^iles, anfwered — One Difference betwixt the two Motions is,
that the Motion of the Projeililes is begun by Impulfe — not fo the Motion of the Planets
—Another is, that the Planets have not the fame Tendency to their Centre that Projec-
tiles have to the Centre of the Earth— Thit the Planets have fuch a Tendency, not
proved by any juft Argument from Analogy, nor from Final Caufes — But even the
Motion of the Projeiiile not compounded — This proved from the Nature of the Mo-
tion—Oh]zQ^ion anfwered, that the ProjeSiiU Motion may be divided — If the Projeiiile
Motion be not compounded^ neither is the Motion of the Planets; but it is ^ftmple Mo-
tion by Mind, p. 381
[B2 C H A P.
CONTENTS.
CHAP. VI.
Proved in the preceding Chapters, that Mind is the only Caufe of Motion m the Hea-
vens Minti very properly typified by i^;V^— Proved alfo that the Motion of the Celef-
tial Bodies is not compounded h\xi /mple — The Purpofe of this Chapter to fliow that
Sir Ifaac's Syftem of Aftronomy can be fupported without arbitrary or impofftble Sup-
fo/itions— Prejudice removed that may arife from the Author's not being learned in
Geometry or Mechanics — No inferior Science demonftratcs its own Principles — Thefe
to be found only in Metaphy/tcs, or the Firji Philofaphy— Euclid's Geometry an Ex-
ample of this — The fame is true of Sir Tfaac Newton's Aftronomy — The Laws of the
Planetary Motion difcovered by Sir Ifaac Newton — Before him Aftronomy no Science,
but only a Colledion of Fails— h curious FaiSt difcovered by Kepler, concerning the
Proportions betwixt the Periods and Dijlances of the Planets— T^\% he knew only as a
Fa£i ; but Sir Ifaac has made a Science of it — No Science of any Thing, if an eflential
Property be not known, from which all its other Properties can be deduced — The
Nature and Eflence of every Motion confifts of two Things, the Motive Force and
the Direaion — The Dire^ion of the Planetary Motion is a Fadl that is known— No-
thing can be difcovered of the Planetary Morion, or of any Thing in Nature, except
from Fails — The Bufinefs of Aftronomy is not to inquire into the Caufe of the Pla-
netary Motion, but to calculr.te that Motion, and to difcover i's Laws — This the No-
tion which Sir Ifaac himfelf had of this Science — Diftinflion betwixt Metaphyfics,
Phyfics, and Ajironomy— Forces or Powers are latent Things, to be difcovered only by
their EffeSis — The EfFedl of a Moving Force is Vehcity — That not abfolute, but re-
lative to two Things, Time and Space— \i the Motion be equable in a Straight Line,
and the Time of it be known, the Law of the Motion is obvious — But if the Motion
be in a Curve and not equable, though the Time be knoiun, the Lawoflhe AJotion not
eafy to be difcovered ~T\\e Force muft be eftimated by a Motion in a Straight Line, one
or rr.orc — But how apply Motion in a Straight Line to a Curve? — This impoflible to be
done, if no Straight Line could be difcovered neceflarily refulting from the Nature of
the Motion — But fuch a Straight Line has been obferved in the Defcent of the Planet
from its Tangent — This Line obferved with refped to the Moon's Defcent from her
Tantjent— The Length of this Line known — The fame as if the Moon had dcfcended
direftly from the Tangential Point — The Law of this Motion of Defcent would be
known, if the Motion was equable — but the Motion is unequable — For difcovering the
Lawr of \\\\% unequable Motion, recourfe muft be had to a fimilar Motion on Earth, the
Motion of the Projciiile — Ttie Law of the Defcent of the Projefled Body afcertained,
firft by Galileo's Difcoveries, and then by Sir Ifaac's — Sir Ifaac firft difcovered that
the D'-fcent of falling Bodies was both begun and accelerated in the Ratio of the Dif-
tatice from the Centre inverfely— This could not have been difcovered by Fait and
Obfervation
CONTENTS.
Objirvation here on Earth, but it was inferred from the Dcfcent of the Moon The
Theory of Gravitation in this Way generalized by Sir Ifaac, and its Law difcovered
—How the Theory of Gravitation, thus made general, is to be applied to the Planets —
The Motion of the Planets fuppofed by Sir Ifaac to be compounded, as he fuppofed
that of ProjecTi!es to be — The two Motions are, the one in the Line of Proje£tion, the
other in the Line of Gravitation — The Motion of the Planets not actually combined, but
only fuppofed to be fo for the Sake of Demonftration — A fimple uncompounded Motion
of the Planets is, by its Nature, poflible — If fo, all the Properties of the Motion arc
from thence deducible, though we may not be able to make the Dedudlion — Better to
acknowledge our Ignorance, than makeftrange and improbable Suppofuions — Our Ig-
norance muft be acknowledged in many other Things, of which we can make no Syflem
— But Sir Ifaac has made a Syftem of Aftronomy — This Syftem to be fupported with-
out the aftual Compofition of the Planetary Motion — The Hypothefis of fuch aCom-
pofition fufficient — This Hypothefis moft natural— It is according to the Method of
Science, and particularly according to Euclid's Method — If the Hypothefis of a Cen-
tripetal Force be admitted, the Hypothefis of a Projectile Force in the Line of the Tan-
gent abfolutely necefTary — The neceflary Conne£fie» betwixt thefe two Motions, and
their Dependency upon one another — The one being given, therefore the other is given —
The Moving Force in the Line of Projeflion is fhewn to have a relation to the Diftancc
from the Centre, as well as the Centripetal Motion — What that Relation is — The
Dedudion from any Hypothefis, if that Hypothefis be granted, as certain from the
Reality — Example of the like Deduftion from an Hypothefis not fo obvious and na-
tural, in the Cafe of the Compofition of Alotion — From that Example the Argument of
the Newtonians anfwered, that the fame Fjff'e^ muft be always produced by the fame
Caufe. Page 405
CHAP. VII.
The Advantage of thus Amplifying the AJlronomy of Sir Ifaac Newton — Firji, It difin-
cumbers the Syftem of the Hypothefis of the Planets being moved by Bodily Impulfe—
The Confequences of fuch an Hypothefis — ido. Of the Notion of a Perpetuity of
Motion begun by Bodily Impulfe— 2,tio, Of Body attrafling or impelling Body at a Dif-
tance — ^to. Of the Compofition of the Planetary Motion — Such a Compofition irrccon-
cileable with the Simplicity of Nature — ^to. Of the Hypothefis of the Planets all fall-
ing into their Centres, if their Motions were to be flopped — La/lly, Of a Centrifugal
Forte fuppofed in the Planetary Motion — The Confequence of this Hypothefis down-
right Alaterialifm — Inapplicable to the Motion of the Planets, whether that Alotion be
by Alind or Body — The Centrifugal Force of the Stone and Sling explained— The Ori~
^in of the Notion of a Centrifugal Force. p. 428
CHAP.
CONTENTS.
C II A P. VIII.
Dfiiniflion betwixt Philofopby and Jjlrommy — Much Injuflice done to St'n Ijaac Newtoiiy
in fuppo'ing that he philofophifed concerning the Caufe of the Motion of the Celejiial
Bodies, and had difcovered that Caufe to be Atirankn — Abfurd Ways of Thinicing
and Speaking thence arifing — Every Mot'mi made to be produced by Juration
The Motion of a Stone falling to the Ground- Of the Aioon—oi the Tides— oi the
Afagnet, &c. — This Syftem of Aitraciion may be more fimplified than it is — Attrac-
tion carried through the whole Univerfe ; and different Syftems made to attraff one
another — Attraclion faid to be ejfential to Matter — Dr. Priejlley's Notion of AtiraHion —
Two Sources of this Error concerning A'tiraSiicf!— The Notion of the Planets being
moved by Impulfe of other Bodies, may be an Hypothefis likewife — Reafons for fuch
Hypothefis, and for other Hypothefes made by Sir Ifaac — The Difcoveries of Sir
Jfaac, now they are made, appear fo natural and obvious, that it feems wonderful
they were not fuoner made— The Refemblance betwixt the Planetary Alotion and the
Motion of ProjeSliles, has led the Nn'jtonians into Errors ; i;w. To fuppofe that the
Planetary Motion was begun by Impulfe, as well as that by Proje£liles \. — 2do, That it^
it was compounded, as they fuppofed that of Proje£liles to be ; -ifio. That the Planet, if
not carried on in the ElUpfe, would fall down to the Centre like a Projeiiile — The Er-
rors not only (hown, but the Caufes of thofe Errors — This ought to give perfect Sa-
tisfadlion — The Conclufions of the Xewtinian AJlronomy may be true, and yet the
Principles falfe — The only Confequence of which is, that the Newtonians teach their
Syftem in an improper Way — Inftance of a true Conclufion froni falfe Premifes. —
This applied to the Newtonians. Page 435
C H A P. IX.
Recapitulation of the Contents of the preceding Chapters — The Diftindlion betwixt
Mind zni Body, and the different Natures of each, the Foundation both of Theology
and Natural Philofopby— the one active, the other pa Jive — This the moft antient Phi-
lofopby known in the World — The Foundation of Matcrialifm, that Body is both
eSfive and pajfive — Materialifm, the Philofophy of the Senfes — Jrijlodemus's Converfa-
tion with Socrates — The Materialiji, if he reafon confequentially, will not admit that
his own Body is nooved by his Mind — Dr. Priejlley^ in denying this, reafons confe-
quentially— He a perfeft Materialiji ; others but Demi- Materiali/ls—Of the difficulty
in conceiving Invlfible Pozvers — All Powers invifible — Mr, Lode's Philofophy, of
the Poflibility of Alatter thinking, has laid the Foundation of all our Materialifm —
The great Progrcfs of Materialifm of late Years — This owing to Experiments without
2 Pbilofophj^
CONTENTS.
Phllofophy — The firfl: Experimenters in Europe not Materialijls, becaufe they were
PhUofopbers—The Tto^tn^iiy of our Phllofophy to Mechanifm, accounts for the fa-
vourable Reception both of Des Cartes's Syftem and Sir I/aac Newton s — The latter
can ftand its Ground without the Afliftance of the A^echankal Phihfophy — All the
Opinions enumerated, that can poflibly be concerning the Motion of the Celejlial
Bodies — Firjl Opinion, that Body moves itfelf — This the Dodtrine of the /fntient
■Materialijls and Jihnjh— The mod fimple of all the Hypothefes concerning the Mo-
tion of the Cekjiial Bodies, irreconcileable with the Compofition of their Motion fup-
pofed by the Newtonians — Second Hypothtiis, that the Planets are moved by Mind
only — This Hypothefis as fimple as the Nature of Things will permit — It admits,
however, of fome Variety — TA/V^ Hypothefis, that Body is the only Movino- Power
— admits of great Variety — i/?. It may be fuppofed that the Body in the Centre is the
Caufe of the Motion of the Planet — This, if true, a great Difcovery of modern
Times — ido. It may be fuppofed that the Planet is moved by Pulfton, both in the
Proje^ile &nd Centripetal Line—This Suppofition has fome Simplicity and Uniformity
in it — 2^ly, It may be fuppofed that the Planet is moved by Pulfion in the one Line,
and Trufion in the other — This Suppofition not fo fimple as the preceding — The
fourth Hypothefis, that the Planet is moved both by Body and Mind — This, too,
admits of confiderabie Variety — Thefe arc all the Opinions poflible concerning the
Planetary Motion — Of thefe the Reader may choofe what he likes beft. — Conclufion
of the Book— Summary of what the Author thinks he has proved concerning iW/W
and Body—'S>\K I/aac Newton's Principia, though not a Philofophical Work, furniflies
ample matter to ^ PhUofopber. Page ..c
PREFACE.
IPrefent here to the Public the Second Part of this great
antient Syflem of Philofophy — great at leaft in its profef-
fions, pretending to embrace the Univerfe, to explain the
nature and operations of that grand Principle, which, under
various denominations, and various appearances, pervades
all nature, informs and animates every thing in the material
world ; I mean Mind, — and to afcend to a higher principle
flill, and through nature and man to lead us up to the JifJI
mind, the great Author and Preferver of the Univerfe,
This Philofophy I am defirous to revive in Britain ; for
there it was, as well as in other parts of Europe, and particu-
larly in England, where it continued down to the days of
Dr. Cud worth, before French learning was in falhion, or the
Philofophy of Mr. David Hume known.
There are many I know who think a Philofophy of this
kind chimerical, or at leafl: ufelefs, and defire a Philofophy
of Works, as they call it, which will add to our power by
fea and land, promote our trade and manufacflures, and in-
creafe both our national and private wealth. Whether Wealth
and Power, and the arts which procure them, have contributed
to the happinefs of mankind in general, or how much we in
particular have profited by them, I do not at prefent inquire ;
but I afli. Is there nothing of any value among men except
wealth and power r Are not knowledge and underilanding
necefTary to direct men to the proper ufe of them - and may
a they
iv PREFACE.
they not be ihc fource of tlie greatcft mifcry in the pofllfTion
of the ignorant and foolifli ? But further : 1 defire to know,
whether knowledge in iti'elf, abflra^led from all profu or
advantage by ir, is not tlic highefl enjoyment of the rational
nature: Whether it be not the only enjoyment of man, con-
fidered as an intellectual creature .' Thefe are queftions that,
I think, mult be anfwercd in the affirmative, in an age that
pretends to be learned. In an age which, by many, is
reckoned a barbarous age, I mean the age of the Trojan
war, we are told by Homer, that Ulyflcs, the wifeft of all
the Heroes who fought at Troy (for Nellor did not figiu there,
but only affifled with his Counfels), was invincible by plea-
fure, as well as by toils and dangers, and could not be kept
from his country, his family, and his friends, by the
charms of two GoddefTes, and by all the pleafures of a gay
and luxurious Court ; but the fame hero it was neceffary to
bind with ropes upon ropes in order to reflrain him from
going to the Syrens. And what did thefe EnchantrefTes pro-
mife him ? Nothing but Knowledge *. And if Knowledge
makes the happinefs of man, muft not that Knowledge, of
which the object is the highcft and moft excellent, make his
chief happinefs. Now what is fo high and excellent as God,
and Nature, and the Univerfe?
But I fay further ; that as Religion is neceflary for the
well-being, I think for the very being of Society, it is of the
greatefl confequence to a nation, that the Philofophy in it
fhould be of the religious kind. In a country where Letters
are cultivated, there will of neceffity be a fpirit of curiofity
and inquiry, which will lead men to philofophife right or
* Whoever comes to us they fay, Ti^-^'afJ.tvtf vsirai, xx.^ irMtovx iJui. OSu^y where he gives a general definition of il^u^j^, introduces it in a
way which fliows that he had fome difficulty to find any thing that was common to
all Minds ; for, fays he, lih n )t.j»o», j'a-< ^tca-r.s ^vf^nf In Afy«». Then he gives the
definition, which is, 'o vfutn {trtxt^ux vufi»TK ^urixn, i^yanKH ; "Thefirfl pcrfeSlion of'
organized body : meaning, by ihcfrfiperfe^ion, that perfeftion which confifts Jw-
itcftft, not In^yua \ that is, in iht power, not in the aHion, or operation, refulting from
that power ; And fo far the definition, as I have obferved above, is proper : And
it is alfo proper, in another refpeft, that it applies to the Mind of every organized
Body ; for, certainly, the Mind is fo much the perfedion of fuch a Body, that we
cannot conceive an organized Body to exift without Mind. And it agrees with my
definition in this refpeft, thatfuch a Body muft neceflarilybemovtd by fome internal
principle, and in fuch a manner as is fuitable to its nature. But my obje£lion to it iy
1/?, That it is too general, and therefore obfcure ; and, 2diy, That it is not compre-
henfive enough, as it does not take in the Mind which moves unorganized Body :
For this laft, an apology may be made in behalf of Ariftotle, that this treatife of his
is entirely confined to the vegetable and the animal Mind, and to the intelledlual
confidered as united with Body ; fo that he does not fpeak at all here of the ^v^n,
or MiTTEj ^J't/;!;!), which is in all natural Bodies, but of which he had fpoken in the
preceding books, • De Phyfica Aufcultatione;' fo that it appeared to him unnecef-
fary to fay any thing more of it in this treatife vi^i 4"Kii- And, indeed, the Greek
word ^vxn, neither in common ufe, nor in the language even of philofophy, has a
fignification fo comprchenfive as to take in this kind of MinJ. And, accordingly,
L
10 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book I.
There are, I know, who cannot conceive a Mind, that does only-
move, and nothing clfe ; becaufe their own Mind, and the Minds of
other animals, which move their Bodies, have thought and refledion,
or, at leaft, fenfations, appetites, and defires : But this proceeds
from having too narrow a notion of Mind, and not being able to di-
ftinguifh things, which, though they cxift together, are different in
their nature. It is true, indeed, that the power of moving is joined
with thought and refledion, fenfation and appetite ; but it is very
different from all thefe ; and we are fure that motion can be produ-
ced without any of them ; for Body, that has none of them, moves
Body ; and, as all motion muft, of neceflity, be produced either by
Body or Mind, if Body can produce motion without fenfation or
volition, Why not Mind ? — The faiSt truly is, that the Mind, the
moft powerful thing in nature, has many powers and faculties, fome
higher, fome lower, of which the power of moving is the loweft :
And this fometimes exifts by itfelf, as in Bodies unorganized, at
other times joined with higher powers, as in bodies organized,
fuch as vegetables, animals, and intelledual creatures.
Another advantage of this definition is, that it takes in Motion, the
grand Agent in all natural operations, by which the whole bufinefs
of the material world is carried on, the knowledge of which is, ac-
cording to Ariftotle, fo eflential to the philofophy of Nature, that,
without knowing it, we cannot know what Nature is *.
And,
1 obfervc, th.it the Aphrodifian, in his treatife above quoted, never fo much as men-
tions it, but fpealis always of the vegetable Mind as the loweft of Minds.
Am fiti >c>$«>iir Ti I5-T< xiKiiri;- '«tieyK»iiif y*j 'xytallui>r,i 'nvrrtf, 'xytciiiriui kxi tiji
I am to inquire fuxjther in the next chapter.
CHAP;
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 25
HAP. V.
0/" Space — Space a third thing in Nature bejides Body and Mind,
according to fome Fhilofophers. — According to Epicurus, Space and
Body the only tivo things m Nature. — Strange Conjequences from
the Notion 0/" Space being a thing exijiing by itfelf. — Space main-
tained by the modern Theijls not to be a Siihjlance^ but a ^lality of
Divinity. — Strange Confequences of this Notion. — If it be true, ifi-
tire/y a modern Difcovery . — ^Space beany thing, it mufl be eitherSuh-
ftance or Accident — 7iot Subftance — tiot Accident — not mere Capa-
city, ivhich is nothing — Space jiich a Principle of Nature as A-
riftotle's Privation. — Space has no Properties. — Not extended there-
fore, nor, properly fpeaking, meafured. — Duration, Time, Eternity,
no j)roperties of things, though necejfary for their Exijlence.
IT is a principle of this philofophy, which I have often inculca-
ted, that there is nothing in the univerfe, except Body and
Mind, and their Properties. But many philofophers, antient as well
as modern, have maintained that there is a third being in Nature,
namely Space. This was the philofophy of Epicurus, and, before
him, of Democritus, who maintained, that there were only two
things in Nature which were the caufes of all things, viz. Body,
and the vacuum or inane, fo they called Space. For they held, as I
do, that there were only two principles in Nature ; but, inftead of
Mind, they faid one of them was Space, which they faid was the
only immaterial or incorporeal thing in Nature ; and, befides thefe
Vol. II. D two,
i6 AN TIE NT METAPHYSICS. Book I.
two, they Aiicl there was no tlurd nature in the univcrfc *". The
modern philofophers, who are materialifts, muft, I think, maintain
thfe dodrine of Epicurus. But even fuch of them as are Thclfts
give a being to Space, and aiTert the exiftence of three things in
Nature, Mind, Body, and Space : The confequcnce of wliich ne-
cefTarily is, that Space is eternal, infinite, and immutable, as well as
God, and, like Him too, has an exiftence neccflary and independent.
And as Sir Ifaac Newton has exprefled himfelf, one ihould think
he believed that Deity had an exiftence dependent upon Space ; for
he fays that infinite Space is a kind of Scnforium or Organum to the
Teity. It is, therefore, of great confequence to philofophy and
theology, to examine well this Notion of the Being of Space, from
which fuch ftrange confcquences rcfult : And though I have faid a
good deal upon the fubjed in my Firft Volume t, to which I beg leave
to refer, where I have endeavoured to fhow, that Space has no ex-
iftence by itfelf, but only in relation to Body ; yet, as the fubje«{ Tl, T. ftU X.xf i;t!5«X1' ««' t^E-'t'" My«T«,, TO ^ ««T« T. ».(,T/K.», ««, 3-«^,.
r,*n, Kett ixut k.f«T(««» t( xci ki»i|T»»- re yxf KUtirixot KH^riKtt xtu xiH)t«w, Ksti t» KHmtt
xiitiTo^ Jx« T.u xi.ifTiK.i;. It is needlefs to quote more paffages, as indeed the fum of
his Phyfiology and Theology is, that, in the univerfe, there is fomething that is
moved, and fomething that moves ; txi r„ Kiuvfiiv,, W. t.»oj «/h.t«,, as Simplicius
cxprefles it in his Commentary upon the firft book of the Phyfics, p. 56. The one he
calls the Iaa, or Material Caufe of things, and the other the Efficient, which he
paraphrafes, by calling it the ««ir t! i^x." '■'nnui. I cannot, however, help quoting
one paffage more of the Metaphyfics, lib. i. cap. 3. where, giving a hiftory of the
opinions of the antients concerning the firft caufes of things, he tells us, that, af-
ter
36 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book I,
If it be proved that Matter cannot move itfelf, then there Is an
end of the whole philofophy of Materiahfm or Atheifm, which can
be
ter they had difcovered, as they thought, the fubjed matter, or Material Caufe, of
the Univcrfe, out of wh'ch every thing was made, and into which every thing is'
refolved, they were naturnlly led to inquire what produced tlicfc changes in this
fubje£i; for, fays he, the fubjecl c.uinot change itfelf ; — Ou yaj ^n loyt i»-»xfifti»i)« Hurt
Trtm fttrxfijcXXetf lavTo. Xiyu it eio», ivn to |i/Aoii tvTi o p^xXKof a^rion rtv uiT*(!xXXfi*-
sxxTi^cf uurtif Ctitt JttlH TO fitt JuAov XAl»|V, 0 06 y^x'KKti XIO^IXITX' «>iA' ITfJO* Tl Tl)5 f£tT«-
/8o>.II5 UiTtOI. T« Si TOUTO ^)1T«V, |V1< TO TIJH 'tTf^X' X^^tl ^flTfO, fc( «» BfiH? (p»ty)fCif, tilt D
There is anotlier authority which has occurred to me while I was writing this ;■
It is from Themiftius, who lived in the time of the Emperor Theodofius the elder,
a Peripatetic philofopher, who writes a treatife ?r(^i ^t/;t'i«i explaining what Arifto.
tie has faid upon this fubjeft ; and, as he was a Sophift, (fo rhetoricians werccal-
led in that age), as well as a philofopher, he writes both with great elegance and
great perfpicuity ; on which account I would recommend his writings to the flu-
dent of Greek philofophy ; and, for another reafon,^ — becaufe they are better print-
ed than thofe of any other commentator upon Ariftotle, Ammonius Hermeias's
commentary upon the Categories only excepted. He proves, that no Body can be
xvTcr.ifvjTtv, or felf-moved, in this manner : Either, fays he, one part of the body
muft move the other, or the whole mult move the whole. If one part move the o-
ther, then it is not felf-moved ; at lead, not the whole of It, any more than an
animal is felf-moved, whofe mind moves its body. On the other hand, if it be
faid that the whole moves the whole, fo that at the fame time, and in the f io> «{ oua
i^' '«i,v^is>>,,
asIIomLTtxprefles it ; for good philc.". phy informs us, that every chain of caufcsan^i
cilicls, hov; long loevcr it m;iy be, hjngs from one great firft Cauf.- which fupport^
it.
Chap. VI. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 3^
And thus it appears, that, if Body cannot move itfclf, there is an
end of the fyftcm of Materialifm and Atheifm ; and every man who
admits this muft be a Theift, whether he will or not.
If I am fuccefsful in this argument, it will fupply a defedl which
I obferve in Dr Clarke's Demonftration of the Being and Atributes
of God, Sed. 3. where he endeavours to refute Toland's pofi-
tion, that Motion is efTential to all Matter ; or, in other words,
that matter can move itfelf. His refutation is by the following
dilemma : ' If Motion, or a tendency to Motion, (which is the
' fame thing in this argument), be efTential to Matter, it muft:
* have a tendency to move fom.e one determinate way at once, or to
* move every way at once. Now, that it cannot have the laft ten-
' dency is evident.' But how does he prove that it has not the firft ?
*■ A tendency,' fays he, ' to move fome one detei'mined way, cannot
* be eflential to any particle of Matter, but muft: arife from fome ex-
' ternal caufe, becaufe there is nothing in the pretended neceffary
' nature of any particle to determine its motion, neceffarily and ef-
* fentially, one way rather than another.' But this is plainly begging
the queftion ; for thofe who maintain that Motion is eifential to
Matter, maintain, that there is not only a tendency in the Matter to
move one particular way, (and indeed it is impoffible to conceive a
tendency to Motion, which is not in fome one direclion or another),
but they further fay, that different Bodies have eifential ly and ne-
ceffarily different tendencies to motion in different dircdions. And
fome of them go fo far as to allow that the Motion is intended for
fome end, and, confcquently, that it is guided by Intelligence which
is in the Matter, together with a principle of Motion, both being, as
they fay, effential to Matter, And, indeed, as I have ohferved,
they cannot be feparated. The true anfwer, therefore, to To-
land's argument, is what I think I have proved, that Matter cannot
move itfelf; and, if it cannot move itfelf, it will follow of necefi'ary.
COUv
40 A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. Book I.
confcqucnce, that it cannot move itfelf with Intelligence, or for a
certain end.
Dr Prieftley's fyftem appears to me to be flill more extraordinary
than the fyftem of thofe who maintain that Body moves itfelf ; for
his fyftem is, that a Body does not move itfelf, but moves other Bo-
dies round it by Attradlion and Repulfion, which he makes to be
elfential qualities of Matter. And I have heard fome Newtonians
explain in this way what Sir Ifaac has faid of Attradion, though Sir
Ifaac himfelf has been at great pains to obviate any fuch niifappre-
henfion, by faying, that he means nothing more by Attraction than
a tendency of Bodies towards one another^ And, for the fame reafon,
he certainly means by Repulfion nothing more than the tendency of
Bodies from one another. I therefore think it hard that thefe gen-
tlemen ihould charge Sir Ifaac with an opinion fo abfurd, and which
is entirely their own ; for no philofopher before them ever thought
of Matter operating upon Matter, otherwife than in contad, and by
impulfe, for a very plain reafon, that nothing can ad where it is
not, neither Mind nor Body : And, indeed, I can no more conceive
a thing to ad 'adhere it is not, than ivhen it is not. But the philo-
fophers of this kind have fuch a rooted averfion to Mind, fuch a
wv£Uf*«Toipoj3i», as Cudworth calls it, that they will fuppofe any thing,
and will adopt the moft improbable, nay, an impoffible hypothefis,
rather than admit the agency of Mind in explaining the phaenome-
na of Natuie. That thofe who deny the exiftence of Mind ihould
do fo, is not furprifing ; but I own I think it very furprifmg, that
the Newtonians, who profefs to believe in Mind, as their Mafter
certainly did, (hould have recourfe to fuch ftrange hypothefes, rather
than make ufe of Mind in folving the phaenomena of Nature.
The hypothefis, that there are other Bodies interjeded betwixt the
diftant Bodies, by which they ad upon one another, cannot be faid
to
Chap. VI. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 41
to be an abfurd hypothefis, as we know that Bodies ad upon one
another by fuch an interpofition. Nor is it a new hypothefis ; for
the phaenomena of the loadftone and the iron has been attempted to
be accounted for in that way ; but it is no more than an hypothefis ;
and, if aethers and fluids, and fubtile fpirits, the exiftence of which
never can be proved, are to be fuppofed, all the phaenomena of Na-
ture may be folved by fuch arbitrary fuppofitions. This would be
contrary to that fundamental maxim of the Newtonian philofophy,
by which we are enjoined not to feign hjpothe/es, and to build only
upon fad and obfervation. But, what is ftill worfe, if the exiftence
of thefe aethers were admitted, it could not be fhown, from any laws
of mechanics known, that they would produce the effedts afcribed to
them : So that they refemble, in every refped, the vortices of Des
Cartes, which are now fo generally exploded.
Thus, I think, I have proved, that Body cannot move itfelf, and
that, if it could, we muft afcribe to it not only a moving, but an in-
telligent Mind ; which, if we could fuppofe, there is an end of the
fyftem of Theifm, unlefs we reckon Spinofa a Theift, who indeed
profeffed to be fuch ; but his God was matter intelligent, or, in o-
ther words, the Material World itfelf. His fyftem of Atheifm is
much the fame with the fyftem of Strato, the Peripatetic, which I
have explained in vol. i. p. 240. And indeed, it appears to me to
be the only fyftem of Atheifm that is not manifeftly abfurd or ri-
diculoufly defective. Of this kind is the fyftem of Epicurus who
accounts for every thing from motion, but gives no account of Mo-
tion itfelf, how it began, or how it is carried on : And, further he
fuppofes, that Motion alone, without Intelligence, can produce all
thofe wonderful works of Intelligence that we fee in the univerfe •
than which I can imagine no greater abfurdity. Dr Prieftley, in the
fyftem he has given us of our Microcofm, (for he has not yet given
us a fyftem of the Great World), has avoided the defed of Epicu-
VoL. II. F rus's
42 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book I.
rus's fyftem, in not accounting for the origin of Motion ; for he
fuppofes, tliat our machine was not only frainedby Almighty power,
but was likewife fet agoing by that Power : But he maintains, that
this Motion and MechaniAn does produce Intelligence, and 'not on-
ly Inteliigcnce, but Confcioufnefs ; for he cannot deny the fad, that
this machine of ours does not only go on in the ordinary opera-
tions of Intelligence, propofing ends, and devifmg means for accom-
plifliing thofe ends, but does alfo reJlcSl, and makes itfelf its own
objedl. And he likewife jnaintains, if I rightly underftand his fy-
ftem, that though tliere be Intelligence in the Univerfc, there is but
one Supreme Intelligence, but no Inferior Intelligences; fo that Men,
Animals, and Plants, are but mere Machines, and the names of Jn-
telleclnal^ animal^ and Vegetable life, are nothing but founds. What
we are to think of this fyftem, I leave the reader to judge. It
is better than the fyflem of Epicurus, in as much as it accounts for
the Origin of Motion ; but, in every other refpcdt, it is perfcd E-
picurifm ; and I think it is more abfurd than the fyftem of Strato
and Spinoza, in this refpedl, that it fuppofes mere Matter to produce
the works of Intelligence which we fee man produces, without Intelli-
gence in itfelf. But fuch fyftems we are to expedl from men who will
fpeculate on thcfe high fubjeds, without the affiftance of the Antients.
I will conclude this chapter with obferving, that, if I have fuc-
ceeded in proving that Body cannot move itfelf, it muft be acknow-
ledged that my definition of Mind and Body difcriminate the two
as much as is poflible ; for, if Body cannot move, and if Mind can-
not be moved, it is evident they never can be confounded, accord-
ing to the definitions I have given of them, which are perfedly di-
ftindl, and, indeed, oppofite, as oppofite as affirmation and negation;
for Mind, I fiiy, j/ioues, Body does not move ; Mind is not moved^
as fhall be demonftrated in the next chapter. Body is moved : And
from thefe definitions is demonftrated an eflential quality of Mind,
of which I am to treat in the next chapter, viz. its hmnateriality.
CHAP.
Chap. VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 43
HAP. VII.
Of the Immateriality of WmA— Difficulty to conceive an immaterial
Subftance.- — This to be done by the method of AbR.r3L&.ion^ as ive
conceive a Point, Line, e^c. — Power, Energy, Activity, effential
^alities of Mind. — That Poiver bejl feen in Motion — therefore
Mind defined by the'Power of moving. — Confequences o/"Mind being
an immaterial Subftance — has no Parts — is indivi/ible, and im-
moveable.— Another confequence isy that Mind moves Body in a
Manner quite different from that in ivhich Body moves Body. — It
moves unorganized Bodies in the fame manner as it moves Animals
and Plants. — !n>f Deity cannot be fuppofed to move Body in that
ivay. — Reafoning from Analogy on that Subje^. — Mind ?;z(?i;£'/ Body
in a manner quite different from that in ivhich Body moves Body.
— Confequences of that Difference. — We hiozu, therefore, infome
refpe^, hoiv Mind moves Body.
UPON this fubjedt, of the immateriality of Mind, one great
difficulty, and perhaps the greateft of all, is to give an idea of
an immaterial Subftance, and to make it conceiveable that fuch a
Subftance fliould exift : This I have endeavoured to do in the 13th
Chapter of the 2d Book of my Firft Volume. I am fenfible I have
loft my labour with thofe who believe that we have no ideas, but
perceive things only by our fenfes and imagination ; for it is certain
that an immaterial Subftance can neither be apprehended by Senfe,
nor figured by the Imagination. But, with refpea: to thofe who
admit the exiftence of Ideas, and who are accuftomed to the abftrac-
^ 2 tions
44 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book I.
tions that fcience requires, the matter will not be fo difficult. A geo-
meter, for example, muft abilradl from I3ody a point, a line, and a
furface. He mud not, therefore, lay, that he cannot conceive
length without breadth, or both without depth ; and, in general, he
muft admit that he can conceive the dimenfions of Body without the
Body ; nay, he muft admit that he can conceive what has no di-
menfions at all, neither length, breadth, nor thickncfs, namely a
Point ; for otherwife geometry would be no fcience. In the fame
manner, the natural philofophcr muft have the idea of form wltliout
matter, and matter without form, otherwife he never can explain
properly the principles of phyfics. Now, if, inftead of abftrading
Form or Dimenfion from Matter, I abftrad that Power by which it
is moved, I have the idea of Mind, which, I fay, is as clear and di-
ftind an idea, as the idea of Form, or of a Point, Line, or Surface.
It may be faid, I know, that Power or Energy is no more than a
Quality of Matter ; but I hope I have proved, to the fatisfadtion of
the reader, that it is no Quality of Matter : It therefore muft be a
Quality of fome other Subftance. What that Subftance is, I cannot
tell, any more than I can tell what the Subftance of Matter is, of
which Extenfion, Refiftance, and Solidity, are qualities ; but I know
moft certainly that there is a Subftance of Mind as well as of Matter.
The experimental men, indeed, or fuch a philofopher as Mr David
Hume, who tell us that we have no knowledge but by our Senfes,
will fay that we do not fee or feel Mind ; therefore we cannot con-
ceive that it exifts. But I fay the fame of a point or a line. No
man can fay that he fees or feels what has no parts, or what has on-
ly length, but not breadth. But fhall we therefore deny that a point
or line exifts ? If we do, we deny at the fame time that geometry
is a fcience. It is true, they do not exift in Matter, nor are not ma-
terial, any more than Mind is ; but they have not, for that, a lefs
real exiftence, but rather a more fixed and permanent one ; becaufe,
whatever is material is in a conftant flux and change ; nor is any
thing fixed and ftable except Mind, and its ideas.
Power,
Chap.VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 45
Power, therefore, ene^gy, or adlivity, (for by all thefe words it may
be exprefled), is an eflential quality of that fubftance I call Mind.
And as this power or energy is mod obvious to the fenfes in mo^
iion, I have defined Mind by the power of tnoviiig, and alfo becaufe
every thing in the material world is in Motion, by which the whole
frame of Nature is fuftained and preferved. There is, likewife, ano-
ther reafon, viz. That, without this power of Mind, Body could not
cxift, though Matter might, according to the dilHndion made by the
antients betwixt Body and Matter ; for it is this moving power of
Mind that makes the particles of Matter run together, cohere, and
form Boxly *.
The quefllon, then, is, What the nature of the fubftance is of
which this power is a quality I And I fay the Subftance muft be
immaterial ; for, as the power is not a quality of Matter, and
yet is a quality, it muft be a quality of fomething which is
not Matter, or, in other words, immaterial ; for immaterial is
nothing but the negation of Matter. And this I think is evi-
den'ce fufEcient for the immateriality of Mind. But, whoever
defires more, may confult the fourteenth chapter of the fecond
book of Volume Firft, where he will find it proved, a priori^ from
the nature of Motion, of Body, and of Mind ; and in the following
chapter there is a proof of it likewife a pojleriori ; both which, joined
together, make, if I am not much deceived, the cleareft proof of the
immateriality of Mind that has hitherto been produced : And it is a
proof which goes to every principle of motion in Body ; and for
that reafon I have called the motive principle, even in Bodies unor-
ganized. Mind, becaufe every thing immaterial, or, in other words,
what is not Body, muft of neceftity be Mind. Ariftotle, as I have
obferved, fays, that the motive principle in thofe Bodies is like
Mind ;
* It is well obferved by Proclus, tbat whatever keeps together aHs, and whatever
a£ts is incoiporea), or Mind. I have quoted the paflage, in a note, upon p. 86. cf
the Firft Volume, which fee. See alfo p. 177.
4€ ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book I.
Mind ; and, in another pafTagc, he fays exprefsly, that it is a fpccies
of life to phyfical Bodies ; which is juft what I fay it is *.
If Mind be not material, it cannot have parts ; for that is an efTen-
tial quality of Matter, which cannot belong to any thing that is not
material. And here we may obferve the analogy I before took no-
tice of, betwixt geometrical abftradtions and thofe by which we come
to the idea of Mind; for it appears that the Mind may not be im-
properly defined, as Euclid has defined a point, viz. that which has
no parts.
If Mind has not parts, it follows, of neceffary confequence, that it
cannot be moved, or moveable : For what is moved muft neceffarily
have its parts in different parts of Space at different times. Nor can
it occupy Space, or be extended ; for Space, as I have faid, only re-
lates to Body, not to Mind ; otherwife Mind would have figure,as well
as extenfion. Mind, however, may be faid, in a certain fenfe, to be
fomewhere ; but in what fenfc I fhall, in the fequel, more fully ex-
plain. Mind, having no parts, muft alfo be indivifible ; fo that, as it
is the moft excellent, fo it is the pureft and fimpleft of all Subftances.
Another
• ^*>i T({ lv(rx '.V Tn; . Nature,
therefore, in Ariftotle's Linguage, is Mind not Intelligent, operating in Body ; for,
if the Mind have intelligence, it does not belong to Nature ; and, therefore, in A-
riflotlc's philofophy, man, as well as God, is diflinguifhed from Nature.
And here we may obferve the true diftinclion betwixt Phyfics and Metaphyfics.
Phyfics treat of Mind operating in Body and through Body ; whereas Metaphyfics
treat of Mind feparated from Body, and operating without Body. Betwixt thefe two
lies the Subject of what Arillotle calls the human philofophy. This fubjeft is human
Intellect, which is not feparated from Body, but, though joined with it, can nCi
»-;thout it.
Chap. VII. ANTIKNT METAPHYSICS. 47
Another important confcqucnce, and which defcrves particular at-
tention, of the Mind's being immaterial, is, that it cannot move Body
in the manner that Body moves Body, by the furface of the moving
Body impelling the furface of the Body moved ; for it is impoIRble
that Mind, not being material, and therefore having no furface, can
move Body in that way.
The qucftion, then, is. In what manner docs Mind move Body ^
And I fay it is by adting upon every particle of it, even the inmofl:
particles. And, accordingly, it is in this way that gravitation moves
Bodies, not in proportion to their furface, but in proportion to their
• mafs *. In the fame way Mind moves vegetables and animals, which
kind of motion in them is called Animcition. And it may be fo call-
ed, alfo, with refpedl to unorganized Bodies, as it moves them in the
fame manner. Of this I fhall fay a great deal more afterwards.
Another very remarkable difference betwixt the operations of
Mind upon Body, and of Body upon Body, is, that, when Body
impels Body, the motion continues fome time after the impulfe ;
whereas Mind not moving Body by impulfe, but by inceffant ener-
gies, the motion continues no longer than the energy, but ceafes
when the energy ceafes. This we know with the greateft certainty,
from confcioufnefs, the fource of all our knowledge of the operations
of the Mind, and particularly its operations upon Body ; for, with-
out
• In this way Sir Ifaac Newton, in his Scholhtm Cenerah^ fpeaks of gravitation,
• Oritur utique haec vis a caufa aliqua, quae penetrat ad ufque centra folis et
• planetarum, fine virtutis diminutione ; quaeque agit, non pro quantitate fuperfi-
• cierum particularum in quas agit, (ut folent caufae mechanicae), fel pro quanti-
• tate materiae folidac i' where Sir ll'aac fecms to acknowledge that Bodies fo mo-
ved are not moved mechanically ; and, if they are not moved mrchanically, they
muft be moved by Mind ; for, betwixt thefe two, there is no medium.
48 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book I.
out confclournefs, we fliould not have known at all that Mind moves
Body.
The confequence of Mind moving Body in this way, is not only
that the Motion ceafes when the energy ceafes, but that it moves
Body in all directions with the fame facility, not only in a ftraight
line, but in a curve, of which the dircdion is continually changing:
And this, as fimply and uniformly, as in a ftraight line ; for, as the
motion is, by the incefTant exertion of the moving power, repeated
every inftant of the motion, it may change its diredion every mo-
ment, without any other motive force being applied to the Body. On
the other hand, as Body moves Body by impulfe, which motion conti-
nues fome time after the impulfe, and as it is a law of Nature, that a
Body fo moved muft go on in a ftraight line, it is evident that it
cannot be defleded from the ftraight line, fo as to be moved in a
curve, without fome other force applied to it. The curvilineal mo-
tion, therefore, produced in this manner, muft neceflarily be a com-
bined motion, not fimple and uniform.
However extraordinary, therefore, this kind of motion by Mind
may appear to thofe who have not attended to the operations of
Mind, but only to thofe of Body, I fay we neither have, nor can have
any other idea of it, becaufe our own motion, from which alone we
derive the idea of the motion of Mind, is of that kind.
Of what ufc tills theory is, in explaining the motions of the cc-
ieftial Bodies, may appear from what I have already faid upon this
fubjccl in the Appendix to the Firft Volume, and will, I hope, appear
ftill more evidently fiom what I Ihall further fay.
In the mean time, it is to be obfcrvcd, that it is not true what is
coimnonly faid, that we know nothing of the way in which Mind
moves
Chap. VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 49
moves Body ; for I think I have fhown, that we not only know
negatively that it docs not move Body, as Body moves Body, but
pofitively in what manner it moves it. It is true, indeed, that, as
we do not know the Subftance of either, we cannot tell exadly how,
by their nature and eflence, they are fo conned:ed, that the one muft
be always adlivc, and the other always paflive : Nor can we ac-
count how Subftances, fo totally different in their natures, fhould af-
fedl one another as we know they do. But,
Efl quoJam prodire tenus, fi non datur ultra * ;
And we muft give over altogether the purfuit of knowledge, if we
infift to know the very eflence of things, and their moft hidden
principles: All that we fhould endeavour, is to know well what is gi-
ven us to know, and to live in hopes that our knowledge Ihall be
.more perfed in a more perfedl ftate.
Vol. TI. G BOOK
• Horat. lib. I. ep. i. v. 32.
50. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. BookIL
BOOK II.
Of che feveral Kinds of Mind.
CHAP. I,
Js there are different Motions, Jo there are different Minds. — Of the
loivejl or elemental Mind. — Proclus's notion of that Mind. — OfGra-
vitation, compared -with other motive Principles — Mind ftot al-
ivays moving, nor Body alivays moved, — Of the reality of this
motive Principle in Body. — The feveral Opinions upon this Sitbje^
—Objedion to the Exijlence of this Mind anfivered. — The Vege-
table Mind lefs abundant than the Elemental — more abundant than
the Senfitive. — The Vegetable more artificial than the Elemen-
tal— but lefs than the Senfitive. — Lafl of ally is the Intellectual,
much more excellent than any of the other three.
IN this chapter, I propofe to give an account of the feveral fpccie-
fes of this great genus Mind ; for, as there are feveral different
kinds of Motion in this univerfe, there mufi: be different Minds ; and,
as all the Motions in it are diredled by Intelligence, there muft be
Minds in it that have intelligence, as well as a moving power.
I will begin with the Mind which only moves, and this in the
funpleft manner. The Mind I mean, is that which, according to
the
Chap.I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 5-1
the philofophy of Ariftotle, is in all phyfical Bodies, and may
be called the Elanental Mind ; firfl, becaufe it is in the elements,,
and makes them cohere together, fo as to form Bodies of fome fize,
•which, being compofed of thefe elements, have all this Mind in them ;
and, fecondly, becaufe it is the foundation and groand-work of all
the other Minds incorporated with Matter; for the vegetable, the
animal, and the intelledlual life in Man, are but fuperftruftures upoa
this elemental life, which pervades the whole material world, and-
may be faid to be the bafis of every thing in it *.
As this Mind animates and actuates fimple and elemental Bodies,
G 2 or.
* This principle, as I have obferved before, Ariftotle fjys is '««-7rs/> 4"''X''-> ^nd lici
^OTi \r Toif ^i«r« K»if(rrut«>v uxuXvtu;,
It T» xtKru^j T0615 If avTn rut Itiaii ccnixiq e-vnj^tuira' And this principle, which is in
itfelf eternal, as well as immaterial, and preferves the fpecicfcs of things, though
the matter of them be corrupted, is, in the language of thefe later Platonifts,
as well as of Ariftotle, called (pvcij. The firft principle, according to Proclup,
is altogether out of Nature, being llri^vuftttx, and perfeitly feparated from all
matter } but this (fvc-n, he fays, is that alone which proceeds and goes forth into
Body. 'H it 9»rt(, v^ttXHvrx fitttty it* Kiel i^ytttot Xiytrxi tw> 0e*>i', ovk cc^a; iv ii i>.>.f
KittiTiK6t, aA>i f^iurx wui rc «iiTox(»i|To>, TU1 «^' ti»uT»i; ln^ytn' And he defines Nature,
according to the doclrine of Plato, in this way, Oun-i* ««-iu^*to;, i^nata-zc: Tn/iaTut,
hcyivi i-x,ivii. Proclus, in Titnaeutn, p. 4. Nature,
therefore, according to him, is precifely what 1 make ir, an immaterial prin^-.ple of
motion in Bodies, acting according to intelligence, but without coafcioufn:rs, or
being able to recognize itfelf. And in a palfage w4iich I have quoted f om the fame
author, (Volume rmt, p. 108.) he blames Ariftotle, and, I think, veiy uftiy, for
fpeak:ng fo much of the Mind which govern- tht Mcions uf toe celefti iBo.Hes, .
and fayini; fo iittle 01 ihis Elemental Mind, which ij the grand agent of Nature here-
on earth.
52 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book 11.
or, if compounded, not of fuch artificial frame and texture as Bodies
organized ; fo the motions it produces here on earth are of the
fimpleft kind, being all in ftraight lines : But, like other Minds, it
moves by inceflant energies, and thefe not conftant or uniform, but
increafmg or decreafmg, according to the dillance of tiie ohjetis to
which, or from which the Bodies in motion are moved. In the moft
remarkable motion of this kind, I mean the motion of Bodies falling
towards the centre of the earth, the ratio of increafe or decreafe, at
the different diftances, has been exadly fixed. But, in the motion
of other Bodies, fuch as elcdrical, magnetical, and chymical, the va-
rious force of the moving power has not been fo exadly calculated,
though we are fure it is governed by fixed and ftated laws, as well
as every other thing in Nature.
This motion of gravitation is Ukewife more conftant than any
other motion of Bodies upon earth ; for in all heavy Bodies here
there is a tendency towards the centre ; whereas the motions of
magnetifm and eledricity are only occafional, when the Bodies are
within a certain diftance of one another. And there is another oc-
cafional motion, which our modern philofophers account for, not
from any reafon or principle, but by a mere word or found, I mean
the word AttraB'wn ; and that is the motion of the waters of the fea
upward, when the moon is in a certain pofition with refped to them.
And here we may obferve in paffing, that, though Mind have the
power of moving, and be the only adive principle in the univerfe ;
yet it is not neceflary that it fhould be always moving, but it may
be fometimes quiefcent, and then it moves only potentially, or in
capacity : And the fame may be true of Matter, with refped to its
quality of heing moved. And, accordingly, Ariftotle maintained,
that the different kinds of Bodies had deftinations to different places,
to which, when they were arrived, they refted. Thus, according
to
Chap. I. ANT I EN T METAPHYSICS. S3
to him, a ftone, if it were at the centre of the earth, would be at
reft ; and therefore he has faid, that Nature is a principle of re/l as
well as of motion. It is, however, true, that we know no Body-
that is not actually in motion, or has not a tendency to motion. In
this ftate are all Bodies here on earth ; the whole folar fyftem is all
in motion, and it is likely every other fyftem in the univerfe.
Neither is it necefTary that every kind of Mind in the uni-
verfe fhould immediately, and diredlly, move Body. And I am per-
fuaded, that the intelledlual Mind is not the immediate Caufe of
Motion, but only the reniote, moving Bodies by the agency and mi-
niftry of inferior Minds, fiich as the Animal and Vegetable, and this
loweft Mind, of which I am now treating ; but we muft never for-
get, that it is a fundamental maxim of this philofophy, that Mind
is the author of all Motion, either mediately or immediately.
That this elemental Mind, or principle of Motion, does really
exift in the univerfe, I hope I have proved to the fatisfadion of my
reader in the firft part of this work. I will, however, add fome-
thing more upon this fubjed:, as I know it is that part of my fyftem
which ftumbles the moft of my readers, more than any other.
There can be, I think, but four opinions upon this fubjed ; for,
either Body moves itfelf, or it is moved by impulfe of other Body,
or it is moved by Mind. And this laft opinion divides into two ;
for, either the Mind is Deity moving diredly and immediately thofe
Bodies, or it is a particular Mind in them, which is the caufe of
their Motion : So that the whole opinions of this fubjed are four ;
and, befides thefe, there can be none other.
As to the /r/? of thefe opinions : Whoever believes that Body
moves itfelf, is an Atheift, whether he knows it or not ; for as it is
54 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
undoubtedly moved by Intelligence, that is, for a certain purpofe,
he muft alfo believe, that Body has, by its nature and elTcnce, Intel-
ligence, as well as a Moving Power *.
To they'^fonJ hypothefis the obje£lion is obvious; That it gives
no account of the Origin, or Principle, of Motion, but liippofes an
infinite feries of bodies all impelling and impelled ; a fuppofition, as
I have fhown f, altogether abfuid and unintelligible: And, befides it
fuppofes Bodies, of the exiftence of which there is not the leaft evi-
dence, and which we cannot believe to exift, without renouncing
our fenfes, and making abfurd and incredible Fidlions, inftead of
Syftems of philofophy ; for, who can believe that there is any exter-
nal impulfe upon a ftone when it falls to the ground ? or, who can
believe, that, when the magnet comes near to the iron, there fliould
be thea a Body which impels the iron, but which did not exift be-
fore : — If fo, we muft alfo create bodies to account for all the mo-
tions exhibited by the chymifts, which, like the Magnetical Motions,
are only occafional. I will only fay farther of this ftrange hypo-
thefis, that it can only be adopted by thofe who have raifed them-
felves fo little above fenfe, as to have no idea of any other Motion,
but that which falls under the notice of fenfe, namely, that which
is produced by the impulfe of one Body upon another, and have fo
little ufe of Intelled:, as not to be confcious of their own operations,
by which they might know, with the greateft certainty, that it i»
their Mind which moves their own bodies.
As to the hypothefis of Body attrading Body, or of any thing,
whether Body or Mind, operating where it is not, it is too abfurd
to be ferioufly refuted X' It has arifen from the term Attradion,
which
• See what I have faid further upon this fubjeft, p. 37.
t P. 37-
% See p. I (J.
Chap.I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 55
which is of univerfal ufe in our philofophy of Nature : And it flxows
us how dangerous the ufe of improper words is in all fciences ; for,
though Sir Ifaac has exprefsly warned his readers againft fuch
an abufe of the word, yet I believe, of thofe who ufe it, there are few
who do not affix to it the notion of fome force inherent in the Bo-
dy, by which it attracts other bodies to it ; and, indeed, the word, in
its grammatical and etymological fignification, can have no other
meaning.
The third opinion is the opinion of Mr Baxter, who maintains,
that the Deity is the immediate and dUxeOi Caufe of Gravitation, and
all the great movements in the univerfe. But this opinion, how-
ever pious it may appear, cannot be admitted, unlefs we likewife
admit, that the Deity does himfelf animate the feveral bodies ; that
being the only way, as, I think,! have proved*, that Mind can move
Body. Now, it would be highly derogatory to the Divine Nature,
and it would be truly making of the Deity an anima mundiy not en-
tirely feparated from Matter, as we ought to believe of Deity,
but immerfed in it, and intimately conneiSted with it, as our
Minds are, to fuppofe that he animated every particle of Mat-
ter, and, in that way, immediately produced all the motions
of Unorganized Bodies. It is certainly a much more probable
hypothefis, and more worthy of the Divine Majefty, to fuppofe
that he moves all thofe Bodies by inferior Minds ; and I fhall
prefently Ihow, that it is much more agreeable to the General Ana-
logy of Nature, and to our original idea of the Moving Power of
Mind.
There are, I know, fome who fpeak of Bodies being moved by a
force originally imprefled upon them by the Deity. This ftrange
notion,
* P. 47.
-56 ANTIENT -METAPHYSICS. Book II.
notion, I imagine, is derived from Sir Ifaac Newton's Firfl Law of
Motion, which afferts, that Bodies once fet in Motion continue al-
ways in Motion, by what he calls the 'vis inftta. But, in ihtfrjl place,
I think I have fliown clearly, and fhall further fliow in the fequel,
that this Law of Motion, though laid down as an axiom, is not
true ; and that no Body can either begin or continue Motion by
any power eflential to Matter, but only by a power altogether dif-
ferent, namely Mind. But, 2dly, if it were true, it could not apply
to this cafe, being only applicable to Motion begun by bodily im-
pulfe which, as I have fliown, cannot account for all the Motions
of the univerfe, And, lajlly, though it might be conceived, that
one original impreflion upon the Body, whether given by Mind
or Body, might continue to make it move without ceafing, it is
impoflible to conceive that the fame imprefTion only once given,
fhould make it move for fome time, and, after it has ccafed to
move, move again, as in the cafe of the magnet and the iron, —
of what they call the elective attradion, which the chymifts exhibit
in their folutions of metals, — and of the common phacnomcnon of
a ftone falling to the ground as often as it is taken up from it.
All thefc falfe opinions, therefore, being rejedled, there remains
only the true opinion, that each Body is moved by a Mind belong-
in"- to itfelf. And this opinion I hold to be perfedlly agreeable to
the general analogy of Nature, and to our original idea of the mo-
ving power in Bodies ; for the moving power of any Body is not a
fenfation, but an idea. The Motion of the Body is a fadl that falls
under the fenfes : But it is by intelligence that we apprehend
the caufe of that movement : And, in general, it is only by
intelligence that we have any notion of caufe or eflfed. Now, how
do we get the idea of Mind moving Body ? And I fay it is by Con-
fcioufnefs ; for it is by rcfiedting on -what pafTes in our own little
world, that we know that our Bodies are moved internally, not by
any
Chap. I. A N T I K N T METAPHYSICS. 57
any external force ; for every Body muft be moved, cither exter-
nally or internally : And, as our Bodies are not moved externally,
they muft be moved by fome internal principle ; and that principle I
call Mind : And it is in this way, and this way only, that we form,
or can form, the idea of Mind moving Body. And by applying this
idea to the fcveral motions of the univcrfe, we fhall difcover, with as
great certainty as the nature of the thing is capable of, that unorga-
zed Bodies are moved by the fame internal principle. And I pro-
ceed thus.
In the //J/? place, I know, by the moft certain of all knowledge,
I mean Confcioufnefs, that my Body is moved by this internal prin-
ciple. From myfelf I proceed to other men ; and by analogy I con-
clude, that their bodies are moved in the. fame manner. By the fame
analogy I difcover that the bodies of other animals are moved likewife
in that way : And from thence I proceed to the vegetable, whofe
motions can no more be accounted for from external impulfe than
thofe of the animal : I therefore conclude that they are alfo produ-
ced by an internal principle. Nor can I ftop at the vegetable ; but
the fame analogical reafoning muft make me conclude, that unorga-
nized bodies are moved alfo by an internal principle, fmce their mo-
tions cannot be accounted for, any more than thofe of the vegetable,
from external impulfe.
Thus, far, therefore, I think it is proved, by a clear analogy, that
unorganized Bodies are moved by Alind ; and, as Mind can move
only internally, not externally, or by application of furface to fur-
face, as Body moves Body, it is alfo proved, that thofe Bodies are
moved by Mind internally. And a like analogy further proves,
what I have before endeavoured to eftablifli, that it is not the Uni-
verfal Mind that moves thefe Bodies, but a particular Mind ; for it
will be allowed by every Body, that it is a particular Mind that
Vol. II. H moveji
58 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
moves our Bodies : For the fame reafon, it cannot be denied,
at leaft, it is not denied by any philofopher among us, that it is a
particular IVjind which moves the Brute. From the Brute, in the
fame analogical way of reafoning, I proceed to the Vegetable, and
from the Vegetable to the unorganized Body ; making this general
conclufion, that all thofe feveral Bodies, being moved in the fame
manner, are not only moved by Mind internal, but each by a parti-
cular Mind *.
The analogical method of reafoning which hath been ufcd here, is
very much pradlifed by Plato, in all his fpeculations concerning Na-
ture. And, indeed, it appears to me, that if, in natural philofophy,
we do not reafon by analogy, from what we fee and know, to what
we do not fee and know, we can make very little progrefs in natural
knowledge ; nor do I think it is poffible that we can otherwife make a
fcience of it at all. And, accordingly, not only Plato, but our modern
na-
• In this analogical way, Dr Prieflley argues, (p. 258. of his Illuftrations of the
Difquifitions), where he fays, That, if we fuppofe that it is an immaterial fubftance in
Man, and not the mere organization of his Body, that feels and thinks, we muft, for
the fame reafon, fuppofe, that it is not the material magnet that attracts iron, but a
pecul'ar immaterial fubftance within it ; and he adds, * For the fame reafon, we may
' imagine diflinB immaterial fuhjiances for every operation in Nature, the proximate
< caufe of which we are not able to perceive.' And I think the Dodor argues
well ; for, if there be an immaterial fubft.mce in Man, and in other animals, by
•which they are moved, there muft alfo neceffarily be an immaterial fubdance in
unorganized bodies, by which they are moved. The Do6lor, therefore, and I rea-
fon in the fame manner : Only we fet out from principles quite different; the Doc-
tor maintaining, that there is no immaterial principle in man, and, therefore, there
is none in the loadftone, and other unorganized bodies ; I, on the other hand, main-
taining, that there is an immaterial principle in Man, and that, therefore, there is
one in Bodies unorganized as well as organized. This Ihows me, that the Dodlor
is naturally an acute man, and can fee confequences and connedlions of things ;
and I have no doubt but that, if he had (ludied the antient philofophy, he would
have drawn the fame concluGons from the principles of it that 1 dp.
Chap. I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS.
f9
naturalifts, reafon in that way, when they colledt a great many parti-
cular fads of natural hiftory, under general heads, proceeding upon
the fuppofition, that all fadts of the fame kind are produced by the
fame caufe. In like manner, I fuppofe that all thefe feveral Bodies,
being moved in the fame manner, are all moved by the fame caufe.
If, indeed, another caufe could be aihgncd, as the fame effea:
may be produced by different caufcs, I fhould admit that the argu-
ment was not conclufive. But, as no other caufe is pretended, ex-
cept Ethers, and Fluids, invifible and Intangible, which, if they could
be fuppofed to exift, (for, as to any proof of their exiftence, it is
not fo much as pretended), would not, by any laws of mechanics
known, account for the feveral motions of Bodies, I think I may fay
that this argument, from analogy, is as conclufive as any argument
of the kind can be.
The great objedion to this part of my fyRem arifes from the con-
fined fcnfe which many people give to the word Mind, as if it de-
noted only that which thinks and reflects, but did not comprehend
that principle which only moves. But here again I would argue in
the analogical way, and afk thofe objedtors, whether they do not
give the name of Mind to that principle in the Brute, which, though
without thought or reflexion, moves him ? This principle, it is
true, has fenfation, appetite, and defires ; but what will they fay of
the motive principle in the Vegetable, which has none of thefe ? And
where is the difference betwixt the motive principle in the Vege-
table and the unorganized Body, except that, in the former, it is
more complicated and artificial ? If any one fays, that he cannot
conceive how there (hould be any motive principle without thought
or refledlion, appetites or defires, I would have him confider, that
one Body moves another, and yet the Body moving has neither
thought nor refledion, appetites nor defires : And, if Body can
move Body without any of thefe, why ihould not Mind do it like-
H 2 wife ?
6o ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
wife ? If, this notwithftanding, any one flioiild think that there
cannot be a moving power witliout appetite and defire, I lay that
there is in Bodies unorganized fomething, at Icaft, very like to ap-
petite ; for, in what the chymifts call elective attra^ions, we ob-
ferve certain Bodies, not only fhowing the greateft inclination to
other Bodies, and running, as it were, into their embraces, but, af-
ter they have incorporated with them, forfaking them, and, in pre-
ference to them, uniting themfelves with others *.
This motive principle, whether fimply moving, or having other
powers, I denote by the general name of Mind ; becaufe I think I
have proved, that It is not Matter : And, if It be not Matter, it muft
be Mind ; as I hold there is nothing in the univerfe but Matter and
Mind. But, if any man is dlfpofed to call it by another name,
fuch as Life^ Vitality, or a Principle of Motion^ I have no objedions,
provided he allow that it is not a Material Principle : For I have
always held It to be frivolous and inept, to dlfpute about tx'o/v/j-,
when people are agreed about things. At the fame time, I think,
it Is better to give fuch names to thefe things as may ferve to keep
in view the governing power in Nature, and never let us forget that
Mind is the author of all Motion.
I only further add concerning this fpecies of Mind, that, as it is
predominant in the fyftem of the Material world, and makes a part
of all Vegetables and Animals, it is neceflary that it fliould abound
more than any other ; and, accordingly, it animates every particle
of Matter, Mineral, Vegetable, or Animal. Nor is it any objedtion
to my fyftem, that I thus make the number of Minds infinite: For,
though Matter be, in theory, infinitely divifible, yet, as I have fhown
elfe-
• See what I have further faid concerning Appetite, both in vegetables, and in
unorganized Bodies, Vol. i, p. 237. and 238.
Chap. T. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 6i
elfewhere *, it is not, in fad, fo divided ; and it appears now to be
the general opinion of philofophcrs, that all Bodies confift of a cer-
tain number of particles, which are perfectly folid, and, therefore, in-
capable of divifion. Now, as all Nature confifts of Body and Mind,
there is no abfurdity in fuppoiing that there is as much Mind in the
univerfe as Body, and, confequently, that every particle of Matter
is animated by a Mind ; not, indeed, a mind intelleclual, for that
is an abfurd,Atheiftical,fyftem,but a Mind of the loweftkind; — that
which only moves in one uniform way.
The next in degree, as well as abundance, is the Vegetable Life,
which, as it is of a higher kind, fo it is more artificial, and has
movements much more various, by which the plant grows, is nou-
rifhed, and propagates its kind : And, as it is lefs abundant than
the elemental life, fo it is more abundant than the Animal, becaufe
it makes part of the Animal.
And here we rife to what Is much more mixed and compounded,
and confequently much more artificial. The Elemental Life is no-
thing but a principle of Motion, and a Motion always in a certain
direction : The Vegetable is more compounded ; for it is a prin-
ciple, joined with the matter of the Vegetable, by the various
movements of which principle, Growth, Nutrition, and Propaga-
tion are performed : But the Animal is of a ftrudlure very much
more artificial ; for there is fuperadded to the Vegetable, a Mind that
perceives objeds without it, or, in other words, has Senfations, feels
Pleafure and Pain, has Appetites and defires, and, by that power,
which is called Inftind, provides for the gratification of thefe appe-
tites, and, by confequence, for the prefervation of the individual, and
the continuation of the kind.
But
* Vol. I. p. 243.
62 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book 11.
But the variety of Nature docs not end even here ; for, however
more excellent the Animal Life may be than the Vegetable, there is,
even in this our earth, a Nature, by many degrees fuperior to the
Animal — a Mind, which not only perceives external objcds, but
perceives that it perceives them, — which apprehends not particulars
only, but generals, — recognifes its own, as well as other natures, —
and, at laft, rifcs to the contemplation of the Great Univerfe, and its
Greater Author : This Nature is MaJi. The Almighty crowned his
works here below with the addition of Intelle£l to the Animal Nature:
Then indeed, he re/led, andfaiv that all ivas good.
CHAP.
Chap. II. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS.
HAP. II.
Of the Difference betwixt Man and Brute. — This only to be learned
in antient Philofophy^ — hkeiinfe another Di/iiniiion, betxvixt God
and Nature. — "The Difficulty of dijlinguijhing Man and Brute ari-
fes from the Progrefs of Nature, by degrees, infenftble , from loiver to
higher Beings. — The Di/linclion o/" Man and Brute depends 7ipo}i
difingui/hing Ideas and Senfations. — Thcfe not confounded in an-
tient Philofophy. — Confounded by Mr Locke and by Mr Hume. —
The Uje of the Word Idea in antient and Modern Times, — Sofne
Ideas certainly not Senfations, fiich as the Ideas of Being,
Number, Beauty, Truth ; — bccaife thefe cannot be apprehend-
ed by any Senfe. — This is the Do^rine of Plato in the Theaete-
tes. — Difficulty of applying this Difinclion to particular Subflances.
— This Difficulty fohjcd, by recurring to the original Notion o/^Idea.
— It denotes the inward Form of the Thing. — That innvard Form
Mind. — This differently exprejed by Plato ^«JAriftotIe.— 77?^ Sul-
fations are the outward Appearances or Accidents of Things. —
This Difinclion betwixt the two, explained. — Gefieral Obfervations
concerning Ideas. — OJ Abflraft, — o/" General Ideas. — Ideas of Sen-
fible Qualities, as luell as of Subftances. — The Confequences of
maintaining that Ideas are Senfations. — No Stability of Knonvledge
tipon that Hypothefis. — This the Do5lrine of Protagoras and Hera-
cWtm—fJjould have been the Do5lrine oJ Mr Kume. — Difference be-
twixt the Ideas and Senfations o/'particular Subflances, explained.—
This Difinclion applied to Animals, Vegetables, and Unorganized
Bodies. — Opinion of Savage Nations coticerning the latter. — Of the
Dijlin^ion oJ Ideas ^M^f Senfations, in Qualities —^f/? as the Colour^
White.
64 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
White— fuc/j as the Perception of Tonch—alfo the Perception of a
particular ¥\^\.\rc.—Of the Idea of Figure in general— of ExtcnCion
— o/" Motion. — 7I2 have an Idea, even of a particular Thing, is
to perceive the one in the many. — A greater one perceived /« gene-
ral Ideas. — Thefe i/iufi be abftraded in order to be per fed. — The Di-
flribution 0/ Things z«/o Genus rt«^ Species not artifcial, but found-
ed in Nature. — 5o//j Uniformity ^?zi Variety, n.fc^//:)' for a Syftem.
— The "wonderful Variety and Uniforviity in the Syjlem r/Nature. —
Of our Idea o/'Mind. — This Idea acquired by Confcioufnefs. — 0/'
the Nature of Confcioufnefs. — // difiinguifloes us from the Brute
more than any thing elfe — is the highcfl Faculty belonging to the
human Mind — is the Foundation of all Certainty ahJ Knowledge.
— No Reafoning without Confcioufnefs. — From Confcioufnefs ivc
have thefrfl Idea of Mind. — Progrefs in that Idea from the Mind
that only moves, to the Supreme Intelledlual Mind. — 0/" the Final
Caufe. — Of the Difference of our Perceptions and thofe of the Brute.
Man dejlined by Nature for Purpofes quite different. — The Progrefs
of his WmAfrom lefler to greater ones, //'// he arrive at the great-
eft One in the Univerfe.
HAVE fiid a great de:il, in the Firft Volume, upon the dif-
ference betwixt Man and Brute : But fo little is the philofophy
of Mind, which alone can enable us to make that diftincftion, ftudied
at prefent, that many believe Man to be no more than a better fort
of Brute, and that the difference is only in degree, not in kind. I will
once more, therefore, endeavour to make this matter clear, which I am
perfuaded can only be done by the help of antient philofophy: If
fo, I would have thofe confider, who philofophife without that help,
how poor a philofopher a man muft be, who cannot diftinguifli him-
felf from a Brute. There is alfo another diftindlion, which the
antient philofophy will enable us to make, a diftindion of ftill higher
im-
Chap.r. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 65
importance in philofophy ; I mean the diftindion betwixt God and
Nature. This is not made, or, at Icafl:, not properly made, bv any-
modern philofopher I know, though there is nothing we value our-
felves more upon than our knowledge of natural philofopl.y ; yet it
is difficult to conceive how a man can be called a natural philofopher^
who cannot fo much as defme the fubje£l of his faience, nor tell us in
what refpedl it differs from the fubjed of theology. This diilindion
I have alfo endeavoured to explain in the preceding Volume *, and
fhall fay fomething more of it in this : In the mean time, I will en-
deavour to explain, accurately and fcientifically, the difference be-
twixt Man and Brute,
What makes it difficult to draw the line exadly betwixt thefe
two, is the progrefs, that we obferve in Nature, from inferior to
higher Beings by degrees not eafily to be feen and apprehended by
fuch intelligence as ours : For in this chain of Nature, which, as
Homer tells us, reaches from heaven to earth, there is not any the
fmalleft link wanting ; and every thing holds of every thing, without
the leafl: gap or interval betwixt. In this progrefs of Beings Nature
afcends from unorganized Body, to Body leaft of all organized, I
mean the plant ; or, in other words, fhe proceeds from the mere
Elementary Life to the Vegetable. From thence if fhe had pro-
ceeded diredly to the Intellectual Mind, there would have been a
prodigious gap : But this (he has filled up with the Animal, fo won-
derfully framed, that it would feem that nothing more could be
made of mere Matter. Her next flep, therefore, was neceffarily to
the Intelledual Being : And, accordingly, as fhe had before joined
the Senfitive Life to the Vegetable, now fhe joins the Intelleftual to
the Senfitive, by fuperadding Intelledt to Scnfation ; and fhe has
joined thefe three together fo wonderfully, that all operate together
in the fame Man, with a mutual connexion and dependence upon
one another. And thus Man, being both an animal and an intelledual
Vol. II. I creature,
* p. 217. 218. 223.
66 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book 11.
creature, muft of confequence adt, fometimes as a mere animal, and
fometimes as an intelleaual Being. And as it is only by their ac-
tions and operations that things are diftinguifhed, it is no wonder
that Man and Brute fhould be confounded by thbfe who cannot
think juftly, and difcriminate accurately.
In the preceding Volume, I have endeavoured to fhow, that it is
by Ideas that the Intelledlual Nature operates, whereas the Senfitive
operates only by Senfation ; fo that, if we cannot rightly diftinguifti
betwixt Senfations and Ideas, we can never properly make the diftinc-
tion betwixt Man and Brute.
I do not know that thefe two were confounded by any anticnt
philofopher ; I am fure, at leaft, they are not in the philofophy of
Plato and Ariftotle. The word Idea comes from the moft antient
fchool of philofophy in Europe, I mean the Pythagorean, and, if
we fuppofe it, as I do, to be the fame with the Egyptian School, the
moft antient in the world ; for it is ufed by Timaeus the Locrian,
in that moft valuable work of his, ftill preferved to us, De Anima
Mundi. The fenfe in which it is ufed by that author is the true
etymological fenfe of the word, denoting thtform of the thing, not
that form which is feen by the corporeal eye, but what is feen by a
much purer and nobler eye, the eye of the Mind. In this fenfe it is
ufed by all the philofophers of the Schools of Plato and of Ariftotle j
and it has been fo ufed by me throughout this whole work, and in
my other work upon the Origin and Progrefs of Language. The
more antient Englifh writers, even as late down as Bifhop Wilkins,
who writes that grand philofophical work upon Language, do not ufe
the term at all, but, in place of it, the word notion. Mr Locke was
the fiift author in England, as far as I know, that made ufe of it ;
but, not being a fcholar, and altogether unlearned in antient philofo-
phy, he has ufed it moft abfurdly, to denote the perceptions of Senfe,
which
Chap. n. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 67
which are common to us with the Brute : And in this manner he
lias confounded the Brute with Man, in the very beginning of his
work upon the human Mind ; nor does he appear to me ever to
have rightly diftinguifhed tliem, or formed a jull notion of what an
idea was, though it be mentioned in every page of his book. Since
his time, ideas and fenfations have been confounded in all our phi-
lofophical writings ; and the ftrange language, of ideas of fenfatioUy
has been introduced into philofophy ; — a confufion of terms which
the French have avoided ; for they diflinguilh betwixt les Idees and
Ics Jhifations.
Mr Hume, fol lowing the footfteps of Mr Locke, fand, indeed, I
cannot help faying that Mr Locke has laid the foundation, though, I
believe, w'ithout intending it, of all the Atheiflical philofophy that
has been broached fmce his time), has told us that ideas are but
weaker fenfations. If fo, there will be no difference betwixt Man
and Brute, except in favour of the Brute, who has commonly acu-
ter fenfations than we have.
One confequence, which Mr Hume has dravim from this doc-
trine *, is, that, as our Mind can only operate by the organs of the
Body, it mufl perifh with the Body. And, indeed, admitting the
premifes, it is not eafy to deny the conclufion, or to prove philofo-
phically that the Mind, never ading but in conjunftion with the
Body, can have a feparate exiftence. And there is another confe-
quenec, which, perhaps, Mr Hume did not forefee, or, if he did, I
believe he would not have been much alarmed, that, as there mull
be Ideas in the Divine Mind, if Ideas be Senfations, then Matter,
from which they are derived, muft be at leaft coeval with the Deity ;
I 2 and
* In one of the valuable legacies he has left to the public, which I have feen
printed, but I believe it is not yet publiflied.
63 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Bookll.
and Deity mud be fo far dependent upon it, as to derive from it all
his knowledge.
It is, therefore, of the greateft importance in Theology, and the
religion of Nature, as well as in the philofophy of Mind, to be able
to diftinguifh accurately betwixt Ideas and Senfations.
There are fome ideas, which, I think, it mufl; be evident to every
Body, are not Senfations, fuch as the Ideas of bein^ or exi/lence, of
the fame, or different, of like or unlike^ of number, that is, 7miltitiule
defined, of beauty, goodnefs, truth, and fcience \ for by what fenfe
can any of thefe be apprehended ? Is it by the fight, the hearing,
the touch, the tafte, or the fmell ? Is it by any, or all of thefe ?
No body, I think, will fay that it is ; for, though we perceive, by
the fenfe, objeds thatexift, — that are like or unlike to other objeds,
— that are beautiful, — that are number, 8cc. yet we certainly do not
perceive by the fenfe the ideas of Exiftence, Likenefs, Beauty, Num-
ber, &c. And, if they are not perceptions of the fenfe, or fenfa-
tions, they muft be Ideas ; for every thing we perceive is neceflarily
the one or the other.
It is by thefe ex;amples, that Plato, in the Theaetetes, has fhown
the difference betwixt Senfations and Ideas. The former, fays he,
the Mind perceives by the Body, and its organs ; the other it per-
ceives by itfelf, without any afliflance from the Body *. He might
have
* Plato Thaetet. .p 84. editio Serraui. The Greek fcholar will obferve in this
paflage of Plato a diftin^lion, which is fomewhat nice, betwixt • the Relative in
the dative cafe, and Ji' Jk, the genetive with the prepoGtion a** ; the former figni-
fying the Agent, or the Percipient, in this cafe, the other the Inftrument by which
xhe percipient perceives. Thus we perceive all the objedls of fenfe, fuch as co-
lours, fineUs, taftes, tj ^|'w;^;;1, or by the Mind j but we perceive each of them bj
the
Chap.ir. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 69
have faid the fame of all the moft general Ideas, fuch as thofe con-
tained in the Categories, as Subftance, Quantity, Quality, Relation,
&c. But, though this be no doubt an effential difference betwixt
Ideas
the means of, or, as we may exprefs it In Englifli in one word, through the feveral
fcnfes, the fight, the heating, or the tafte, that is, in Greelc, J/ <>":^!*«, ^' «»•«,
tici yvriui ; or, as Plato has likewife expreiled it, )»' ly, li' art/f, &c. that is, by
the means of the organs of thefe fenfes. This (hows how much the Greelc philofo-
phy contributes to the perfe£t underftanding of the Greek language.
I cannot help here obferving, that this Dialogue of Plato is one of the fined phi-
lofophical dramas that ever was written : Though there be but three perfonages in
it who aft any confiderable part, and the fubjefl: perfectly one, viz. An Inqui-
ry what fciencc is ; yet Plato ha» contrived to give it a wonderful variety, with
incidents, turns, and peripateias, as they may be called, which are moft pleafing
and furprifing : And the ironical charader of Socrates, pretending to know no-
thing himfelf, and to be only the midwife of other peoples knowledge, is no where
better kept up. I would, therefore, recommend this Dialogue, together with the
Protagoras and the Gorgias, as perfed models, for thofe who, not contented with
the plain Didadic and Ariftotelian method, as it may be called, of delivering philo-
fophy, would join with it the ornaments of fine writing. If they think to do this
by treating it in a rhetorical or poetical ftile, they arc very wide of the mark, and
fall into the common error of thofe, who think that it is ornamented didtion only
that makes poetry ; whereas it is fable, charaElers, and manners, that conftitute the
effence of poetry, the language of which may be perfedly plain and Gmple, and
ought to be fo, if the nature of the fubjed requires it.
I have clfewhere obferved, vol. i. p. 401. that the principal queftion in this dia-
logue is not refolved. This was referred, as it would appear, for Ariftotle to do
in his books of Analytics, which, I have no doubt, were written with a defign to ex-
plain what Plato, in this Dialogue, has fo much puzzled and perplexed ; for what
the fchoolmen fay of thefe two philofophers, that difputat PUto, docet AriftoteleSf
will apply, if in any cafe, in this. But, though the principal queftion be not
determined, it is decided very pofitiveiy by the reafoning above mention-
ed, that Senfatlon is not Science ; for, fays he, as there can be no fcience without
thofe ideas I have mentioned, and as thofe ideas are not perceptions of fenfe, there-
fore Science is not Senfation. And I doubt this was all the length that Plato could
go, confiftently with the charader of Socrates, to determine negatively what
fcience was not.
70 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
Ideas and Senfations, and which, accordingly, I have made much
life of in the courfe of this work, yet it is fomctimes difficult to
apply it, particularly to Ideas that are fpecial and particular, to certain
things, fuchas a particular fubftance, an Animal, for example, or Ve-
getable, or a quality or accident of any of thefe, fuch as Colour or Fi-
gure ; for, as we have Senfations as well as Ideas of fuch things, it
becomes a matter of pretty nice difcrimination to diftinguifli accu-
rately the one from the other. .Thus, when I fee a man, I pei-
ceive his colour, his fliape, and certain other things that fall under
my fenfes ; at the fame time I have the Idea of the Man : But,
how am I to dlftinguifli what I thus perceive by my Senfes, from
what I perceive by the Mind alone without the Senfes, or, in other
words, the Idea ?
In order to explain this matter, we muft recur to the original, and
etymological fignification, above mentioned, of the word Ideay which,
by a metaphor taken from the outward appearance of the thing, de-
notes that hiivard form by which every thing is what it is, and no-
thing elfe * : And this form I muft be able to diftinguifh from the
matter.
• This/orffj, in the language of the Pythagorean School, as I before obferved,
is called iJ-f«, (from whence our Englifh word idea), a word much ufed by Plato,
but feldom by Arillotle, except when he difputes againft the Ideas of Plato. The
word generally ufed by Ariftotle, and very frequently by Plato, is u'iot, which A-
riflotle very often paraphrafes, by calling it the t» -n hi ut»i of the thing, or fimply
the T» «>«< conftrued with the dative of the thing, as r* «»i»i «»*{««■», or to «»«< '<»•»■• :
And fometimes he calls it the Aeyo? of the thing. The matter he gave the fame
name to, that other philofophers did, calling it vXn' The compofite, that is,
the Matter and Form joined together, he held only to have a real exifl-
ence ; therefore he called it the th «», or the -rot* rt, and gave it a name,
fuch as, atifttvf, or '(x?rc(, and then he didinguiflied betwixt «»«j»5rof and
T» tit»i eift^uzra, and bctwixt tvSv and *« n»«i tvtn' See Ariftotle De Jnima, lib. 3.
cap. 5. On the other hand, Plato, holding that the Form or Idea had an exiftence,
not only out of Matter, but out of the Mind of any intelligence, faid that the idea
was
Chap. II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 71
matter, otherwife I can have no Idea of the thing. In the works of
art, this diftindion between the Matter and the Form is obvious to
common obfervation. And no philofopher will deny that there is
the fame diftin£tion in the works of Nature, if he believes that the
material world is the work of Intelligence ; for, if that be the cafe,
the Form of every thing in Nature muft be, like the Form of artifi J
cial things, the Idea in the Mind of the artift who produces them.
But, it will be afked, How are we to difcover this Idea in the works
of Nature ? And it muft be acknowledged, that it is more difficult
to difcover it in the works of Nature than in thofe of Man, for
this plain reafon, that the former being the work of mod perfed
Intelligence, cannot be fo eafily comprehended by us as the works
of Intelligence, fuch as our own. But it is to be difcovered, even
by us, at leaft in a certain degree ; and there is one difference be-
twixt the works of Nature and of Art, which helps us very much to
that difcovery. The works of Art are, in themfelves, all lifelefs
and inadive ; whereas the works of Nature have, like the images
which Dedalus is faid to have made, life and motion in themfelves ;
and it is this principle of life and motion, which I call Mind, that
makes the Form of every Natural Thing, producing all its motions
and energies, and its every other quality. That there is fuch a
Mind,
was the T« «», or the t» »»t«; o», or, as we would fay in Englifli, the thing, or, the
thing it/elf- And this was his meaning when he fpoke of «wro «»^{»x«{. jtvT»-' or Mind, af-
ter he has made a diftin£lion betwixt the vAij or matter, and the f*i>^(pri or «?«?, that
is, the form or idea, he adds, »v»yKtiity «j« Tr,ti ■^vj^i)' ovria* «»«<, «3{ hJoj fufunti ^vrt-
Chap.II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 73
Yet all thofe fubftances contlhue ftill the fame. And not only docs
the fpecies ftill remain ; but even the individual, though every par-
ticle of it be changed, is ftill the fame. Nov\^, what is it that pre-
ferves this wonderful Identity, amid fuch variety oiciiaages ? It is,
Ifay,this internal principle, this Mind, as I call it, which is apprehended
only by the Intellect ; whereas the Senfes perceive no more than the
jnatler of the Thing, and thofe material qualities which are continu-
ally changing. However imaginary this notion of identity may ap-
pear, as, I know, to fome every thing will appear fo that they can-
not fee with their eyes or lay hold of with their hands, yet it is
truly the principle, without which there would be no ftability or
permanency of exiftence in this lower world, but every thing would
be in a perpetual flux, like the ftream of a river, according to the
philofophy of Heraclitus and Protagoras, whom Ariftotle refutes *
by making the diftin£tion I make betwixt the Idea or Form of the
thing which is permanent, and its material and fenfible qualities
which are fleeting and conftantly changing.
I will further add upon this fubjed, that whoever believes there
is no fuch internal principle, or Mind, as I call it, in Bodies, which
makes them cohere, moves them, and produces all their feveral quali-
ties and accidents, but that it is a certain arrangement and configu-
ration of the parts which produces all thefe efFetfls, and confliitutes
the nature and efl"ence of the thing, is a materialift. If this be his
opinion concerning Man or any other animal, he is acknowledged
by every body to be fuch ; and it will fcarcely be denied, if he has
the fame opinion with refped to the vegetable : And if he thinks fo
concerning animals and vegetables, he will, a fortiori, be of opinion
that unorganized Bodies are of the fame kind, deriving all their
qualities from the matter of which they are compofed, varioufly ar-
ranged. It was in this way that the Materialifts of old reafoned, par-
ticularly Epicurus, who made the nature and properties of every
.thing, organized and unorganized, vegetables and animals, and, a-
VoL. II. K mong
• Metaph. lib. 4. cap. 5. p. 878. Ed. Du Val.
74 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
mong other things, the human foul, to depend upon the pofition,
order, arrangement, and figure, of the atoms or particles that coiu-
pofe them ; all which Lucretius has exprefled in one line,
Concurfu?, motus, pofitura, ordo, figura.
This was the necefTary confequence of thofe philofophers excluding
Mind altogether from the fyftem of the univerfe, and maintaining
that there was nothing in Nature befides Body and Space ; And it
mufl be allowed that their fyftem was at leafl: confiftent with itfelf.
On the other hand, the Theifts, who maintain that Mind is the
principal thing in Nature, and that which conftitutes the eflence of
every animal and vegetable, if they ftop fhort there, and admit that
Minerals, and other unorganized Bodies, derive their nature and ef-
fence, their motions and their other qualities, from the order and
arrangement of their parts, betray their own caufe, are inconfiftent
with thcmfelvcs and but half Theifts. This was not the cafe of the
Peripatetics, who did not derive the qualities of Bodies from fuch
arrangement, but from what they called iheir Subftantia! Form,
meaning that imuarJ For/fi, or MinJ, as I call it, which made them
to be fubftances of fuch and fuch a character *. And here the reader
may obferve how well my fyftem, whether true or falfe, hangs to-
gether. The principle of Movement in Bodies, when they are not
moved by any external impulfe, I make to be an internal principle,
which, being immaterial,! call Mind. Now, as fubftances, unorga-
nized as well as organized, are diftinguiflied one from another by
the different arrangement and configuration of their parts ; and as
all thefe different arrangements and configurations muft be produced
by Motion, there is nothing more natural, and, indeed, I may fay
neceflary, than that the fame moving principle fhould conftitute the
very nature and elfence of every Subftance. We therefore know fo
much of the eftence of Subftances, that we know, in general, that
it is Mind, the Great Piinciple and Author of every thing in the u-
niverfc : But we do not know particularly what kind of Mind it is
that
-* See what I have further faid concerning fulflantial forms, Vol. j. p. 58.
Chap ir. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 75
that informs each particular fubRance, though we know, in general,
that, as the Subftances are different, fo the Mind, which informs
them and conftitutes their eflence, mud alfo be different. It is,
therefore, true, in one fenfe, that we do not know the efTence of
any Subftance. But then we know efTentlal qualities of different
Subftances ; and by thefe we difcriminate one Subftance from ano-
ther. Thefe when we can difl.inguifli from accidental qualities,
which may exift in the thing, or not exift, and yet the thing conti-
nue the fame, we are faid to have the Idea of that thing.
This diftindtion betwixt the internaiyorw, or the nature and ejfence
of the thing, and its material and accidental qualities, is the founda-
tion of the diftindlion betwixt Ideas and Senfations, laid down by the
two commerita'tors upon Ariftotle, Simplicius and Philoponus, which
I hold to be perfectly juft. The Nature or Eifence of the thing, fay
they, is perceived by the Mind, and by the Mind only, operating
without the Body; and therefore is the fubjedl of our Ideas : Whereas
the Accidents of any thing, which flow from its nature and eflence,
being perceived by the Senfes, are the fubjedl of our Senfations.
With this diftindion, the difference betwixt Ideas and Senfations
may, I think, be made very clear, even with refped: to fubjeds of
■which we have both ideas and ienfations, fuch as the fubjeds above
mentioned. But, before I come to apply it to particular examples,
I will make fome obfervations upon Ideas as they are confidered by
our modern philofophers. And, in the firft place, Ideas and Ab-
ftradl Ideas, are, in the language of that philofophy, confidered as
the fame thing, as if there could be no Idea that was not abftraded
from the matter with which it is incorporated. If that were the cafe,
favage nations would have no ideas at all, and very few of the vul-
gar among us. But the truth is, that we muft neccflarily fee the
Form or Idea in the Matter, before we can abftrad it ; for, how can
we abftrad from Matter what we do not know ? And the fad' is,
that, in the pradice of life, and even in pradical Sciences, fuch as
K 2 natural
76 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS, Book II.
natural philofophy, mechanics, and aftronomy, wc do not abflraa:
the Form from the Matter, but confider them both together. In
pure mathematics, indeed, we do abftratft and confider the Forms
bythemfelvcs without the Matter ; and it is only with refpea to
this fcience, that the antient philolbphers fpeak of Ideas of Abftrac-
tion *. It is therefore true, that Ideas are confidered in the Matter,
as well as ivithout the Matter ; and therefore Ideas, and abftrad
Ideas, are not fynonimous terms. It is true, however, that the
Mind mud have fome notion of the Form as diftind from the Mat-
ter, though not confidered as adlually feparated from it ; and it is
this that diftinguirties eflentially the Ideas of the Man from the Sen-
fations of the Brute, who has no notion, either of the Form or of
the Matter, and, confequently, is incapable of diftinguifhing them.
2clo^ Ideas are not general only, as is commonly believed, but alfo
particular ; that is to fay, they arc not only perceived in many par-
ticulars, but in one particular, fuch as an animal or a vegetable. If,
therefore, there were but one thing of the kind, as fome of the an-
tients fuppofed the fun to be, which, therefore, they faid was 7nona-
dicy ftill we Ihould have an idea of it, though there were neither
genus nor fpecies to which we could refer it ; for, to generalize, is no
more than to make that reference, the Mind having perceived a like-
nefs betwixt particular things, and in that way forming the Idea of a
genus or fpecies. Nor is there any thing to hinder a fenfation being
generalized by the Mind's perceiving that the fame fenfation arifes
from many different things : But it will not therefore become an
Idea, unlcfs the Mind perceive fomcthing of the nature and eflence
of the fenfation which diftinguifhes it from every other fenfation.
Thus, it appears, that, though generalizing be, no doubt, an o-
peration of the Intelled, which is given to Man but denied to the
Brute,
• Plato, nowhere, as I remember, fpeaks of fuch Ideas ; but Ariflotle and his
commentators fometimes mention them, and fay that they are 5"/ «2«hina bowl, the Captain
beat him, which the animal laid fo much to heart, that he abftain-
ed from food, and died. — In fhort, the Senfe of Honour I hold to
be fo elTential to Human Nature, that, if a man never had it, I
(hould not believe that he belonged to the fpecies : And, if he once
had it, but loft it intirely, I fliould confider him as the moft abje(ft
and degenerate creature of the human race.
Now,
* Vol- I p. 281. fecond edit.
126 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
Now, tlic Scnfe of Honour is founded upon the Senfe of Beau-
ty ; for it proceeds from an opinion, that we are poffcired of a cer-
tain Beauty and Dignity of charader, which demands refped from
others. If a man has great ftrength and elevation of Mind, he wil!
not be very folicitous to have this opinion of himfelf confirmed by
the teflimony of others ; he will be fatisfied with the honour he gives
to himfelf. And this is the cafe of the proud Man : But by far the
greater part of Mankind are not proud, but •vain ; and they defire
that the good opinion they have of themfelves fhould be con-
firmed bv the opinion of others ; and thence comes the defire of
Praife, which is fo univerfal a paflion.
From the Senfe of Honour, and Defire of Praife, proceeds the paf-
fion of Anger, one of the ftrongeft paffions belonging to the Hu-
man Nature. This paflion arifes, when we not only do not meet
with the Praife from others which we think we deferve, but when
we are treated by them with negled or contempt *.
Revenge
• See Arlftotle upon the fubjeil of Anger; Rhetorica, lib 2. cap 2 — where
he has given a very accurate ilefiriitio'i of Anger, and explained and diftinguiflied
all the caufes ■which produce it, and which all refolve into honour offended, or,
in one word, affront: For we muft diftinguifh betwixt injury and aflront: A man
may fufFer great injuries and lofs, for which he will grieve very much, but not be
affronted or angry. It was not the lofs of.Brifeis, that made Achilles angry with A-
gamemnon ; but it was W u^itrc* A;^*'*' »<'^" "lo-Ui — and again becaufe he
treated him tirn ■»■"•« aTiftrim ^iT<»»«irTii>. — In (hort, his anger rofe from the
fenfe of his own dignity and worth, to which Agamemnon had fliown no regard.
Having mentioned Arirtotlc's Rhetoric, I would recommend very much to the fludy
of the learned reader this 2d Bock of it, concerning the P.-.fllons and Charadlers of
Men, as containing more of what is called the Knowledge of the World than any
book I ever read. And, in general, I would recommend the Moral and Political wri-
tings of Plato and Ariftotle, as the bed fchool in which a man can learn this Sci-
ence of the If^crld ; for it is with the World, as it is with other things, we fhall
never be perfect in the Pradice of it, unlefs we know likewife the Science. ,
Chap. III. ANTIENT iMETAPHYSrCS, 127
Revenge is nothing elfe but Lifting Anger, or M»wf, as the Greeks
c; 11 it ; and, if the palhon is violent, a man will ratlier die than not
fatisfy it. This is the cafe of fome barbarous nations, who, by the
pradice of war and hunting, have got a ferocity of manners, which,
inftead of making them languilh and die when they are affronted,
like the tame and gentle favage of Guiana or the OrangOutang, will
not reft fatisfied, till they have appeafed their anger by the death of the
perfon who alTrontcd them. And, as thofe men haA^e greater ftrcngth
of Mind than we have, and greater perfcvarence in al! their refolu-
tions and enterprifes, they will wait many years for an opportunity
of fatisfying their revenge.
As, from a Senfe of Honour, and of what is Beautiful and Refpec-
table in Characfter, arifes Anger, fo alfo Love and Friendfhip, As
to Love, it Is acknowledged by every body, that it is founded up-
on our Senfe of Beauty ; and, as to Friendlhip, it cannot be with-
out Mutual Efteem ; and that again cannot be without each of the
parties having a Senfe of Worth and Beauty of Charader in
the other. This connedion betwixt Anger and Friendfhip A-
riftotle appears to have known very well, when he tells us, that
the nations in whom ©"/*«?, or Anger, is a prevailing Paflion,
are moft inclined to Friendfhip * : And, accordingly, the In-
dians of North America are as remarkable for their Friendfliips,
as for their Anger and their Revenge. And Homer has made the
charader of Achilles perfedly confiftent, when, at the fame time
that
• De Republica, lib. 2. cap. 7. As the conneclion betwixt Anger .nnd
Friendfhip is not very apparent, 1 will fubjoin the words of Ariftotle : 'o ivfUi it.
Til i rrtmt t» fihuriKtu — icvrn yct^ %J\ii n t^j ■4'''X''5 ov'^/k!, S (piXcvf.it. jf(irSai tcuirccf — ■
And a little after he quotes a poet, who fays, 'Oi to» a-sj* o-n^lxnif/ti h xxi s-i^k
fiirtuTi. — And it is a common obfervation, that mens Anger and Hatred are in pro-
portion to their Love and Friendfhip.
12 9 A N r I E N T METAPHYSICS. Book II.
tliat he lias m?.de him fo Tafiionate and Revengeful, he has made
him as violent in his Friendfliip ; i'o that, rather than not Revenge
the death of his friend, he chofc to Die himfelf *.
But not only do thofe violent paffions of ftrong Minds proceed from
a Senfe of Honour, but there is that common paflion of Weak Minds
above mentioned, vphich is derived from the fame fource; I mean Fa-
tiitj, — an equivocal word, denoting, cither the Love of Praife for mean
and frivolous things, or an exceffive Love of Praife for great and valu-
able qualities + ; but flill it is the Love of Praife, which cannot be
without a Senfe of fomething Beautiful and Praifeworthy in Charac-
ter. It is Vanity that gives that univerfal dominion to Fafhion,
which I obferved before : And, however contemptible a vain man
may appear in the eyes of a man of fenfe, I fhould think it a very
bad fign of a young man, to have no Vanity ; for a man muft have
attained to great fenfe and knowledge, more than can be fuppofed in
a young man, to be too proud to be vain, as Dean Swift very well
exprelfcs it.
And here I cannot help making an obfervation, which, I know,
will appear very ftrange to the niofl; of my readers ; That, to diredl
well the vanity of men, and particularly of young men, who are
more governed by that paffion than thofe of riper age, is the great-
eft work of legillation, and of good government. For Virtue may
be made fafliionable, as well as Vice : And men who have a Senfe
of Honour, (and fuch only are, by Nature, deftined to be free citi-
zens), will not be out of that fafhion, more than any other; where-
as, thofe who, by Nature, are intended for Slaves, wanting the Senfe
of
• See Arift. Rhetor, lib. i. cap. 3.
t It is in this 'alter fenfe that we fay Cicero was Vain, who defircd Praife for
Great and Noble Qualities ; but he defired it too much. In the latter fenfe, wc
fay a man is Vain, who dcfircs Praife for his Houfe, his Equipage, or his Drefs.
Chap.VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 129
of honour altogether, or having it in a fmall degree, mufl; be com-
pelled to do what is right by ftripes, the punilhment of Haves, not by
difgrace, thegreateft punifhment of freemen. While, therefore, what
is right, and truly praifeworthy, in life and manners, continues to be
honourable in a State, that State will continue to be free and pro-
fperous ; but, on the contrary, if what is bad becornes honourable,
or even things in themfelves indifferent, fuch as Wealth, but which,
by the ufe that is made of it, is truly faid to be the root of all evil,
that State wV\ foon ceafe to be free and happy. To abftain, there-
fore, from Money, in an age of Wealth and Luxury, is the higheft
compliment which Horace thought he could beftow upon one of his
friends; of whom he fays, that he was
abftinens
Ducentis adfe ctaiBa pecuniae *.
Nor do I think that Livy has any where praifed his countrymen
more, than where he has faid, " That, in no country, Poverty con-
tinued fo long honourable f." — But to return to our fubjedl.
To this Vanity is commonly joined Envy ; for the vain are almoft
all invidious. This is one of the worft paflions belonging to human
Nature, and yet it arifrs from a Senfe of what is Beautiful and
Praifeworthy in Character, and the Delire of being more efleemed
and refpe(Sted than others, upon that account.
From the Senfe of the Beautiful arifes a Perception that appears al-
together oppofite, namely, the Perception of the Ridiculous:]; ; for the
Ridiculous is that which is Deformed : But philofophers know that
Vol. II. R there
• Ad Lollium. — Lib. 4. Ode 9.
t Iviv. in Proacmio.
% See what I have faid upon this fubjcft, Vol. 3. p. 298. of Origin and Progrefs
of Language.
130 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
there Is the fame knowledge of contraries ; and, though a man be not
a philofopher, he will readily perceive that it is impofhble to know
what is Beautiful, without knowing, at the fame time, what is not
Beautiful, or Deformed, and v/Vf'yf//^. This Scnfe of the Ridiculous is
exprefled by that ftrange agitation of the mufcles of the face, and often
of the whole body, which we call Laughter, and which every Body
knows is peculiar to Man, who therefore has been defined a rifihle Ani-
mal: But every Body does not know tliat the reafon,why it is peculiar
to him, is, that he is an Intellectual Animal; for it isonly Intelledl that
perceives Beauty, and its contrary. Deformity : And therefore the
Brute, not having Intelled, is neither a Rifible Animal, nur perceives
Beauty.
But, though every man muft perceive the Ridiculous, as well as
the Beautiful, yet every man does not delight in it. It is the plea-
fure, chiefly, of the vain, the invidious, and the malignant, not of
the great and good, who delight in the contemplation of the Beauti-
ful, but turn their eyes away from the deformed. Hence it is that
Savages, who are commonly high minded men, are very grave, and
feldom laugh : And, among civilized nations, neither philofophers,
nor high-bred men, are addided to laughter; which, therefore, is tlie
paflion of the vulgar only, in fuch nations.
Ambition is one of the paffions of great Minds, and is evidently
founded in a man's fenfe of the dignity and fuperiority of his cha-
racter, which he thinks entitles him to govern others : And in all
fuch characters, the Senfe of Honour, and the Love of Praife, is very
ftrong. Even Avarice, one of the moft fordid pafhons belonging to
our Nature, has a mixture of the Love of Praife in it ; for a rich
mian defires to be refpeCted for his Wealth : And, accordingly, I
have obferved, that all the Avaritious are Vain to a certain degree,
that is, as far as it does not interfere with their Love of Money.
All
Chap. VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 131
All our other Defires and Pa/fions belong to the Animal Nature :
For they are either the defire of bodily pleafures, or of the means of
enjoying thefe ; or they are affeQions of the Mind, fuch as are
common to us with the Brutes.
And thus it appears that Beauty is the fole delight of our Intellec-
tual part, — the fource of the pleafure of arts and fciences, — the foun-
dation of all our Virtues, — and of our Vices too, fuch as Anger and
Revenge, Vanity, Envy, Contempt, and Derifion.
If it be afked, Why Beauty pleafes us ? the anfwer is. That it
pleafes us becaufe it is Beauty ; or, in other words. It is the ultimate
caufe of the pleafure : And, in this refpe£t, it is the fame with the
Pleafures of Senfe, which pleafe us for no other rcafon but becaufe
they are Pleafures of Senfe. And the fame may be faid of thofe
pleafures which arife from natural afFedion and fociety.
If it be farther afked. What is the final Caufe of Beauty giving
us fo much pleafure ? I anfwer. That the goodnefs of the Author
of Nature has thought proper to annex to the exercife of all our fa-
culties a certain pleafure. This is the cafe of all the Energies of the
Animal Life ; and it would have been very extraordinary, if, to our
nobleft energy, and to the exercife of our higheft faculty, no plea-
fure had been annexed.
It may alfo be afked. Why Beauty is made to confifl in Syflem,
and nothing elfe ? To this the anfwer is obvious, from what has
been already obferved. That Beauty being a pleafure of the Intelledl,
it could not have been perceived by Intellect in any other way.
I will conclude this Chapter with obferving, that, as the Syftem
of the Univerfe muft be not only the greateft but the moft perfect
R 2 that
132 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book II.
that can be conceived, and, confequently, of the higheft Beauty, — and
the contemplation of it being the nobleft occupation of Man, as well
as the happieft, — we are, by Nature, fo much framed for that contem-
plation, that our Intelle£t apprehends nothing but in Syftem : So that
every exercife of our Intelledl, upon every fubjedt, may be faid to be
a preparation for the enjoyment of that higheft happinefs, for which
we are by God and Nature deftined. Whoever, therefore, cultivates
his underftanding properly, is acquiring, by degrees, the capacity of
this higheft enjoyment, which may be called the Beatific Vtfion of
Philofophy.
BOOK
Chap. I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 133
BOOK III.
Of the feveral Minds in Man, confidercd as diftincl
Subftances.
CHAP. I.
The Intelledlual Mind, a dijlincl Subjlance from the Animal. — Only two
Opinions upon the Subje^. — Things, to be diJlinguiJJied by their Pro-
perties— Adive Beings, by their Operations. — The Operations of
the Intelledt, and of /^(f Animal Life, quite different. — Man ope-
rating by Intelled, «/ a Senfitive Being. — 77;^ Animal Nature, no
Impro'uement or Refnement of the Vegetable. — No more is the Intel-
ledtual an Improvanent of the Animal. — The Vegetable Life exifs
feparately from /A Ti) A^iffctiTiKt], — and Ihemiflius ^1^1 4"'X^'f' ''''• '• ^^^- ^'^- — ^
Know, that the veneration, that the Pythagoreans had for the number/oar, is afcri-
bed to its being a fymbol of the progrcfs of Nature in the formation of Phyfical
Bodies i the monad ftanding for the point the duad iot the line, the number three
for the fimplefl fuperficial figure, viz the triangle, and the nurnberyiur for the
fimplefl foiid figure, viz the Triangular Pyramid, confift ng of three fides and a
bafe : So th.it the number four completed the progrefs of Nature in the formation
of Phyfical Bodies. But though, no domt, the Pythagoreans confidered Arithme-
tic as t!'.e Primary Science, and Geometry as nothing more than the application of
Numbers to Lines and Figures; yet it is likewife ceitain, that they made Num-
bers
Chap.r. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 137
Nor fhould we be furprifed that Man is To compounded, when
there is alike compofition in every other Animal, and even in Vegeta-
bles : For, in each individual of thefe, there is, iw/o. The common
Nature of the genus ; ido^ The more particular Nature of the fpe-
cies ; 3/zo, That more particular Nature ftill, which diftinguifh-
es one individual from another ; and, lajlly^ The common Elemen-
tal Life, or Principle of Motion, which is in all Bodies unorganized,
as well as organized. Nor will any one who has attended to the
varieties of Nature to be difcovered by the analyfis and decompofi-
tion of Bodies, be furprifed that the compofition of Minds fhould be
as various as that of Bodies.
Thisdocftrine of three of the four Minds in our wonderful compofi-
tion, 1 mean the Vegetable, Animal, and Intelledual, being diftiuNft
fubftanccs, and not different qualities of one and they^"?W(? fubflance, is
no difcovery of mine, but the dodlrine of Ariftotle, and of the Pe-
ripatetic fchool,as delivered and mofl clearly explained by Philopo-
nus, in the introdudlion to his Commentary upon Ariflotle's books
De minima ; and, as Philoponus was a Chriflian, I have no doubt
but this was the dodrine of the church at that time. — As to ihe/oiirlby
or Elemental Mind; I have given a reafon in the note below, why they
do not mention it as any part of the compofition of Man.
There is an objedlion which Philoponus, in that introdudion,
ftates to this dodrine, calling it a vulgar and popular objedion ;
namely, That, in this way, w^e have three Minds inftead of one. But,
though it may appear a vulgar objedion to a philofopher, who
Vol. II. S knows
bers the fymbols of Divine and Spiritual things : And, therefore, I think, it i»-
better to explain this grand myftery of the Tetra^ys, by applying it to Mind rather
than to Body ; and, by fuppofing it a fymbol of thcfe four Minds, which, riling one
above another, as numbers do, animate the whole univcrfc, and govern its move-
ments. But, in the fchooi of Plato and Ariflotle, the Elemental Life was confi-
dercd as belonging only to Nature, not to Man; and, therefore, in the compofi-
tion of Man, they fpcak only of a trinity of Minds, the Vegetable, the Animal,
and the Intelledual.
138 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
knows the variety of Nature, and has learned to diftinguifh be-
twixt the fcveral things that enter into the compolition of Natural
Subflances ; yet I am perfuadcd it is the fource of the coniinon er-
ror upon this fubjed : For we fpeak of Man as having but one
Mind, without dirtinguifliing betwixt his Soul and his Animal or
Vegetable part ; and we think a man, now a days, a good phi-
lofopher, if he can diftinguifh betwixt this fingle Mind in Man and
his Body. But, for the fame reafon, as Phlloponus has well obfer-
ved, that we conceive the Body, and the feveral kinds of Mind, to
be diftind fubftances, though clofely joined together, fo we ought
to conceive thefe minds as diftind from one another *.
From this dodrine of our Intelleftiial Nature being a fubftancff
xliftinifl from our Animal Life, as diftinft as that life is from the
Vegetable, there refult feveral moft important confequcnces, as I
fhall fliow in the following chapter.
C HAP.
• T will give the wor-Is of Phlloponus, becaufe there is an error in the text,
which I thinlc I am able to correft. Mii «o-»{mt4i ^i th i^m-xxxi <«t»5i«» fK«>ni».
T« ««» ; T{i/f i^«>5«f 'X'M't **' ""■•'■{I*' ■4'UX'" ^lOiKcvfiifx' /t"/« y«j iti *»■»■«{ ttulur*
li ■vJ'k;^!) t«p riftxTi T»t/Tf(, JjKH fto it n ?rj«y«« iitiiit ; KtcTx aXr.^eictt it »«j; «» ft
•»1ir, iuTU Ti| T« i\tym, kxi t<\ (fvTiKri (rvfigu^Etif fiiaf fti> rittt (rvit)(,nxt iT«i« CiX
TijiF cvtx'Pttxf iJiiTCW y«{ TT^tri^iif tijj fcm Aoyixii? it a>.ay>fy Ti){ S's «A«yot/ i .>yt(. Ih the laft part of this paflage there fliould not
be after the ?>«««» a full flop, but only a coma ; and, in the end of the paflage, in-
ftead of i «A»y»«, we fhould read « xtyixn : And then the fenfe is clear, which is this ;
" Becaufe ihefe feveral Minds, by reafon of this connediion, have a mutual fym-
*• pathy, we fay that they are one, and that the Rational Mind ufes the other two
*' as organs.'
I cannot help obferving here, that it is much to be wiftied that this valuable work
of this Chriftian commentator upon Ariflotle were reprinted, and the many errors
in the only edition we have of it, both in the pun(Stuation and the words, correc-
ted : And I have no doubt but that it will be done in England ; as I hope that couni.
try will have the honour of reviving the Greek Philofophy, which it will not be
difficult to do where the Greek learning i$ fo well underflood.
Chap. II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 139
CHAP. II.
7'he Confequence of the Doctrine «5/" three dijlinci Subftances in Man. —
Theje Subftances cannot be tranfmuted into one another — nor nvill
//j(f Deftrudlon of one. be attended zuith the Deftrudlion 0/" another.
— Still lefs "will they be deftroyed by the Deftru(Slion of the Body.
— The Intelledual Subftance cannot be fo deflroyed^ as it operates
ivithout Body : — Nor the Animal or Vegetable Subftances, though
they do not operate ivithout Body. — 'Thefe are not perifliable by their
oiji'n wfl/Mr^,^«';z§- Immaterial Subftances. — Of the feparateExiftences
of thefe Minds. — The Intelledlual does fo ex'i/l. — The Animal and
Vegetable Minds do not exijl feparately. — Of the Doflrine oj Tranf-
migration. — Hoiv to be underftood upon the Principles of this Phi'
lofophy. — Into ivhat Bodies the fcueral Minds tranfmigratc. — Whe-
ther the Human Mind tran/migrates into the Brute. — NoTranf-
migration of the Elemental Life. — This Philofophy eJiablifJoes the
fcparate Exiftence, and the Immortality of the Soul, upon thefurejl
Foundation. — The Do^rine of h\icvc\.\\x% and o/Mr Locke eaftly refu-
ted upon the Principles of this Philofophy. — Coniparifon of the Hu-
man Soul to the Mafter of a Ship. — Of the life of this Philofophy
in Theology. ^
AND, in (he frjl place, it Is evident that, if the Intelledual,
Animal, and Vegetable Life, which make our wonderful
compofition, are diftindt Subftances, it is impoffible that the one can
be tranfmuted into the other ; for there is no fuch thing in Nature
as a metamorphofis of any Individual Subftance, or any Species of
S 2 Sub-
140 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
SubftanceSj into another. In natural Subftances, indeed, fuch as
Vegetables and Animals which are propagated by Generation, we ob-
ferve that the mixtures of fome of them produce a motely oflspring,
participating of the nature of both Speciefes. But this confufion
goes no farther than the firft generation : And, if we could fup-
pofe it to go fiirther, it could not affed the prefent argument ; for it
is impoflible to conceive that Mind can propagate Mind, in the way
that Plants and Animals produce one another. We muft therefore
hold, that the Intelledual, the Vegetable, and the Animal Natures,
whatever improvements they may receive in their feveral kinds,
continue always diftindl Subftances, and never run into one another ;
fo that the Vegetable never becomes an Animal, nor the Animal
an Intelledual Being. And, if fo, we muft not dream, as fome phi-
lofophers appear to have done, of an afcent of Minds from the low-
eft to the higheft ; nor imagine, that the Vegetable, by being pafled
through certain Strainers ond Refiners, can ever become Intcl-
ieaual.
2do, It follows, from the three Subftances being diftind, that the
deftrudion or annihilation of one cannot produce the deftruclion of
the other. If, indeed, the Intelledual Mind was nothing but a Qiiality
or Property of the Anhnal, and the Animal the fame of the Vegetable,
it would be impoflible that the one could fubfift after the other was de-
ftroycd : But, as they are fcparate Subftances, they muft have a fcpa-
rate exiftcnce, not dependent upon one another, or upon the exiftence
of any other Subftancc, as Accidents or Qualities are dependent upon
the exiftence of the Subft.inces in which they are inherent. Suppo-
ftng, therefore, that, at our death, the Animal Life in us was wholly
annihilated, as it no doubt ceafes to exift in the fame compofition of
Matter, our Intelledual Mind, being a diftind Subftance, would ftill
continue to exift : And the only confequcnce with refped to it
would
Chap. II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 141
would be, that it would lofe the miniftry of the Animal Life, and
could not move Bodies, nor receive perceptions and impreflions
in the fame manner as it did before. Our Intellectual Part is not
more connefted with our Animal, than the Animal is with the
Vegetable in us ; and yet we know, not from reafoning only, but
from fad: and obfervation, that the Animal or Senfitive Life may
ceafe in one of our members, and yet the Vegetable continue.
It may, therefore, be laid down, as a general propofition, That,
when Subftances are diftinft, however they may be conneded toge-
ther, the deftrudion of the one will not be attended with the de-
ftrudion of the other. That this is the cafe of Bodies, we have ocu-
lar proof; for different corporeal Subftances, however intimately
they may be mixed and incorporated together, can be feparated and
analyfed, without any hurt to any of the compounds by the diflb-
lution : And the fame is true of the compofition of Mind.
^tioy If the incorporeal Subftances in us cannot be deftroyed or
annihilated, by the feparation from one another, or even by the an-
nihilation of any one of them, if we could fuppofe fuch a thing,
much lefs can they be deftroyed by the feparation or diflblution of
the Body to which they are joined ; for they arc Subftances ftill
more diftind, if poflible, from Body, than from one another. Body
being of a nature much more different from Mind, than any Species
of Mind can be from another. As to our Intelledual Mind, it is not,
as we have feen, immediately conneded with our Bodies, but only
with our Animal Life, through which it operates upon our Bodies,
and receives impreflions and perceptions from thence : But in
that way only it is conneded even with the Animal Life ; for, when
it forms Ideas, thinks and reafons, it ads by itfelf, without the leaft
afliftance from the Animal Part of us. And, as we know the Na-
ture
142 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IIL
ture or effeiice of nothing, except by its operations, or, indeed, that
it at all exifts, Ariftotle, I think, nioft philofophicaliy, concludes,
that the Intelledual, as it operates feparately, has a fcparate and
independent exiftence *. — And thus it appears, that, by the dillblu-
lion of our Bodies, or their annihilation, if we could fuppofe fuch a
thing, our Intelledual Part cannot be deftroyed, any more than by
the dilTolution or annihilation of any other parcel of Matter.
As to the Animal Life, there may appear more doubts, beca.ufe
the Animal Mind operates by bodily organs. But, if we are con-
vinced, that it is a Subftance diftin£t from thefe organs, we cannot
fuppofe that, by the derangement, or total dinblution of thofe or-
gans, the Mind itfelf fhould be deftroyed. It ufes other organs or
inftruments, by which it operates upon Bodies, fuch as Levers and
wedges ; yet nobody fuppofes that, by the deftrudion of thefe, the
Mind who employs them is deftroyed. Now, the only difference
betwixt the two kinds of inftruments is, that the one is remoter,
and the other nearer and more clofely connecfled with the Mind. I
think, therefore, we may fafely conclude, that the Animal Subftance
in us, and in other Animals, is not deftroyed by the deftrudion of
the organs or inftruments which it employs. Whether it can be
fuppofed to exlft feparately, without being annexed to any organs,
as our Intelled may exift, is another queftion, which I fhall conf^-
der prefently.
"What I have faid of tlte Animal Life will apply equally to the
Vegetable ; for, if the Vegetable Life be an Immaterial Subftance,
it is impoffible that it can perifli with the compofition of Matter to
which it is annexed : But it will not from thence follow that it
exifts in a feparate ftate.
4/(7,
* See Vol. I. p. 196.
Chap. II. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. 143
4/«7, As, therefore, none of tlic three Minds can perifli by the dc-
ftriidion of one another, or of the Body, it is evident that, if they
do perifh, it muft be in confequence of fomething in their own na-
ture that makes them liable to Death and Dcftrudion. Now, this
cannot be the cafe ; for, in the ordinary courfe of Nature, of which
only I am fpeaking, not of any extraordinary or miraculous interpo-
fition of Deity, there is nothing annihilated : And what we call the
Death or deftrudion of any Subftance, fuch as Animal or Vege-
table, is nothing but the diflolution or feparation of the Bodily parts
of it, and the derangement of the organization by which the Plant
or Animal operated. Now, of an immaterial Subrtance, which has
no parts, it isimpofTible that there can be any diflolution or derange-
ment of parts ; and I will venture to affirm, that whoever fpeaks of
the death or annihilation of a Soul, or of any other Mind, has no
Idea affixed to his words, and fpeaks without underftanding what he
fays.
5/0, As to the queflion, Whether thofe Minds exift leparated from
all Matter and Mortal Concretion, I think there can be no doubt
but that the Intelledual Mind may exift in that way ; for, as it can
operate without Body, there can be no reafon given why it fhould
not exift without Body. We are fure that the Supreme Mind exifts
in that manner. And, as our foul is in a conftant ftate of progref-
fion, even in this life, when we live as we ought to do, there is the
greateft reafon to believe, and none at all to doubt, that we at laft
fhall be fo refined and purified from all the contagion of Matter,
.as to become pure fpiritual creatures. But this will not happen,
Donee hnga dies, perfeSfo temporis orhe,
.Concretam exemit labetn, purumqiie reliquit
Etherium Sen/um et aiirdi Jmiplicis ignem *.
Even
* Virgil. jEn. Lib. (J. t. 745.
144 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
Even in this life, a common imderftanding ads without Body ; and
the philofophical Mind ads fo much in that way, that it may he
faid to exift, for the greater part, without Body. It is true, indeed,
that a perfed Savage, that has not formed Ideas, can hardly be faid to
operate without the Body, or to be any better than a mere Brute. But
ftill he is an Intelledual 'Qoing potentially, as we are in our ftate of
infancy : And it is a fine obfervation of Ariltotle, That, in things
eternal, fuch as the Mind is, whatever gsa^s, potentially, will, fome
time or other, exift in energy or actuality ; fo that, in fuch Beings, there
is no difference betwixt the pojfe and the ejfe *. And, therefore, as it is
impoffible to deny but that the human foul ?nay exift in that way, it is
fair to conclude that, fome time or other, it ivill fo exift, not only fe-
parated from Body, with which I have fiid it is not immediately con-
neded, but even from Animal Life.
As to the Animal Life, I do not think we have any reafon to believe,
that it either does, or ever will, exift in a feparate ftate: For we fee, that
all its energies and operations arife from Body, and are relative to Body
only ; and, therefore, as we know nothing of the nature of any thing
but by its operations, we ought to conclude, that it is of fuch a Nature
as never was deftined to exift without Body. And, if this be true
of the Animal Life, it certainly cannot be otherwife in the Vegeta-
ble Life : Nor indeed can we have any idea of a Vegetable Mind
without a Vegetable, which it nourifties, makes to grow, — preferves
the individual, and propagates the kind f.
6 to,
* To y«e^ i»J^i;i;lir^«( T«u litai (ivh» >i«^f{!i 1» Tcif «<5"iOI5* De NdtU, Aufcult. Lib- 3.
cap. 5. Seil. 6. And the reafon is, that, if what is in potentiality never exifts, the
potentiality would be given in vain, and would exiil for ever to no purpofe. Now,
fays Ariflotle, Nature does nothing in vain ; MaS'sh « i^vtrn i^aiu futrry Lib. 3. cap,
10. De j47iima. It may be obferved that Ariftotle applies this maxim only to things
eternal, meaning the Principles and E (Fences of things, which, being immaterial, as
I have fliown, (p. 72. )> are all eternal ; whereas the corporeal forms are in conftant
diange and fucceffion.
t See what I have further faid upon the feparate exiftence of the feveral Minds
in us, in the firft volume of this work, book, z^ chap. 16.
Chap. ir. A N T I E NT M M T A P H Y 8 I C S . 145
Gto, The (loilrhie, therefore, of Tranfinigration, wliich I believe
is the nioft antient philofophy in the world, co:nes to this, upon the
principles of my philofophy ; That, as Mind never perilhes, when-
ever the Body to which it is annexed is difTolved, if it he by Nature
deftined not to exift feparately without Body, it muft, of noceiTity,
animate fome other Body, and, therefore, mult tranfinigrate into an-
other compofuion of Matter. This mufl: be the cafe of both the
Vegetable and Animal Life, and, for the greater part, I believe, of
the Intelledual Life ; as there are very few fouls that are prepared,
upon quitting this Body, for the higheft ftate of refinement, which
muft be in a feparate ftate of exiftence.
■ The only queftion upon this fubjed appears to me to be, F/oiii
what form, to what form the feveral kinds of mind may be moved ?
and, Whether the tranfmigration be univerfal to the three feveral
orders of Being, Vegetable, Animal, and Man ?
That the Soul of Man tranfmigrates into Man, cannot, I think,
be doubted, unlefs we fhould fuppofe that there is a creation of a
new Soul for every Human Body that is born, which no philofo-
pher will believe, and which Synefius, the moft learned Bifhop of
the antient Chrifl:ian Church, declares he could not believe *. Or, if
we {hould fuppofe this new creation, what is to become of the Souls
of the departed ? They are not fit, for the greater part, as I liave
faid, to exifl; in a pure Spiritual State : They muft, therefore, ani-
mate fome body ; And what Body fo fit as that of Man ?
But what fhall we fay of the Animal Mind ? Does it tranfini-
grate into the Body of Man ? And I am of opinion it does not :
For, as the Animal Mind cannot, as I have faid, be transformed into
the Intelledual Mind, if we could fuppofe fuch a tranfmigration,
Vol. n. T the
*■ See Vol- I. p. 260.
146 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
the Animal might have the form of a Man ; but he would not be
really a Man, any more than an Idiot or a Changeling.
The greatefl difficulty in this matter is, to know whether the Hu-
man Mind tranfmigrates into the Brutal form. And it is the opi-
nion not only of the philofophers of the Eaft, but of fome of the
Weft, particularly Plato, that the Human Soul may, by way of pu-
nilhment, be degraded to inhabit a Beaft. Whether it be fo or not,
is a queftion, which, I think, philofophy cannot determine : Only
this w^e know with certainty, that, if the Human Intellect be in a
Brute, it muft be there latent, as it is in us in the womb and during
our infancy.
That there muft be a tranfmigration of the Animal Mind from
Animal to Animal, and of the Vegetable Mind from Vegetable to
Vegetable, is, I think, evident, if it be true, what I have laid down,
that neither of thefe Minds is annihilated, or periflies, any more
than the Intelledual. I think We alfo know with certainty, that thefe
tranfmigrations of the Animal and Vegetable life are governed by
certain rules, as well as every thing elfe in Nature : But what thefe
rules are, I believe no philofopher ever can difcover.
But, What fhall we fliy of that principle of Motion, that Ele-
mental Life, as I call it, which is in every particle of Matter ? Does
it tranfmigrate from one particle to another ? And, I fay, it does
not ; bec.iufe no reafon can be affigned for fuch tranfmigration : For,
as this Life is in the minuteft particles or indivifible atoms, there is
no dilTolution or feparation of parts, as in the Bodies of Animals
and Vegetables ; and, confequently, the life, which animates them,
continues always in them, without tranfmigration or change of any
kind=
What
I
Chap. 11. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 147
What I have faid in this and the preceding chapter, will, I hope,
put the important dodtrine of the feparate exiftence of the Intellec-
tual Mind in a clearer view than it has been hitherto put, and will
fliow the truth of what Ariftotle fays, " That, when it fo exifts, it is
" what it truly is *;" by which he means, that, being free of the con-
tagion of the Body, and delivered from all the paffions and difor-
ders which its conjundion with the Animal produces, it is truly it-
felf. And indeed it is much more difficult to conceive it joined
with a fubftance fo diflferent as Body, than to conceive it exifling by
itfelf.
What I have faid will, I hope, alfo put the immortality and e-
ternity of the foul upon the fureft bottom, on which philofophy can
put it : And, accordingly, Ariftotle makes that conclufion from its
feparate exiftence "j". And, indeed, it anfwers at once all the objec-
tions that have been made to its immortality : For, if it be a fepa-
rate fubftance from the Body, it is not merely a certain modification,
or organization, of Matter, as Dr Prieftley maintains, which, there-
fore, muft be at an end when the Body is diftblved ; and, if it be
a feparate fubftance from the Animal Life, it will not perifli when
that life ends, as Lucretius fuppofes.
And indeed, the arguments ufed by this philofopher plainly fhow,
tTiat the fourcc of the error is confounding the three fubftances, of
which we are compounded, with one another, and with the Body with
which they are all incorporated. And, indeed, if I really believed tliat
all the three were qualities of the fame fubftance, fo united together,
that they could not exift feparately, I fliould be much difpofed to
T 2 believe,
* ^«»,r9-tTiM)i»», Sec Arid. lib. 2.
De Animay cap. 1 .
t P 12- 3.--
154 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
unlefs we will maintain, with the C;irtcrians, that Matter and
Extenfion are the fame. — This philolbphy is much more antient
than the philofophy of Plato and Ariftotle, and, I am perfuaded, is
as antient as any in the world : For it was the philofophy of the
School of Pythagoras ; and, I think, there is no reafon to doubt that it
was brought by him from Egypt. It is to be found in that moft va-
luable piece of Pythagorean philofophy, Timaeus de Anima Mundiy
who fays that the Material World confifts of three things, the Idea,
that is, the Form, — the Matter, — and the compofite of thefe two, that
is, the things which are perceived by our Senfes *. As to Subftan-
ces immaterial ; it is almoft needlefs to obferve, that they could ad-
mit of no fuch compofition ; they were all Form, and therefore the
moft fimple of all Beings.
The laft diftindtion I fhall mention is well known, even to thofe
who are no farther advanced than to the threfhold of philofophy ; it ia
betwixt Subftance and Accident, — a diftindlion which runs through
the whole of things, every thing exifting being either Subftance
or Accident. It is fo obvious, and has been fo often taken
notice of before, that I fhould not have mentioned it upon this oc-
cafion.
•See what I hav€ Lid before in a note upon p. 70. of the different ways in which
Plato and Ariftotle exprefs themfelves, concerning the Form, or Idea, of a Thing,
and that Idea joined with Matter, fo as to make a Compofite, which is apprehended
by the Senfes. — Without entering into the controverfy betwixt Plato and his
fcholar about Ideas, I think it muft be admitted, that the Matter of which any na-
tural fubftance is compofed, is in conftant change, and never one moment the fame:
It is, therefore, the Idea of fuch fubftances alone that has a permanent ex*
iflence ; and, accordingly, it is only by the Idea that any thing is an objedi: of
Intelleft. And it is in this way that Ariftotle himfelf argues againfl. Heraclitus,
and others, who faid. That nothing had any permanent exiftcnce, but every thing
was in a perpetual flux like the ftream of a river; Metaph- lib. 4. cap. 5. — p. 878.
edit. Du Val.
Chap.III. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 155
cafion, If it had not been to obferve, that, by our fenfes, we only
perceive the Accidents of things : But it is by our Intellect only that
we perceive the Subftance of any thing ; for the Intelle£t, colle£bing
together the feveral Accidents of the thing, and perceiving that they
muft exift in fome Subjlratum or Subjedt, does, in this way, form
the Idea of Subftance.
Having premifed thefe obfervations, I will now apply them to the
Human Intelledl. And, in ihcjirji place, I think it is evident, that,
in our entrance upon this ftage of our exiftence, it exifts only Po-
tentially, not Adually : For, though our Soul be, as I hold, im-
mortal and divine, yet, being fo intimately connedled with the Body, it
is fo far mortal and in generation, and therefore muft have the fame
progrefs from Potentiality to Adluality, that all things mortal and in
generation have. I hold, therefore, Ariftotle's comparifon to be juft, of
our Mind in that ftate to an unwritten tablet *, or, as we would fay,
to a blank fheet of paper : For, whether we fuppofe, with Ariftotle,
that our Ideas originate in this ftate, and are formed by the Mind
from objeds of Senfe, — or with Plato, that thefe obje<3:s only excite
and refufcitate them, as it were, from the dormant ftate they are
in at our birth, — it is certain that then we have them not, at leaft, in
Energy and Ufe.
And not only is there this progrefs, from Potentiality to Aduality,
in the Individual, but, as I hold, alfo in the Species. To be convinced
of this, we need only confider how flow the progrefs of our chil-
dren is in underftanding, notwithftanding the intercourfe they have
with IntelleQual creatures, and how much they learn by imitation
and inftrudiion. But how much more flow muft the progrefs of
the perfedt Savage be, without fuch advantages ? And, indeed, it
U 2 appears
• Lib 3. De Anima, cap. 5. injtne.
156 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
appears to me, that, if Societies had never been formed nor Arts
invented and pradiled, we never lliould have had any ufe of Intel-
le»ft. And, as there is no reafon to doubt but that every nation was,
at fome time or another, in this favage ftate ; therefore, I fay, this
progrefs from Potentiality to Aduality is of the Species, as well as
of the Individual : And as cur Intelledt is by far our nobler part,
fo the progrefs of it is very much flower than of our Animal and
Vegetable part. But of this progrefs of Man I will fay a great deal
more in the fubfequent part of my work : I ihall therefore only add
here, that, if there were not fuch a progrefs in Man, and a progrefs
not to end with this life, human life would be not only miferable,
but rldiculoufly imperfedt, and quite irreconcileable with any Syftem
of Wifdom and Goodnefs in the Univerfe.
Of our progrefs from Senfations to Ideas, and of the difference
betwixt thefe two, I have fpoken fully elfewhere. As the firft exer-
cife of Intelledl among Men muft have been pradical, and, as the
fubjed of Pradlice is Particulars, or Individual Things, it is evident
that, in our firft Ideas, there could not have been the feparation, a-
bove mentioned, of the Form from the Matter ; but the Compofite
would be the Subject of fuch Ideas. Of the manner in which we firft
form our Ideas, I have already fpoken at pretty great length *. I have
there faid, that, among the feveral qualities, which, we fee, are inhe-
rent in the fame Subjedl or Subftance, as it is called, we perceive one
that is principal, which makes the thing what it is, and diftinguifhes
it from every other thing. This is the Idea of the Thing, which
when we perceive to be common to many things, we are faid to^^-
neralife, and to have the Idea of a Species. In this way we perceive,
indeed, the One in the Many ; but we perceive it only with the Many.
Such are the Ideas of all Savages : For, to deny that Men who
Speak,
* P. 72. 85.
Chap. III. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. 157
Speak, Conkilt, Deliberate, and Rcafon, oftffn much better than we
do, have Ideas, and affirm that they have only Senfations, fhews the
grofleft ignorance of the philofophy of Mind. Nor, indeed, is
Pradical Intellect much diflcrent among us ; for we muft necefTarily
know Individuals: And, if the Savage be inferior to us in the know-
ledge of Generals, he does more than make it up in his accurate
knowledge of Particulars ; and, therefore, in the pradice of thofe
Arts to which favages apply, fuch as Hunting, and War of the kind
they ufe, they difcover much more fagacity than we do. I fpeak of
thofe Savages whom the neceffities of Life oblige to pradice Arts,
fuch as the Indians of North America ; for, as to thofe who live in
a country and climate where Nature is fo bountiful as to give them
every thing necelTary for their fubfiftence, without art, and with
little or no labour, fuch as the Caribs and other inhabitants of the
Weft India Iflands, they have little ufe of Intelled of any kind ; — fo
little, that the Spaniards, when they firft came among them, could
hardly believe them to be human creatures ; and it required a Bull
of the Pope to eftablifh their humanity.
As the Savage does not fpeculate, it is impoflible that he can have
Ideas far removed from Matter and Material Things. He cannot,
therefore, have Ideas of Exiftence, Time, Space, Subftance as op-
pofed to Accident, Quantity, Quality, Relation, and other Ideas of
higheft Abftradion. Even Number, — that Idea of fuch neceflary
ufe in Human Life, that no Society can fubfift, or Art be pradiced
without it, being that by which weconfider a thing, either as one^ fub-
fifting by itfelf and feparated from other things, or as a multitude of
fuch feparatc things defined and limited, the Savage only perceives as
applied to particular things, but cannot ufe Numbers as we do, with-
out fuch particular application, nor confider their nature and proper-
ties by themfelves, and abftraded from every thing elfe. He is there-
fore no Arithmetician, and ftill lefs a Geometer ; For, though he
muft
15 8 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
mufl. have the Idea of Figure in particular things, he has not learned
to abflrad the Dimenllons of Body from Body, and to make a Science
of them by themfelves. As to Subftance Immaterial ; it is an Idea
of the higheft Abftradion, and the nobleft fubje£l of Speculative in-
tellcifl ; But it is fuch an Idea, as it is impolRble the Savage can
have perfedt, that is, abftradlcd from all Matter ; for -it is only by
entering into ourfclves, and ftudying our own Minds, for which the
Savage has neither leifure, being wholly occupied with the concerns
of the Animal Life, nor inclination, that we can attain to iuch an
Idea. He cannot, however, be faid to have no Idea of it : But his
Idea of it is the fame that he has of Number and Figure ; that is, he
perceives it incorporated with Matter ; for he perceives that there is
a Power that moves Body, and which is not Body, Nor do I believe
that there is any Savage who thinks that Body moves itfelf, or who
makes the diftind;ion, which our modern philofophers make, betwixt
Natural Caufes and the Operations of Mind ; for thofe Natural Cau-
fes, when diftinguifhed from Mind, can be nothing elfe but Matter
and Mechanifm, by which they fuppofe all the Operations of Nature
are produced. But the Savage is fo far from being of that opinion,
that he underftands, and, I think, rightly, the winds and waters,
and every part of Nature, to be moved by Mind ; though, I believe,
he is not philofopher enough to diftinguifh the feveral kinds of
Mind, or to conceive that there may be Mind that ynovcs without
Intelligence or Volition, But he perfedly conceives that the Mind
which performs thofe operations is a far greater Power than his
Mind ; and, therefore, all favages believe in Superior Minds : And
fo far the Indian,
ivhoje uiUutorJ Mind
Sees God in clouds^ and bears him in the "wind *,
is much wifer than many of our philofophers.
Let
• Pope's F-JT'iy on Man.
Chap. Iir. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 159
Let us now contraft, with the operations of the Pradical Intellea,
the Speculative Life and the Occupation of a Philofopher. He
Jives, as it were, in the Intelleaual world, and is converfant with
pure Ideal Forms, refembling, in fome degree, thofe in the Mind of
the Deity, the Patterns and Archetypes of all Material Tilings, which
have no reality or permanency of exiflence except in fo far as they
participate of them. He dwells, too, within himfelf, ftudies himfelf
that is, his owA Mind, and from thence proceeds to the contemplation
of fuperior Minds, and even of Deity itfelf. The employment,
in this manner, of his Nobleft Faculty upon the Nobleft Objeds,
muft, of neceflity, produce the greateft happinefs of which human
Nature, in this ftate of its exiftence, is capable. Nor is this hap-
pinefs difturbed, in any great degree, by the clamorous wants of an in-
digent Animal Nature, more indigent in vulgar men than in any other
animal, the imagination of man being more rich and fertile than that
of any Brute, and confequently producing more appetites and defires,
which having invention and fagacity fufficient to gratify, he is thereby
rendered more miferable. It is no wonder, therefore, that Ariftotle
thought the Contemplative and Philofophical Life fo much prefera-
ble to the Pradical * ; and that Plato judged it neceffary to compel
the citizens of his commonwealth, after they had continued to phi-
lofophife fome time, to defcend to govern the ftate, and to mix in the
affairs of men, as the Gods of Homer did in the battles of the
Greeks and Trojans, — Qiof m notoi/ utf^w^ for fuch a Man is truly a
God among men.
CHAP..
• See the note * upon p. 105.
i6o ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
CHAP. IV.
The Sluefiionjiated^ Whether the Pradlcal and Speculative Intelled
he the fume ? — They are the fame. — This the Opinion o/"Simplicius.
— Objeclions to this Opinion. — ift, That the Oh]tGis of the two
Intelleds are different. — zdo, The Authority ©/"Ariftotlc on the o-
ther Sith.—Anfiver to the firft Objedion., that the Pradical Intel-
led is a neceffary Step in the Progrefs to the Perfed Intellcdl, and
that the Objeds 0/ Pradical and Speculative Intelled are not more
different than the Ideas o/perfed and imperfed Intelled 7niiji be.
Difiinfiion betivixt Pradical Ideas and Senfations. — Anfiver to
the Authority ©/"Ariftotle — that, ivhen he /peaks of the Intelled 0-
perattng by the Phantafia, he means the Pradical Intelled. — The
fame ivhcn hefpeaks of a pafTive, incorruptible, Intelled. — The In-
terpretation of Simplicius of that Paffage, better than o/'Philopo-
nus. — This is evident from Ariftotle's Words. — No Philofopher ever
thought more highly of^ the Pluman Soul. — He makes Energy its
Effence in a fe par ate State — Joined -with the Body it mufi befome-
times quiefcent, as is Senfitive Life. —Difference, in this refped,
betivixt the Senfitive and Vegetable Part of us. — What Ariilotle
means luheu he fays, that the Soul, in a feparate State, does not
Remember, Reafon, Love, or Hate. — Wonder that Ariftotle's
meaning fjjould have been miflaken. — The Reafon of the mijlake. —
Ohfervations on the DoBrines of this Chapter — as to the Mind's in-
tuitive Perception in a feparate State, and as to its conftant Adivi-
ty — the Mind's Sympathy -with the Body iii this State — ivhat
Ariftotlc ?neans by the Soul's not Loving or Hating in a feparate
State.
H
AVING thus made the diftindion betwixt pradical and fpe-
culative Intelled, let us now inquire, \yhether the Mind,
that
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. i6i
that perceives only the perifliable- Forms incorporated with Matter, —
is converfant only with individual things, and employs itfelf in the
government and diredlion of the Animal Life, — be the fame with
that which contemplates the eternal and unchangeable Forms of
things, — makes Mind its principal objeft, — abftrads itfelf as much as
is polTible in this ftate of exiftence from all external things, — and
places its whole happinefs in the fludy of Beauty and Truth ; or,
in other words, Whether the Pra«t> ^xtTxcfiarti ij ■^vx>'>. Lib. 3. De Aiiima, cap. 8.
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 163
particular and individual things, mufl: operate with the afllftance of
the Senfes and the Phantafia : But, as to the Speculative Intelleft,
which is converfant only with the Ideas or Forms of things with-
out the Matter, it is evident that it cannot operate properly, if it
takes the afllftance of either Senfe or Imagination ; and it is cer-
tainly true what Plato fays, that nothing difturbs the Intelledt more
in its operations than the Phantafia. And, when it is employed upon
its nobleft objedt, — Mind and things divine, it is evident, that, if
we try to pidure them in our Imagination, we never can have any
proper Idea of them. It is true indeed, that it is very difficult to
think even upon fubjedls of fpeculation, without any help either
from Senfe or Phantafia: But, to think fo, is undoubtedly the per-
fedion of Intelledt, to which the philofophers of the Platonic
fchool, in later times, afpired, by a certain regimen and manner of
life, which they called Cathartic *. But, without fuch preparation,
though in Geometry we ufe the Senfes and Phantafia more, I think,
than we ought to do, yet in Arithmetic thofe, who have learned
the fcience, operate upon numbers, and inveftigate their nature and
properties, without applying them to particular things, and confe-
quently without the Senfes or Phantafia. And, therefore, I per-
feftly agree with the Pythagoreans, who held, that nothing was fo
proper a preparation for the contemplation of Divine things as the
ftudy of Numbers, which, for that reafon, they ufed as the fym-
bols of Divinity and of all the myfteries of Nature f ,
X2 It
• See Philoponus in the beginning of his commentary upon Ariftotlc's books
De Anima.
* See Nicomachus Gerafinus' Arithmetic, and the t« StoAoy.i/^i.* rm A^itfmn.
Hnj, — a compilement from this author and fome other Pythagorean writers ; a very
rare and curious book, which I faw in the King of France's library and had the
ufe of for fome time, but do not know where elfe it may be found.
i64 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
It is true, alfo, that Arlftotle fays, that the Intellect is pafTive and
perifhable * ; and it is from this pailage chiefly that it would fcein
Ariftotle makes a diftindtion of Intelledl into that which is operative
and immortal, and that which is paflive and perifliable. To avoid
this interpretation, Philoponus fuppofes that Ariftotle means here,
by the Nou? -n-aSjiTixcf, the Phantafia. But Ariftotle every where di-
ftinguifties betwixt the Intellect and the Phantafia, particularly in
liib. 3. De Amma^ cap. 3. et 4 ; nor do I fee with what propriety
he can call the Phantafia Intellect, any more than the Senfe. I
therefore agree with Ariftotle's other Interpreter, Simplicius, that
Ariftotle here means, by the paflive Intelled, the Intelle»Ttf khi aiiiot, Ou
fitnftciivcfUf ot, cTi revTo fiv rtuTtv tvSlt
»o«. Lib. 3- De J/iima, cap. 6. where it is evident that the t»wt« fcn nTTxttf, which
he oppofes to the uxintiKu N»v5, is the pure fpeculative Intelledt, which, he had
faid before, in the fame chapter, was both «/«yiis and nrrxttit : The «» fitiiftttiv*'
fiit, with which the fentence begins, I hold, applies to the pure Intellect, and
means not that it forgets, but that it has not any ufe or need of memory ; as I think
is evident from a paffage in the firfl book of this treatifc, cap. 5. towards the end,
where, fpeaking of this pure Intelled, he fays, That, when the Body to which it is
joined is dilTolved, okti /utnutvivn, tvrt fiixn j of which paflage I fliall fay more in
the fequel. What he fays in the end of the paffage before us, that, without
the paffive Tntellefl, the Mind thinks of nothing, refers to the progreffion from
that ftate of mere capacity in which the Intelledl is, before it is impreffed by ex-
ternal objefts ; which impreffion is abfolutely neceflary for its operating in this
our prefent flate.
i66 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
But, whether Ariftotic believed that we had two Intelledbs, or
only one, it is perfedly clear that he believed that at leafl we had
one Intelledt that was incorruptible and immortal. And, indeed, it
appears to me, that no pliilofopher or divine ever thought more
hi"-hlv of the Human Soul than Ariftotle. Even when he confiders
"it as adling in conjunction with the Body, he fays it is x^f'V) that
\s,jeparable ; but, when it is adually feparated, (for that is the force
of the word x"f"&«0> '^^^^^ ^'^'X ^^ '''» what it truly is, immortal
and eternal *.
But, farther, he fays that, in this feparate ftate, it is, by
its eflence, active ; fo that it cannot exift without ading or energi-
fing, T« ouT»« m t)ii^yii*-\ : And, a little farther down, in the fame
chapter,
• Xwfi^sc, ^i srTi juomv T«w«' iit'n Irli" kki Tot/To fimf mtxticTty k«i «iJie». De Anima, Lib 3.
cap. 6. The diflin£liori betwixt mUtxrat and xiiitf I have obferved elfewhere, (vol.
I. p. 140.) When he fays, that the Intellect only is immortal and eternal, he
means, as Philoponus has well explained the paflage, that the other parts of our
compofition, fuch as the Senfitive and the Vegetative, are mortal ; for, it appears
from other paffages in this work, particularly lib. i. cap. 3. in fine, that Ariftotic
did not believe in the Pythagorean dodtrine of Tranfmigration.
If the Intelleft alone be immortal and eternal, and the other parts of our compo-
fition not eternal, it is evident, that, according to the opinion of Ariftotle, it muft
be a fubftance by itfelf, and not a quality, improvement, or refinement of the Sen-
fitive or Vegetative parts of our Nature; and, accordingly, Ariftotle, lib. \.De
Jnima, cap. 5. has exprefsly faid, that the Intelieft is a fubftance by itfelf, which
is not corrupted or impaired by the decay of our Senfitive Faculties : 'O h »»v( t„-
xlf tyyinrBcii, ivrim T»» ovrit, k*i ov fiiiifirB*f fttc\iTr» yu^ «^»« (t»u iov) irx6ii,xXXu revh rev t^ot'
rt( fxiix, It lx!<>« ixi>- ^'»> «*' feuTjti (fHt^tftiiov, evri ftynfioiuii, tuTt (fiXti' »v ya( ixw
ftv r,», «?t>i« T»v K.»inu,i »ua>i0Xif i ii ttvs iirtif #ii«ri{or ti icxi xwtill; t/lit. Lib. I. Cap. f.
Where Philoponus obferves, that Ariftotle ufes the word «r*{, becaufe he had not
yet fo fully proved, as he does afterwards, thrft the Soul was of a Nature Divine,
and therefore impaflible.
j- 0» (ifiifittinet, in xwalti.
Chap. IV. AN TIE NT METAPHYSICS. 169
his meaning fhould have been miftaken by any of his commentators;
and yet the eldeft of them, Alexander Aphrodifienfis, was pf opi-
nion, that Ariftotle believed the Soul to be mortal, and to perilh with
the Body. Of this we are informed by Philoponus, in his commen-
tary upon the Sixth Chapter of the Third Book, De yln'wia; and that
he does no injnftice to the Aphrodifian, is evident from a work of
his, ftill extant, upon the fubjed: of Mind, in which he pretends to
deliver the dodrine of Mind upon the principles of Ariftotle's philo-
fophy. I cannot fee any other ground for his error, except that
Ariftotle fays, that Mind is the «iJ'of, or Form, of the Animal; which
is faying no more, than that it is the Mind which makes any Animal
of a Species diftindt from a Vegetable or an unorganized Body.
But, furely, it does not follow from thence, thaf Mind is not a di-
ftind: Subftance fromBody : For two Subftances, united together, will
make a Species diftindl from either ; and, according to Plato, all the
feveral Forms and Speciefes of things are Subftances, which have a
feparate exiftence, not only out of Matter, but out of the Mind of
any Intelligent Being ; which Subftances, being united to Matter,
compofe the feveral Speciefes of Corporeal Things.
I will conclude this Chapter with a few obfervations. — However
extraordinary this philofophy of Ariftotle's may, at firft fight, appear,
yet, if we attend carefully to what pafles in our Minds even in this
life, we fliall be difpofed to believe that his notions of the feparate
ftate of the Soul are not ill founded.
And, in xh.tjirfl place, it muft be admitted, that our moft perfect
knowledge, at prefent, is our knowledge of Axioms or Self-evident
Propofitions, of which we perceive the truth intuitively, without any
difcourfe of Reafoii. Now, in a more perfed; ftate of our Intelli-
gence, it is evident that we muft perceive the truth of more propofi-
tions in the fame way; and, in a more perfedl ftate ftill, we muft
Vol. II. Y perceive
170 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book III.
perceive every propofition in the fame manner as, we arc fure, Supe-
rior Intelligences apprehend them.
And here we may fee, that, when we knoiv in this way, the Me-
mory is entirely ufelefs. In reafoning, we muft remember the pre-
mifes before we can infer the conclufion : But, when our Ideas are
all prefent to us, and when we perceive intuitively their connection,
we have no need of Memory or Recollee Subftance of each
Body. I know, by Confcioufnefs, certain Operations of my own Mind ;
and, in like manner, I difcover, that, where there are operations, there
muft he fomething that operates : And this fomething is the Subftance
of Mind.
Mr Locke feems to have been fenfible, that the Idea of Subftance
cannot be drawn from either of the two fources, which he has af-
figned to all our Ideas : And, therefore, he would fain deny that we
have any fuch Idea ; at Icaft he fays, it is fo obfcure and imperfed,
that it does not in the Icaft add to the ftock of our knowledge. But
there
Chap. I. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. 179
there are many things that we are fure do certainly exift, and yet
wc have no clear conception of the manner of their exiftcncc. This
is the cafe with refpedt to the Supreme Mind, and even our own
Minds, of the exiftence of which we have much greater certain-
ty than of the exiftence of Body. And, as to our knowledge, it
would be exceedingly imperfedt without the Idea of Subftance, or
rather we fhould have no knowledge at all : For we could not con-
ceive Qualities, without, at the fame time, having an Idea of fome
Subftance in which they are inherent ; and I hope I have already
fhown, and will further fhow, that, by diftinguifhing the feveral
fubftances of which we are compofed, there is fomething to be ad-
ded to our knowledge.
There are other two Ideas of the greateft importance to philofo-
phy ; but which likewife are neither Senfations nor Reflexions.
Thefe are the Ideas of Matter and Form^ of which the whole
Material world is compofed : For it is only the compofite of thefe
two that is perceived by the Senfes ; but it is Intellect alone that
can make the feparation, and conceive each of them by itfelf. Mat-
ter, without form of any kind, is not only no Perception of the
Brute, but it is an Idea of the Human Mind, fo remote from com-
mon fenfe and obfervation, that I doubt very few of our modern
philofophers have any fuch Idea : And, as to Form without Mat-
ter, 1 do not believe that Mr Locke was learned enough to know,
that Ider.s, of which he fpcaks fo much, are nothing elfe but Forms
of that kind. And, as to fubftaniial Forms, it is plain from what
he fays, that he had not the leaft Idea of them ; for he did not
•know enough of the fyftem of Nature, to know, that, in all natu-
ral Subftances, there is a certain Form from which all the qualities
of the Subftance refult: And this is what is called, in the language of
the Peripatetics, the Siihjl ant nil Form of the thing. In every fubjed of
Science this Form muft be difcovercd, otherwife there could be no
^Science. Thus, for example, the Geometer muft know the Effence
Z 2 or
i8o ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV,
or Subflantial Form (for thcle words are fynoni;nous)of the Triangle^
or any other Figure of which he treats, otherwife he never could de-
nionftrate the feveral quahtics and properties of the figure relulting
from that Form. It is the fame in the works of Art, if they are ported
in their kind ; for in them theie muft be fomething principal, to which
every thing elfe in the piece is to be referred. Now, to fuppofe that it is
otherwife in the works of God, and that an Animal or Vegetable is
nothing but brute lifclefs Matter, with fo many qualities inherent in
if, but unconneded, and without any bond of union among them,
would be contrary to the whole analogy of Nature, in every part of
wliich we obfcrve a wonderful union and fubordinacy of things to
one another. But of this I have faid a great deal more in the
Firft Volume of this work*.
Farther, there are two other grand Ideas, which never can be
derived from Senfation or Refledlion ; and yet they are fuch, that,
without them, we never can philofophife upon the fubjedl of God
or Nature, or indeed upon any other fubjed : The ideas, I mean,
are thofe of Caufe and Effccl. For, whatever Idea we may have from
Senfation or Refle£tion, of the thing that produus or the thing
-produced^ we never can derive from thofe fources the Idea of Pro-
du£lion, or of the one being the Caufe of the other. Mr David
Flume, therefore, argued very well upon the Principles of Mi:
Locke's philofophy, when he maintained, that we had no Idea of
Caufe and efFedt ; and that we only knew that one event preceded
another.
There is alfo another Idea, of fovereign ufe in human life, the
foundation, as I have ihown t, of Virtue, and of every thing that
gives delight to the nobleft part of our Nature, which is neither an
Idea of Senfation nor Reflection. The Idea, I mean, is that of
Beauty^ which, though perceived in objeds of Senfe, is perfectly
diftind
• B. 2. chap. 2.
t P. 112. &C.
Cliap. I. A N T I £ N T M E T A P H Y S I C 3. v8t
diftind from the perception of thefe objcdls : And, accordingly, tiie
Brutes, which perceive thcfe objeds as well as we do, have no per-
ception of Beauty ; and many of our own fpecics fee numbers of
moft beautiful things without perceiving any Beauty in them. And
it is the fame with refpedt to the operations of our Mind ; for tlie.
perception of Beauty in them is quite diftindt from the perception
of the operations themfelves.
Mr Locke fays, that the Idea of Beauty is a complex Idea of Co-
lour and Shape. If his own Idea of Beauty had been more perfcd,
he would have added Motion ; the Beauty of which is a much higher
Beauty than that of cither Shape or Colour. But I fay, that a
man may combine what Ideas he pleafes, and perceive the combina-
tion as diftindlly as poflible j yet, if he has not in his X ind a pre-
conceived Idea of Beauty, or, in common language, if he has not
Tafte, he will have no perception of Beauty in any fmgle thing, or
in any combination of things.
Moreover, I fay, that we have not, from Senfation or Refledioriy
the Idea of Good^ for the fame,reafon that we have not the Idea of
Caufe and Effedl ; becaufe Good is that which has a tendency to
produce Hoppinejs. Now, how defective muft any fyftem of Ideas
be, that does not take in thofe two governing Ideas of Human Life,
the Beautiful and the Good?
But what need I infift upon particulars, when that whole clafs of
Ideas, which, according to Mr Locke's own account of them, is mofl:
numerous, cannot be derived either from Senfation or Refledlion ?
The Ideas I mean are thofe of Relation . For, though from Senfa-
tion and Refledtion we may have the Idea of each of the two things
related^ it is impoffible that from either of thefe fources we can have
the Idea of the Relation ; which, therefore, is an Idea that the Mind
muft draw from its own ftore, without the afTiftance of either Senfc
or Reflexion.
Thu«^
i82 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
Thus It appears to be true, what the Bifhop of "Worceftcr has
maintained in his difpute with Mr Locke, that all our Ideas are not
derived from Senfation or Reflection, but that many of them are
from Reafon * ; by which he means the Mind operating oiherwife
than either by Senfe or Refledion.
Mr Locke has thought proper to clafs our Ideas according to their
origin, as he conceived it. But the Antients diftinguifhed betwixt
the origin of them, and the chiffification or arrangement of them.
With refpe(ft to the arrangement, they diftributed them into ten
clalfes, called Predicaments or Categories; and human wifdom has
not invented any better divifion of them : As to the origin of them,
they confidered that as a feparate fubjedt of inquiry, of which I have
faid a good deal in this chapter, and fliall fay more in the next.
But, before I leave the fubjedl of Mr Locke's philofophy, I can-
not help obferving, that, not only the Matter of it is very erroneous
and imperfedV, but the language of it, and the terms of art he ufes,
are fuch as I cannot approve of.
The language of antient philofophy, which came down from the
School of Pythagoras to the Academy and Lycaeuviy is fhort, clear,
and comprehenfivc, as their Ideas of things were. They divided the
univerfity of things according to their manner of exiftencc, whether
primary ox Jecondary \ calling thofe things which exifted /jrzwrt:^/)',
that is, independently by themfelvcs, Subjiances, and denominating
thofc things which had but Tifecondaty exiftcnce, dependent upon o-
thcr things, Jccidents. This diftindion of things Mr Locke has
endeavoured to ridicule t : He has, however, been obliged to ufe it,
though
• See the Bifliop of Worcefler's anfwer to Mr Locki:'s Jctter concerning fome
pafTages relating to his EflV.y of Human Underflanding, p. loo.
t Lib. 2. cap. 13- parag. rp. and 20.
Chap. I. ANTIENT M E T A P PI YS I C S. 183
though he has thought proper to change the name of Accident (a
moft fignificant appellation, as I have ellevvhere obferved, efpecially
in its Greek origin,) into Mode. — Further, they diftinguifhed and ar-
ranged things, according to their Genufes, Speciefes, and DiflFerences,
that is, the qualities winch diftingulfh one fpecies of the fame genus
from another. This dlvifion of things, likewife, Mr Locke has
thought proper to reprefent as merely nominal, adapted only to the
ufe of different languages, but without any foundation in the Nature
of things*. But the antients thought this diftindlion fo much
founded in Nature, that they defined things according to their Genus,
Species, and Difference. And, indeed, nothing (hows more that Sy-
ftem of the univerfe, the contemplation of which is the chief delight
of the philofopher, but of which Mr Locke appears to me to have
hardly had any Idea : For it fliows the proceffion of things, fuch as
it is in Nature, from the higheft to the loweft, from what is moft
general, that is, the higheft Genus, fuch as thofe that compofe the
Categories, down to the loweft Speciefes, below which there is no-
thing but Individuals : Then it fhows moft manifeftly the rerum
Concordia difcors^ that wonderful fimilarity and yet difference of
things, and that connection and dependency of one thing upon an-
other, by which every Species is a Syftem, the Genus above it a
greater Syftem, and fo on till we come to the Category, or higheft
Genus
' Book 3. chap. 5. fefl. 8. and foil. And, in his difpute with the Bifhop of
Worcefter, he has gone fo far as to maintain, that there is no Nature ctmnian to the
feveral individuals of a Species — that Man, for example, is a common name for Pe-
ter, J.imes, and John, but denotes no Nature common to thefe three; fo that it is
impoffible there can be three perfons in one Nature. — See the Bifliop of Worcefter's
anfwer to Mr Locke's 2d letter, towards the end, where the Bilhop (hews the dan-
gerous confequsnce of fuch a philofophy to Religion. And, indeed, a philofophy
which maintains that there cannot be three perfons in one Nature, or two Natur.s in
one perfon, is totally adverfe to the myllerics of the Chriftian faith, as it mult denji
the doQrinc both of the Trinity and the Incarnation.
1 34 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Buok IV.
Genus of the order. This divifion alfo Iliows the wonderful tenden-
cy there is in Nature to the owf, and chat afcent by which things rife
above one another, till they end, like a pyramid, in a point. And fo
comprehenfivc is tlie divlfion, that it includes all the poffible variety
there can be in the matter : For every thing muft either be only a
Species, only a Genus, or both Genus and Species ; and, bcfides
thcfe, there can be nothing elfe. Man, for example, being the loweft
Species, and having nothing under it but Individuals, is a Species only :
The Genus, Animal, which is immediately above Man, is both Genus
and Species ; for it is a genus with refped: to Man, but it is a Spe-
cies with refpeil to the ro iij.^lv^ov, or animated Being : And fo we a-
fcend till we come to Sitbfiancc, which is a Genus only, and not a
■Species; and, as I obferved elfewhere *, we may reduce all the Cate-
gories, or highefl: Genufcs, to one, viz. Subjlance and its Attributes,
which makes this Logical Syftem of the Antients a kind of Syfteni of
Theology.
Thus, it appears that tlie language of antient philofophy mofl
clearly exprefles the nature of things ; and the terms of Art, fo far
as concerns this philofophy of Ideas, are very few, being no more
than five, viz. Subftance and Accident, Genus, Species, and Differ-
ence. In place of this language, fo fimple and plain, Mr Locke has
thought proper to introduce a new one, much more perplexed and
obfcurc : For, in the firjl place, he has confounded Senfations and
Ideas, making Ideas to be Senfations, and Senfations Ideas ; — things,
as I have fliown, in their nature, perfedlly different : What is, pro-
perly fpeaking, Ideas, he calls Abftradl Ideas, as if there were no
Ideas but what were abftradtcd from Matter : Then he fpeaks of
Simple Ideas and Compound Ideas, and Simple Modes and Mixed
Modes ; — terms which heufesin fuch a way, that I am often at a lofs
tp know whether he means by them Accidents or Speciefes. And I
think
« Vo!. I. p 36.
I
Chap. I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. i8j
think it is not without reafon that the Bifhop of Worcefter, in the
treatife above mentioned *, accufes h'ltn of confounding Men's
apprehenfions with his new Terms, fuch as Complex and Abftraci
Ideas, and Specific Navies ; to which, I think, he might have added.
Modes, and Mixed Modes. — In fhort, I cannot help faying, though
I fliould give offence, that the philofophy of Mr Locke is, under the
appearance of a new philofophy, nothing but the antient, much
mangled and deformed, and expreffed in a barbarous jargon. From
this barbarity, Mr Harris has the merit of having firft refcued Philo-
fophy : And I defpair not to live to fee both the dodrines and the
language of antient philofophy reftored.
I have infifted fo much upon the errors and defeats of Mr Locke's
philofophy, for two reafons : frji. To clear the way for Plato's doc-
trine of Ideas, which I am to deliver in the next chapter, by remo-
ving thofe objedions to it, which will naturally arife in the Mind of
every one who has ftudied Mr Locke's book upon human under-
flanding ; and, idly, To ftiow how infuflicient the beft natural parts
are, unafTifled by antient learning, in the ftudy of philofophy; for
Mr Locke was undoubtedly a man of excellent natural parts, very-
much fuperior, in that refpeA, to Mr David Hume, or to any that
has philofophifed without the affiftance of the Antients fmce his
time. And his llyle is as good as, I think, that of any man can be,
who is not a Scholar and has not formed his Tafte upon the befl:
models of antiquity ; without which it is as impoflible to write well,
as to excell in the arts of Sculpture and Painting, without ftudying the
antient monuments of that kind.
Vol. n. A a CHAP,
* P. 121.
i86 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
CHAP. II.
The general Propofition maintained in this Chapter ^ That all Ideas are
originally in the Mind, is demonjlratedfrom /^ Nature o/" Ideas, and
the Dijlinciionbetivixt thernand^cnianons, — ^ II Ideas ffui^ origi7iatey
either from Mind or Body. — The Ideas ^External Forms^r/? fo«/?-
dered. — The Senfations zvhich thcfe Forms produce^ not Ideas, hoiv-
cver much generalized or ahft railed they may be. — Our Senfations not
the Materials out of nvhich Ideas can be made. — Ideas refenible the
Form of any Piece of Workmanfljipy ivhich is not from the Matter
but from the Mind of the Artijl. — Without Senfations ive cannot
have Ideas ; but Senfations, therefore^ are not the Caufe of our
J Ideas. — They are excited by Senfations — are lejs perfetl at frft —
more perfect afterivards. — Some fo perfect as not to exijl at all in
Matter. — 0/"Ideas of Reflcdion. — Every individual Perception of
the Operation of our Mind, u, according to Mr Locke, aji Idea. —
— This not true. — There mujl be the Knowledge of the Nature of
the Operation. — This cannot be it'ithout the Knowledge of the A-
gent. — This Knowledge can only be derived from Mind. — The only
^efiion remaining is^ Whether our Mind creates its Ideas ? — This
cannot be conceived. — Ideas cannot be difcovered in the Objects in
nvhich they are inherent ^ iinlefs they be previoufly knoivn. — The
Soul being a diflincl Subftance, puts this A'lattcr out of doubt. — No
Soul can be ivithout Ideas. — If it creates Ideas, it creates itfelf. —
This impoffible. — Jill our Ideas, as ivell as our Minds, are from
God. — In his Mind the Ideas cannot be abflr acted from Matter. —
This Origin of our Ideas much nobler than that afftgned by Mr
Locke — is the conftqucnce of our being made after the Image of
God. — No innate Ideas in one Sevfe. — A previous State of the
Human
Chap. ir. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 187
Human Soul. — T'hs latent Ideas in us not called up by an Act of the
Mind, like the Ideas ive have already acquired. — That ivc have no
confcioufnefs of any thing in a State of pre-exi/lence, no proof that there
ivas nofuchState. — Mr Locke's Error^ inconjounding Confcioufnefs
and\6,cn\.\X.j . — The Intelledual Part of us may be dormant and quiefcent
for fame Time. — This agreeable to the Analogy of Nature. — In/lances
offuch a State, both in the Vegetable and the Animal, — Our Intel-
led;ual VA.rX.fome times quiefcent, even after ive are groivn up. —
Ideas even then lie dortnant in our Minds_/or Tears.
IN the preceding Chapter, I think, I have fhown, that there are
very many of our Ideas, and thefe of the greateft importance,
which are not derived from Body. The Reader, I believe, will not
be inclined to divide the matter, or to think that fome of them come
from Body, and fome from Mind ; and, therefore, I hope he will
be prepared for the general propofition which I am to maintain in
this Chapter, that all the Ideas of our Mind can come from no other
fource than the Mind itfelf. This, I think, I am able to demon-
ftrate from the account I have given of Ideas in the preceding
Book, and the diftindlion I have made betwixt them and
Senfations. I have there fhown, that, by the Senfes, we only
apprehend the external and material Qualities of things, which are
continually changing and paffing away, as well as the Matter in
which they are inherent ; whereas, by the Intel ledl, we apprehend
the Nature and Eflence of the Thing, that which makes every thing
what it is, and continues always the fame, in all the viciflitudes of
Generation and Corruption and amid all the changes to which the
material and outward Form of the thing is liable. And this is what,
in the genuine fenfe of the word, and, as it is ufed by antlent philo-
fophers, is an Idea ; which, therefore, they fay, is eternal and un-
A a 2 changeable.
i88 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
changeable, and which to know is the only Knowledge and Science *.
And, as this internal Nature and Eflence of every corporeal form is
nothing elfe but tliat internal principle which moves the Body, —
makcsit cohere, — producesall its Qualities and Accidents, — and which,
therefore, can be nothing elfe but Mind, as it is Mind that gives
being and energy to every thing; — I fay, it is only from Mind that our
knowledge of this or of any other Mind can be derived, and not
from Body, which never can produce Mind, nor any conception of
Mind,
All our Ideas, it is evident, mufl: originate either from Mind or
Body : I will begin with thofe which are moft likely to originate
from Body,— I mean our Ideas of external Forms ; of which as we
have Ideas as well as Senfations, it is fometimes, as I have obferved f,
not eafy to diftinguifh the one from the other.
Mr Locke has been pleafed to call even our particular Senfations
by the name of Ideas : But this is a language which no Man, who
cither thinks or fpeaks accurately, will ufe ; and the utmoft that
the greateft Materialift can pretend, is, that our Senfations, when
abftradted and generalized, become Ideas. But I think I have fhown
moft evidently, that Senfations, however abftradted from the Mat-
ter which produces them, or from one another, or, however much
generalized, that is, applied to different fubjedis, are ftill no more
than Senfitions, that is, impreiTions made upon our organs of Senfe,
preferved in our Phantafia or Memory J. And, if Senfations, by be-
ing
• To kno'M, therefore, in the language of Plato, Is ipxrtt», and uTxvratf «im tx,tir»; while things,
In generation and corruption, ouk is-tj, ttxxx yi»Tii. The more I ftudy the do£trine
and the language of this philofopher, the more I admire him ; and I am perfuaded
that no man ever knew more of the inmoft Nature of Things, without excepting even
his fcholar Ariflotle, or had more exalted notions, both of divine and human things,
than Plato.
t P. 69.
< P. 78.
Chap. II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 189
ing abftraded and generalized, cannot become Ideas, I think it is as
evident, that, neither by feparating, compounding, or combining
them in any way, can they be Co transformed.
But, it will be faid, that, though our Senfations are not themfelves
Ideas, they are the materials ouc of which the Mind makes them,
in the fame manner as an artift makes any piece of work out of
Timber, or Stone, or any other Material j and this I know is the
common opinion of thofe who derive all our Ideas from Senfa-
tion.
But I (hould be glad to know how the Mind can operate upon its
Senfations, otherwiie than by abftrading, generalizing, feparating, or
compounding them ; and, if by none, nor all of thefe operations, no
Ideas can be produced, it is not to be conceived how Ideas are to be
made out of Senfations. — As to the woi-ks of art that are made out
of Stone or Metal, thefe materials only change their form, and the
piece of work produced is ftill Metal or ftone. But an Idea is not
a Senfation in any refpedt, but is as different from it as the Fonn of
the piece of work is from the Matter : And, as the Form has an o-
rigin quite different from the Matter, fo is the Idea derived from a
fource quite different from the Senfation.
It is true, indeed, that, in this ftate of our exiftence, confined as
we are in this prifon of flefh and blood, we can have no Ideas with-
■out imprefhons made upon that flefh and blood by external objeds.
But this is faying no more, than that our Mind at prefent cannot o-
perate without Senfations : But it will not from thence follow, that
'our Senfations are the Caiife of our Ideas ; for we muft diftinguifli
betwixt the Caufe and that without which the Cau/e cannot operate.
An animal cannot adt, or exert the fundions of the Animal Life,
without a certain degree of heat and moillure ; and yet heat and
moifture are not the Caufes of the Animal ading : I cannot fee an
objedt,
190 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
ohje(f!t, If a perlbn ftands betwixt me and it j but tliat perfon moving
out of the way is not the Caufe of my feeing it *.
Thus, it appears, that the Ideas, even of objedls of Senfc, are
not from Senfe : And, if not from Senfe, they muft be from Mind ;
and all that the Senfe can do is, to excite the Mind to produce them
out of its own ftore.
But, as there is a progrefs in our IntelletStual Part, as well as in e-
very other part of our wonderful compofition, fo the Ideas of fenfi-
ble objeds, when they are firft excited in us, are far from being
perfed : But the latent Idea is only by degrees difclofed and per-
fedcd. This is evident in the Idea of Figure, which being excited
by our fenfcs in the manner that I have defcribed f, is, no doubt, at
firft, very imperfect ; but, when it comes to be perfeded by the
fcience of Geometry, it is an Idea which cannot be derived from
Matter, becaufe it does not exift in Matter ; for there is no fuch
thing in Nature as a perfedl circle or globe, fuch as is defined by
Geometers; — there cannot even be drawn a ftraight line, in which
many crooks and Inequalities may not be perceived with a micro-
fcope.
The fame is true of thofe Forms, which we admire fo much in
Painting and Statuary ; for it is acknowledged by all the connoif-
feurs in thofe arts, that, if an artift did no more than copy life
exactly, as the Indian and Chinefe painters do, he would not de-
ferve the name of an artift. The Ideal Beauty, therefore, (for fo
it is properly called), makes the perfedlion of all the fine arts ; and
this Beauty is not colleded from Senfe or Obfervation, but arifes
from our own Mind.
Here,
• See upon this fubjed, vol. i. p. 163.
t P. 83-
Chap. II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 191
Here, therefore, we have two fets of Ideas, which cannot be de-
rived from Matter, becaufe they do not exifl in Matter; and in this
they differ from other Ideas which exift in material objedts, as well
as in our Minds. If then we have Ideas which we do not exift in
Matter, but only in our Minds, and which, therefore, cannot be de-
rived from Matter, we ought not, as I {aid in the beginning of this
chapter, to divide the matter, but to fuppofe that all our Ideas are
originally in the Mind. — And fo much for the Ideas of fenfible ob-
jed:s.
As to Ideas of Reflexion, Mr Locke does not pretend that they
arife immediately from the objedls of Senfe ; but they arife, accor-
ding to him, from our Confcioufnefs of our perceptions, of thofe
objedts : And every individual perception of the operation of our
Minds upon thofe objeds, is an Idea in his language, as well as
every individual Senfation. But I deny the one as well as the o-
ther ; and I fay there can be no Idea without fome knowledge of
the Nature of the Thing. Now, it is impoffiblc that we can have
any knowrledge of the Nature of any operation^ without knowing
fomething of the Agent. In order, therefore, to have an Idea of
Perception, Volition, Thinking, and Reafoning, we muft know that
the Agent in thefe operations is fome Inviiible Power, by whatever
name we call it, whether Mind or Spirit, And fo far even the moft
barbarous nations have Ideas of Refler not ufeful.
Further,
Chap. III. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 209
Further, if he has the fccHng of Pleafure and Pain, he mud like-
wife have Appetites and DeHres, by which he feeks the one and a-
voids the other. " Thofe, therefore, ^vho maintain that the Plant
has Senfttion, muft alfo maintain that it has both Pleafure and
Pain, and likewife Appetites and Defires.
Thofe, who philofophife only by fails and Experiments, will hardly
believe what they cannot fee with their Eyes or perceive with
fome other of their Senfes. They will not, therefore, be convinced
by this Reafoning a priori and from Final Cajifes, that the Vege-
table has not Senfition and a feeling of Pleafure and Pain. But,
luckily for thefe philofophers, there is an Experiment, which, if they
pleafe, they may make upon their own Bodies, and which will con-
vince them that the Senfitive Nature in them is quite diflindt from
the Vegetable ; for, if they cut the nerves of any member of their
Body, they will immediately perceive that they have no Senfation
in that member below where the nerves are cut, and yet the Vege-
table part there, if the artery be not cut, and if the blood coatinue
to circulate, will remain entire and uncorrupted.
As the Vegetable part of the creation is intended for the fake of
the Animal, it is therefore more abundant, and is propagated in more
different Avays : For almoft all Animals are propagated only by feed
in the common way of generation ; whereas the Vegetable is not on-
ly propagated in that way, but by Slips, Grafts, Laying, Suckers
from the root, and even by Cuttings, in which laft way it is now
difcovered that all Plants, with fufficient care and attention, may be
propagated.
And from hence refults a remarkable difference betwixt the Ani-
mal and the Vegetable ; namely, that the Vegetable Life appears to
be in every part of the Vegetable, whereas the Senfitive Life has
Vol. XL D d a
2 10 ANT I EN T METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
a particular Scat, which is the Brain, in all Animals that have Brain ;
fo that the communication with that Seat being cut o(F, by the cut-
ting of the Nerves, which all proceed from the Brain, there is, as I
have faici, an end of the Senfitive Life in the Animal.
Further, as the Senfitive Life is more excellent than the Vege-
tative, fo the latter, according to the order of Nature, is made fub-
fervient to the former. And this accounts for a remarkable differ-
ence betwixt the Vegetable, when it is by itfelf, as it is in the Plant,
and when it is joined with the Senfitive Life, as it is in the Animal :
For, in the Plant, the fap by which it is nourifhed only afcends and
defcends, but does not circulate as the blood does in Animals ; nor
has it one common Fountain or Rcfervoir, where it is thrown out,
and again taken in ; for that was not neceflary for the oeconomy of
the Plant : Whereas, for the fupport of the Body of the Animal, fo
much more artificially organized than the plant, and for enabling
the organs to perform their feveral functions, it was neceflary that
there fhould be a circulation of the Blood, a diftribution of it to
every part, and a fecretion from it of many different juices, of which
the Vegetable has no need.
Another remarkable difference is, that, as the Animal is an e-
manclpated fon of the earth, (as he is called by fome philofopher,
whofe name I have forgot), and goes from place to place, he has
members adapted to that progreflive Motion, by which he moves not
only on the Earth, but in the Water and the Air. And he has alfo
a certain impulfe of his Mind, called in Greek '»fjwi, and, in Eng-
lifh, Spoilt aneiety^ by which he is excited to that Motion ; whereas
the Vegetable, being fixed to a certain place, has neither..
The laft obfervation I fhall make upon this fubjed: is, that, as
there is no gap in Nature, the Vegetable Life comes fo near to the
Animal, that there are Animals which partake fo much of the Vege-
table,
Chap. III. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 211
table, as to be denominated by both names, and called Zoophytes,
fuch as Polypufes and Corals, and fevcral others that have been of
late difcovered and cuiioufly examined. In them the ufe of that
great principle, which I have laid down as a diftinguiihing charadte-
riftic of the Animal from the Vegetable, is well exemplified ; for,
as Animals are more or lefs locomotive, fo they have more orlefsthe
ufe of Senfes. Thofe Animals, who, like the Vegetable, are fixed to
one place, and only move themfelves in that place in order to take
in their nourifhment, have very few Senfes, perhaps only one, viz.
the Touch, without which they could not be an Animal at all.
Thus, I have endeavoured to explain the Differences betwixt the
Animal and the Vegetable : Some of the Similarities I have likewife
mentioned ; and I will fay more upon that fubjedl when I come to
treat of Nature, and to (how what a wonderful analogy the differ-
ent parts of Nature have to one another.
The only two Minds, that remain to be compared, are the Animal
and the Intelleftual. But, upon this fubje£t, I hope I have already
faid enough for the fatisfadtion of thofe who can be convinced by o-
ther evidence than that of their Senfes : For there is no experiment
that can fhow this difference, as in the cafe of the Animal and Ve-
getable Life ; it is only found reafoning and good philofophy which
can fatisfy a Man that he is not a Brute.
D d 2 CHAP.
212 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
CHAP. IV.
'The Importance of the Doflrine of Caufes. — Arlflotlc's Account of
QAd.\x{t%^ full and complete. — l^htoh -Addition of tnvo other Caufes, not
neceffary. — Abufe of the Term, CanCe.— -Thi/igs [aid to he Caufes
ivh'ich are only the remo'val of Impediments that hinder the real
Caufe to operate. — The Poiver of the Mind ivithout the Organs of
Senfe, enjident in Dreaming and Night-walking, or ivhen the Body
is affeHcd by certain Difeafes. — The Internal Organs, fuch as the
Brain, not properly Caufes, any 7nore than the External. — The
Intelledual Mind, not immediately conne^ed at all ivith the Body
or its Organs. — Hot and Cold, Moift and Dry, no Caufes of
Things. — I he confidering Juch Things as Caufes, leads to great Er-
rors.— The common Diftin^ion betivixt Firft and Second Caufes,
not fufficicntly attended to by our Modern Philofophers, particularly
the Newtonians.
I
N order to think and fpeak accurately upon Metaphyfical Sub-
ie£ls, we muft not only diftinguifh betwixt the different kinds of
Mind, but alfo betwixt the different kinds of Caufes, Mind is un-
doubtedly the Caufe of all things in Nature, and the only active
Being in the Univerfe, all things elfe being merely paffive ; and yet
we fpeak of many other things as Agents and Authors of various
produdlions : And 1 doubt not, but that an inaccurate language of
this kind has led into many errors in philofophy.
No philofopher has fo well diftinguifhed the different kinds of
Caufes as Ariftotle; and, as philofophy is the knowledge of Caufes,
he
Chap.IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 213
he may be faicl thereby to have laid the very foundations of philo-
fophy. There are, according to him, four kinds of Caufes, the Ma-
teria/, the Formal, the Efficient, and the Final. This Divifion I
have explained in the firft part of this work *; and I fhall only add
here, that, however Httle Final Caufes may be ftudied by philofo-
phers at prefent, yet, if we believe in God, and hold that every
thing in this univerfe is produced and governed by Intelligence, we
muft of neceffity, at the fame time, believe that the Final Caufe is
truly the Firft of all Caufes, and therefore moft worthy of the ftudy
of the Philofopher, being that for the fake of which every other
Caufe is employed : So that it may be called the Cau/e of Caufes ;
for it is for the fake of the end that the Efficient Caufe a£ls, that the
Form is given to the thing, and the Matter provided to receive that
Form. And, as the Final Caufe is the firft: and higheft of Caufes,
fo the Material is the loweft ; yet it is of abfolute neceflity, as it is
the fubjedl in which the Form muft exift, in the works both of
Nature and of Art t.
To
* Vol. I p. 33.
t Ariftotle, in the laft chapter of his 2cl Book of Phyfics, fpeaking of thejffn.:/
and Tnaf^r/a/ caufes, exprefles the diiTerence of them in this way. He fays, a thing
is done «i* "Ji, meaning the final Caufe, or the iv h%x.a. ; but, at the fame time,
he fays, that the thing cannot be done «i/k a.iiv t^vJi, meaning the Va«, or material
Caufe. And he adds, xa* nu-^a fi.ii t* (pus-iit* Aixtmi in ccHimi, ftaXXet it 'n Tift inx»'
itiTitt y«5 rtvTt T7i< »A)i;, .' tv^ iwro rev nXtUf, that IS, " Both Caufcs, (the Final
♦' and Material), ought to be treated of by the Natural Philofopher -, but chiefly
" the Final, becaufe this is the Caufe of the Material, not the Material of il."
Our modern philofophcrs have juft reverfed this method of treating Phyfics ; for
they fpeak a great deal of Material Caufes, but little or nothing of Final.
1 will fubjoin here Simplicius's account of the pre-eminence of the Final Caufe ;
To x{<«T(c-1«» «it;o» t» ri>.ix»f iu inxn x«i r» vtir.rixct ?r«i«, x»i t» {i^icir •{'^a, x«; r» »A(-
xo» cciTf 'vvt7T^0Tca •iKKOf T«i{ TT^Kyfittu — in libros Dt Anima, lib. 3. fol. 80. p. 2.
where the learned reader will obferve, that he fays the r» eiJif, or Species, ij/^ii
T« 5r{«yft«, that is, bounds or determines the thing, becaufe it is by the Species,
not by the Matter, that every fhing is what it is, and is 'Vpirrir-»d from every thing
elfe ; and accordingly it is by the Species that we know every thing.
214 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
To theio four Caufcs Plato has added two others, viz. the Iiiftru-
mental Caufe and the Exemplary, but without any neceffity or
good reafon : For the inftrument, by which any agent performs any
work, is not the Caufc of the work, properly fpeaking, but the means
by which it is performed ; and, accordingly, in common language,
we do not fay that the pencil is the caufe of the piiSture, or the gra-
ving-tool of the ftatue, but the Artift of both *. Or, if the Platonicians
will dignify it with the name of a Caufc, it is to be referred to the Ef-
ficient Caufe; but it is only a Secondary Caufe of that kind, and of a
nature very much inferior to the Primary, as much inferior as Body
is to AlinJ, or the Tool to the Art'i/l. And I fay the fame of all the
operations of Body upon Body ; as, when one Body impels another,
the impelling Body is only the Secondary Efficient Caufe of the Mo-
tion, but the Primary Caufe of it is Mind, moving either that im-
pelling Body, or fome other which impels it. And here again the
truth appears of what I have elfewhere obferved t, that Mind is ul-
timately the Efficient Caufe of every thing in the univerfe. As to
what is called the Exemplary Caufe, if it is to be confidered as a
Caufe, it muft be referred to xht formal ; and the expreffion denotes
no more, than that the Form, inftead of being derived from the
Mind of the Artift, which is commonly the cafe of the works of Art
and Intelligence, is taken from fome thing without the Mind of the
Artift t-
Having
• The learned in the Greek language will obfcrve, that the inftrument or means,
by which any thing is done, is exprefled by the prepofition im, conftrued with the
genetive ; for they fay a thing is done hit t$vIi n rovh : Whereas the Final Caufe is
expreffed by the fanne prepofition joined with the accufative, as appears from
the paffage of Ariflotle quoted in the preceding note.
t P. 20.
J I will enumerate all thefe fix caufes, as they are exprefied by the various
ufe of the Greek prcpofitions. Ttrjajj*; «u» n x^-^n x«tT» t»» A^nrTonM'' « -/aj t»
»J iv, oJ; i! i/Ai)' I! TO x»t' i, '«; T« JiS'»;' i) to i/p' iu, u( To ■xtituf i) To J(' i i; to TiAoj, Kxrtc
U>MT»tic KXt TO ?r5«5 0, is to irec^itiliytix' xxi to J(' iv, i; to i^ytttixct, OrK-^Ui h 4 tefKn
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. z .
Having faid fo much of Caufcs in general, I will proceed to take
notice of fome things which are commonly fpokca of as Caufes, but
which are truly not fuch. It is commonly faid that the Eye fees,
and the Ear hears; by which expreffion, one might be induced to
believe, and, I imagine, it is generally believed, that the Eye is
the Caufe of our Seeing, and the Ear of our Hearing, or that the
Eye is the Agent in the operation of Seeing, and the Ear in the ope-
ration of Hearing. But neither is true ; for it is moft certainly the
Mind that both Sees and Hears. Neither is the Eye or Ear even the
Inftrumental Caufe, or the Means by which the Mind Sees and
Hears. But true philofophy teaches us, that the Mind perceives all
things by its own Natural Powers, and that the Body, fo far from
affifting its perceptions, is an impediment to them, which is only in
part removed by thofe five Inlets of knowledge we have from the
Senfes; fo that a Man cannot be faid to See by means of his Eyes, any
more than a perfon can be faid to See an object by another going
out of the way, who is betwixt him and it. The obftrudlion, indeed,
is removed ; but there is a great difference betwixt the Caufe of any
thing, and the removal of an impediment, without which the Caufe
could not adt *.
This
xi'/iTcci, rnr»MT»x,*>i lutt T« airitv. — Simplicius, upon the Phyfics of Ariftotle, lib. I.
fol. 3. I have given this quotation for the fake of the young fludent of Greek,
■who, if he has made any confiderable advances in the language, will perceive,
that the ufe of the prepoGtions, either (ingle or in compofition, is one of the great-
eft niceties in it. The Theologian alfo may, from this paflage, learn how impro-
perly the words ««< >«'/♦! ii» »■;•? t«» ei.i', in the beginning of St John's gofpel, are
tranflated, " And the word was iu«7A CoJ;" whereas i: fliould be, " after thti-
•' mage of God,' as it is exprefled in other parts of (cripture.
• This I have explained at more length in the firft volume of this work, p. 16/.
where 1 have quoted the words of Plato in the Phaedoi where he has exprcfsly made
the diftinftion betwixt the Caufe, and that without which the Caufe cannot operate.
A^;^• ftn »( lirli T« xiTitt T« «iTi, aAXe it iKiiFt ctttu iv T« teiTitr tvx at jr«T iiji tiiTitf.
This paradox, as I know it will appear to the moft of my readers, that the Min.l
fees without eyes, the learned reader will not be difpleafed to fee explained by Ci-
•' cero.
zi6 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
This will appear the Icfs incredible, even to the Reader who is no
philofopher, if he confidcrs the common phacnomcnon of Dreaming^
which evidently fliows that the Mind has the Power of Perception,
independent of the Body and its Organs ; for, in our Dreams, we
fee and hear without our Eyes and Ears, and fometiraes in fo lively
and forcible a manner, that we are more affe£ted than by the fame
perceptions when awake. The cafe of the Night-walker is ftill a
more remarkable example of what the Mind can do by itlelf ; for
the Mind of the Night-walker, as it appears to be more feparated
from the Body than in common Sleep, does things which are gene-
rally not believed, becaufe few people are philofophers enough to
know the Power of Mind ading by itfelf *. The fame is the cafe
of
cero, with that copioufiicfs and elegance wliich illflinguifli his philofophical ftyle,
as well as that of PlatOj from every other of the fame kind. The paflage is in the
firfl Book of his Tufculan Queftions, cap. 20. where, after fpeaking of the enlarged
views anil wonderful profpeiSls that the Mind fhall enjoy after its feparation from the
Body, he adds, " Nos enim ne nunc quidem oculis ctrnimtis ea quae videmus, Ne-
" que enim eft ullus fenfus in corpore, fed ut non folum Phyfici decent, verum
" etiam Medici, qui ifta aperta et patefafta viderunt, viae quafi quaedam funt ad
•' oculos, ad aures, ad nares, a fede animi perforatae. Itaque faepe aut cogitatione,
•' aut aliqua vi morbi impediti, apertis atque integris et *culis et auribus, nee vi-
" dermis nee audimus : Ut facile intclligi pofTir, animinn et videre et audire, non
■" eas parteis quae quafi feneftrae funt animi: Quibus tamen fentire nihil queat
" mens, nifi id agat et adfit. Quid quod eadem Mente res difTimillimas comprc-
" hendimus, ut colorem, faporcm, odorem, fonum ? ^ae nunquam quinque nun-
" tiis animus cegne/ceret, nift ad eum omnia referrentur, et is omnium judex fotus ef-
*' fet. Atque ea prcfefto turn multo puriora et dilucidiora cernentur, cum, quo
" natura fert, liber animus pervenerit. Nam nunc quidem, quanquam foramina
" ilia, quae patent ad Animum a corpore, calidiflimo artificio natura fabricata eft,
*' tamen terrenis concretifque corporibus funt intercepta quodam modo. Cum
*' autcm nihil erit pratter animum, nulla res ohjeUa impediet, que minus percipiat
*' quale quidque fit.'" I have faid the fame thing in vol. i. p. 162. when I had not
this paffage of Cicero before me, in which it is fo much better exprefled.
• See what I have faid upon the fubje£t of the Night-walkers, vol. !•
p. i6t.
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 217
of perfons affected by certain difeafes, of which I have given one ex-
ample in the preceding Volume, which fell under my own obferva-
tion ; and I will here give another, which I had from very good
authority. It was communicated to me in a letter from the late Mr
Hans Stanley, a gentleman well known both to the learned and po-
litical world, who did me the honour to correfpond with me upon
-the fubjeft of my firft volume of metaphyfics. I will give it in the
■words of that gentleman. He introduces it, by faying, that it is an
extraordinary fadl in the hiftory of Mind, Avhich he believes ftands
fingle, and for which he does not pretend to account : Then he
goes on to narrate it. * About fix and tvv^enty years ago, when I
* was in France, I had an intimacy in the family of the late Ma-
* rechal de Montmorenci de Laval. His fon, the Comte de Laval,
* was married to Mademoifelle de Maupeaux, the daughter of a
* Lieutenant General of that name, and the niece of tlie late Chan-
' cellor. This gentleman was killed at the battle of Haftenbeck ;
' his widow furvived him fome years, but is fince dead.
* The following fadt comes from her own mouth. She has told
' it me repeatedly. She was a woman of perfe£l veracity, and very
' good fenfe. She appealed to her fervants and family for the truth :
' Nor did fhe, indeed, feem to be fenfible that the matter was fo ex-
* traordinary as it appeared to me. I wrote it down at the time j
* and I have the memorandum among fome of my papers.
* The Comtefle de Laval had been obferved, by fervants who fate
' up with her on account of fome indifpofition, to talk in her fleep
* a language that none of them underftood; nor were they fure, or,
* indeed, herfelf able to guefs, upon the found's being repeated to
* her, whether it was or was not gibberilh.
* Upon lier lying in of one of her children, fhe was attended by
' a nurfe, who was of the province of Brittany, and who imme-
VoL. II. E e ♦ diately
2i8 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
* diately knew the meaning of what (lie faid, it being in the idiom
' of the natives of that country ; but fhe herfelf, when awake, did
' not underftand a nngle fyllable of what fhe had uttered in her
' fleep, upon its being retold her.
* She was born in that province, and had been nurfed in a family
where nothing but that language was fpoken ; fo that, in her firft
mfancy, fhe had known it, and no other ; but, when flie returned
to her parents, flie had no opportunity of keeping up the ufe of
it ; and, as I have before faid, flie did not underftand a word of
Breton when awake, though fhe fpoke it in her fleep.
' I need not fay that the ComtefTe de Laval never faid or ima-
' gined, that fhe ufed any words of the Breton idiom, more than
' were necefTary to exprefs thofe ideas that are within the compafs
' of a child's knowledge of objedls,' &Ci
I have not the leaft doubt of the fadt, being attefted by a man of
fo refpedable a charadler, I think with Mr Stanley, that it is a very
extraordinary fa (St in the hiftory of Mind, though I am not furprifed
that the Comteffe, who, I fuppofe, was no philofopher, did not think
it fo. I will endeavour to explain it upon the principles of the phi-
lofophy of Plato and Ariftotle, leaving it to thofe, who believe
that we arc nothing but Matter and Mechanifm, to account for it up-
on the principles of their philofophy.
In xht frji place, the reader will be furprifed, when I tell him, as
I believe Mr Stanley was when he read my letter in anfwer to his,
that I do not think the Gomtefle was dreaming,, though fhe was cer-
tainly fleeping ; but fhe was in the ftate of a night-walker or fom~
nambtile, as the French exprefs it: And I have two reafons for think-
ing fo. The firft is, that fhe remembered nothing of what fhe had
uttered
Cfiap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 219
uttered in her fleep. Now, as I have obferved in my Firft Vo-
lume *, the difference betwixt dreaming and night-walking is,
that we remember our dreams, but never what we do when we
are in the other flate f- 'idly, Our dreams are compofed of what is
at the time in our memory and our phantafia, not of things which
never were there, or, though they may have been there, are, at the
time we dream, utterly forgot and obliterated. Thus, in our dreams,
we fpeak or hear a language which we underftand, though it may
not be our native language; but we neither fpeak nor hear a language
that we never underftood, or, having once underftood, have utterly
forgot. In the fame manner, we fee in our fleep perfons that we
know, or have known, and ftill retain the memory of, but never
perfons that we know not, or have never known. At the fame
time, I do not deny that, in our dreams, as well as in night-walk-
ing, the Mind may perceive objects that it never perceived before
or, perhaps, never could perceive by any of the five Senfes. That
it will have fuch perceptions in a ftate of perfeft feparation from
the body, I have not the leaft doubt. Nor do I deny that, even in
this life, it may perceive ivhat eye hath not feen, nor ear heard
neither hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive. But this
I hold to be fupernatural : And of this kind I believe Lucullus's
dream to have been, which I have mentioned in ihe Firft Volume t,
and likewife the dream concerning Pompey §. And if the Coratefle
had fpoken a language that fhe had never before underftood, I fhould
have thought the cafe altogether beyond Nature, and not to be ac-
counted for upon any principles of philofophy that I know.
E e 2 Holding,
• Page 161.
t Arillotle has obferved this in his treatife De Somno et Vigilia ; and he fays that,
in his Problems, he has given a reafon for this difference betwixt dreaming and
night viralking ; but I have not been able to find the paffagc.
t Page 155.
§ Page 156.
220 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
Holding, therefore, that there was nothing fupernatural or mira-
culous in the cafe, it is, I think, a neceflary confequcnce, that thefe
articulate founds, with the fignification annexed to them, muft have
been in the Mind of the Comtefle before fhe fell aflcep, or became
difeafed ; for, if they had never been in her Mind, it would have
been, as I have faid, miraculous ; and it would have been fo like-
wife, if they had been once in the Mind, but had been altogether out
of it at the time fhe became difeafed, or fell afleep ; for their coming
back again to the Mind, in that cafe, muft have been by the opera-
tion of fome fupernatural power, as much as if they had been pre-
fentcd to the Mind for the tirft time.
The fadt, therefore, as I underfland it, was, that this Breton Lau"
gunge was in the Mind of the ComtefFe at the time fhe became difea-
fed and fell afleep, though the perception of it was not, at that time,
prefent to her Mind. Nor is this fmgular ; for we very often dream
of things, the perception of which was not prefent to our Minds
when we fell afleep ; but then thefe things we could have recollect-
ed, and fo prefented to the Mind before we fell afleep, if any occa-
fion of fuch recolledlion had been given us ; and the Angularity of
the cafe of the Comtefl~e was, that fhe had totally forgot the Breton
language, and could not have recolleded a word of it before fhe fell
afleep. This Angularity makes the cafe a phaenomenon of Mind,
which cannot be explained without knowing, better than is to be
learned in any modern book of philofophy, the nature both of Mind
and Body.
And, in xkitjirjl place, as Mind is an immaterial fubftance, of a
nature perfedlly different from Body, we cannot conceive that the
perceptions of our Minds make an impreffion upon it, fuch as a feal
does upon wax, and every Body, more or lefs, upon another ;
though, as almoft our whole language concerning Mind confifls of
metaphors
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS, 221
metaphors taken from Body, we frequently fpeak of impreflions up-
on Mind ; and even Ariftotle, whofe philofophical language is lefs
metaphorical than any I know, often fpeaks in that way. Whatever
perceptions, therefore, were once in our Mind, we cannot conceive
to be worn out of it, or effaced, as we are fure all impreflions
upon Body will he fooner or later : And it is for this reafon that
we cannot conceive that any perception of the Mind, whether Idea
or Senfation, which was once in it, can ever go out of it, though it
may not be actually prefent to it for a reafon that ihall be immedi-
ately given.
On the other hand. Body is, by its nature, fleeting and tranfitory,
in fo much that it is not precifely the fame Body for two moments
together, but is in a confliant flux and viciflltude of change and
fuccefl^ion.
This being the nature of Mind and Body, the next thing
to be confidered is, what the confequence muft be of their being
fo clofely joined, as they are, in our wonderful compofition. And,
in the jirji place, as the union is fo intimate, it feems- to be ne-
cefl*ary that the Mind fhould fo far partake of the nature of its com-
panion, as not to have its perceptions fixed and permanent, but
tranfitory as the particles are, which compofe the body to which it
is joined. And, accordingly, its perceptions of Senfe it has only by
fucceflTion, one after another ; nor does any perception of that kind
laft longer than the imprefllon, made by the external objed upon the
organs of fenfe, continues : And, in like manner, our Ideas, which
are excited by thofe perceptions, are fleeting and tranfitory.
But, if thefe perceptions, thus excited, were to be carried away
by the flux of the body, as by a ftream, fo that we could not recall
them again and prefent them anew to the Mind, it is evident that
222 ANTIENT rsIETAPHYSICS. Book IV.
we fliould have no knowledge at all in this ftate of our exiftence,
but all the impreffions upon our Minds would be immediately
effaced, like traces in water. But we have a faculty, by which our
perceptions, after they are part, are revived and prefented anew
to the Mind. This faculty is called Memory *y without which we
could acquire no knowledge in this life ; and the exercife of it is
what we call Reminifcence or Recollefiion^ which cannot be, unlefs
we have the confcioufnefs that we formerly knew the thing. The
lofing of that confcioufnefs is what is called Oblivion : And then there
can be no Reminifcence or Recolleftion ; but we muft learn it again,
that is, know the thing anew, or be forever ignorant of it.
And here we may obferve a wonderful analogy between Plato's
fyftem of Reminifcence of what we knew in a former life, and our
Recolledion of things in this life. For this Recolle£tion is never
without either the thing itfelf being prefented again to the Mind, or
fomething that has a connedion with it. In like manner, fays Plato,
we have no Reminifcence of any thing in a former life, without that
thing being again perceived by the Mind, or fomething that has rela-
tion to it ; yet the notions of both are in the Mind, but latent, and
not perceived, till they be excited in the manner I have mentioned.
And I lay fo much weight upon arguments from analogy, in que-
ftions concerning Nature, that, if there were no other reafon to
convince me of the truth of Plato's philofophy upon this point, it
would be to me fufEcient. But I hope I have given other reafons
for this opinion, that will convince the reader, as they have convin-
ced myfelf f*
I
* I have, in the Firft Volume, page 96. made a diftin£tion betwixt Memory
and Phantafia, the one teing, according to my apprehenfion, the receptacle of
Ideas, the other of perceptions of Senfe ; but it is unneceffary to embarrafs this ar-
gument with that diftinftion.
t See Chap. 2. of this book.
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 223
I will add another obfervation upon this fuhjed : That the flate of
the Night-walkers bears a moft perfed refemblance to the ftate of
pre-exiftence in which Plato fuppofes our fouls to be before thev
appear upon this flage : For the Night-walker has ideas and percep-
tions of the objeds of Senfe, though without the affiftance of the
Senfes *, fuch as we muft fuppofe our Mind to have, in its
pre-exiftent ftate j and it ads likewife upon Body, as there is all
the reafon in the world to believe it does in that ftate. But
when the perfon awakes, he enters, as it were, on a new fcene
of exiftence, with a total oblivion of what pafled while he was a-
fleep.
But, when we are awake, and found in Body, the ftate of our
Mind in this life, while we are confined in this dark prifon of flefh
and blood, muft be very different from its perfedt ftate, when it is
feparated from the Body, and is pure and unmixed "f, as Ariftotle
exprefles it ; then it has no Memory, as the fame author tells us,
becaufe all its perceptions are prefent to it, and confequently it has
no Reminifcence, Recolledtion, or Oblivion.
But how can our foul be fo much feparated from our Body while
it remains in it ? How could the Comteffe recoiled in her fleep the
words of a language of which (he did not remember a word when
{he was awake ? My anfwer is. That fhe could not have done it in
her ordinary ftate of Body and Mind, even when ftie was afleep ;
though, at that time, the Soul is uiore difengaged from the Body
than when we are awake, becaufe the Animal Life and the Senfes
are then at reft : But the Comteife was then not only afleep, but
flie was difeafed ; and in certain difeafes the Soul is more difengaged.
from.
• Sec what I have faid upon the fubjeft of the Night-walker, Vol. i. p. i6l.
t See Vol. I. p. 141. and this Vol. p. 165.
224 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
from the Body than at any other time. In fainting fits, for exam-
ple, nrcn very often fee extraordinary fights, fuch as may be called
Viftons^ fo far they exceed any thing that is to be feen when they
are in a good ftate of health *.
The tye, therefore, betwixt the Comtefle's Soul and Body being
much loofened, both by her being afleep and difeafed, ftie exerted
fome part of that power which her Mind would have had, if it had
been altogether feparated from her Body. If fhe had been a woman
of Science, or a Philofopher, fhe might have had perceptions of
theorems, which fhe had either never known in this life, or, if fhe
had known them, had altogether forgot them ; and of this kind
I had likewife fome experience myfelf, in the fever mentioned in
the preceding note : But, as I prefume fhe was not a Lady of that
kind, all that was prefent to her Mind at that time was the language
and ideas of her childhood.
Thus, I think I have Ihown, that this extraordinary fadt is not
only to be explained by my philofophy, but ferves very much to
confirm the truth of it, and, indeed, is the befl illuftration I could
have given of it. Our fouls, in their pre-exiftent flate, muft have
had
• This Ariftotle has obferved in his third chapter, De Somno et Vigilia ; and in a
pamphlet that was publifhed in London in 1778, entitled, « Conjedures upon
the Materiality of the Soul,' the author relates that he was prefent when a
friend was blooded, who fainted as foon as the blood began to fpring ; and, when
he recovered from bis faint, faid that he had feen the mod charming fcenes that it
is poflible to imagine ; and the furgeon who let him blood faid that it happened fre-
quently. I myfelf had fome experience of this kind; for, when I was thought to
be dying of a £ever, about three years ago, I had a dream, or, as I would rather
call ft, a vifion, in which I was happier than ever I was in my life : And it was a
happinefs of a kind altogether fpiritual and intelleftual, fuch as I could not exprefs
by words •, but next morning I told my phyficians that I had been in elyfium laft
flight, and, upon feeling my pulfe, they declared me to be out of the fever.
Chap. IV. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 225
had Ideas, as wc cannot conceive a Soul without Ideas ; but, when
we come into generation, and are united to the Body, thefe Ideas are
obliterated, and, as it were, effaced. They continue, however.
Hill in the Mind, though in a latent ftatc, obfcured and overlaid, if
I may Co fpeak, by our vegetable and animal part, but are excited
and revived by the operation of external objects upon our organs
of Senfe ; for fuch is the connedtion which God and Nature have
ordained betwixt our intclledual and fenfitive part. Being fo revi-
ved, they continue in the Mind for fome time, but not all prefent
together, as we muft fuppofe they were when the Mind was pure
and difengaged from Matter, but only called up, and prefented to
the Mind, upon occafions. This faculty of Recolledion and Re-
mlnifcence is loft by degrees, and then the Idea or Perception,
of whatever kind, is loft for the prefent, as much as if it had
never been in the Mind. In this cafe was the Comtefle with refpedt
to the Breton language ; and in the fame cafe is every one with re-
fpedt to what he has once learned, but has abfolutely forgot. In
that ftate, thefe perceptions are as much latent as when we came
fir ft into this world j nor can they be again revived (fuch is the or-
der of Nature,) while our Mind continues perfedtly united, as it is
in our ordinary ftate, with the Body ; but, when that union is en-
tirely diffolved, then will all thefe perceptions be again revived,
and the Mind will enjoy itfelf, and continue in the pofleflion of all
its Ideas, without interruption or difturbance from Body ; and I think
it is a comfortable thought to every philofopher, and lover of know-
ledge, that, whatever we acquire of that kind, during this life, fhall
not be loft to us in the next. Now, betwixt the utter diflblution of
Mind and Body and our ordinary ftate, there is a kind of middle
ftate, in which we are while we are afleep, or affeded by certain
difeafes j and then the Mind, being difincumbered in fome de-
gree of the body, exerts her native power, and refumes fome part
of that knowledge which fhe had loft by oblivion. In a fituation
Vol. II. F f not
226 AN TIE NT METAPHYSICS. BooklV.
not unlike that of tlic ComtefTe, is a very old man ; for the diflblu-
tion of his Mind and Body being then near at hand, he lecollciits
what he tuid known in his youth, but had abfolutely forgotten for
many years. And there is a gentleman flill living, concerning whom
I have had occafion to be well informed, who, in his youth, loll his
judgment by a blow on his head, and has ever fince been in a ftate
of idiotry, not remembering or giving any attention to what happens
every day ; but he remembers very pcrfcdlly every thing that paifed
before that accident, fmce which, his Mind may be confidered as in a
ftate of feparation from the Body, and as in another life, remem-
bering every thing that pafled before that feparation.
Thefe are my notions of the Mind's power of perception, either
when it is entirely feparated from the Body, or in part by fleep or
difeafe. But, when we are awake, and found in Body, I admit
that we cannot perceive Objedls of Senfe without the ufe of the
Organs of Senfe, which, therefore, are then of the nature of thofe
things mentioned by Plato, that are not Caufes, but without which
the Caufe cannot operate.
Of this kind, I hold not only the External Organs to be, but alfo
f, the Internal Organs, fuch as the Brain or Heart, which are not Cau-
fes of the operations of Mind, but only things without which the
Mind could not operate.
What I have faid here, the Reader will obferve, applies only to
the Animal Mind, which alone perceives the objects of Senfe ; for,,
as to the Intelledual Mind, whofe Objeds are o£ a quite different
kind, I hold that it has no immediate connexion with any Organs,
External or Internal, but only mediately, by its connection with the
Animal Life, which is fo neceflary to it in this ftate of its exiftence,
that it cannot ad without it.
The
Chap. IV., ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 227
The phyfiologlfts, who are not philofophers, fpeak of a certain
temperature of Hot and Cold, Moid and Dry, as being the Caufe
hoth of the Animal and Vegetable Life. But it is truly not a Caufe,
but only that without which the Caufe cannot a(5t.
I have been the more full upon this fubjed, becaufe I am perfua-
ded, that the confidering thofe things as the Caufes of the Operations
of Mind, not the concomitants only, has been the original fource
of Materialifm ; for it has led men to believe that Mind is nothing
elfe but Body modified and organized in a certain way : And, ac-
cordingly, Epicurus has endeavoured to prove the mortality of the
Mind, by fhowing, that it cannot adt without the Body ; from which
he concludes, that it is infeparable from the Body, and muft fubfift
or perifli with it *. And in this way all the Materialifts, from him
down to Mr David Hume, have always argued.
I will conclude this chapter with putting the Reader in mind of a
diftindtion of Caufes, which, though commonly made, feems to be
forgotten by fome of our modern philofophers ; — the diftinftion
I mean is betwixt Firft and Second Caufes. This diftindion fup-
pofes, what I hold to be certainly true, that nothing can exifl:
without a prefent Caufe : So that, though there may be a remoter
Caufe, there muft always be fome immediate Caufe operating in
the produdion of the Effeft, the fyftem of Nature being nothing
elfe but a feries of Caufes and Effedls, at the head of which is the
great Author of Nature, who is the Caufe of all things, but only the firft
Caufe, not the neareft, or immediate. Thus, he is the Caufe of the Life
and Movement of all Animals, but only the remoter, not the imme-
diate : And in this fenfe St Paul is to be underftood, when he fays,
" that in Him we live, move, and have our being f." In like manner I
maintain
• See Lucretius. " '•' ''"" ' '
t I could have wiflied, for the honour of our Englifli tranflators, that they had
not
228 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
maintain againft Dr Baxter, that God moves unorganized Bodies, not
immediately, but by the intervention of that Mind which I call the
Elemental Mind. With refpedt to things in Generation and Cor-
ruption, which are the Caufes of other things of like nature, the
remoter Caufe may no longer have an exiftence, and yet the thing
produced continue to exift by virtue of fome immediate Caufe con-
tinually operating. Thus, an Animal or Plant, produced in the or-
dinary way of generation, receives its exiftence and firft movements
from the parent Animal or Plant ; but it continues to exift and to
be moved by virtue of the Animal or Vegetable Life, that is in it,
after the parent, which firft began its motion, has ceafed to exift.
If the Newtonians had attended to this diftindion, they would
not have maintained, that a Body, put in motion by impulfe of an-
other Body, continues in motion by virtue of that impulfe, after it
has ceafed, but would have feen clearly that the impulfe was only
the remoter caufe of the Motion, and that the Motion muft be con-
tinued by an immediate Caufe, which can be no other than Mind.
And I think they were the more inexcufeable, for giving fo great a
handle to the Atheift, by the "uis in/tla, which they devifed for car-
rying on the Motion, when they knew that there were other Mo-
tions, which were carried on in the fame direction, which could not
be accounted for from any impulfe, fuch as the Motions of magne-
tifm, which, if we fuppofe to be produced by a "uis injitay there
is an end of Theifm, — But of this more hereafter.
CHAP.
not followed the vulgar idiom in rendering this palTage, but had tranflated siF*v^il
■we are moved, inftead of we move- JHs of the /^poflUs, chap. 17. v. a8.
Chap.V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. iig.
CHAP. V,
The Seat of Dreams is the Phantafia — The Phantafia belongs to the
Animal Nature, for the Prefervation of -which it is abfolutely tie-
cejfary. — Dijiinclion of the Human Imaginations zw/o /^o^ ofivhich
•we perceive the Delufion^ and thofe -which -we believe to be Reali-
ties.— This Dijlin^ioji applied to our waking Imaginations. — Di"
flitiBion of our Imaginations into Voluntary and Involuntary. — Of
this latter Kind, the Phantafms that appeared to Bonnet's old Man.
— Another Inflance of the fame Kind — O/^waking Phantafms, -which
'we mi/lake for Realities. — This the Cafe of the Madman. — Dif-
ference bet-wixt Madnefs and Folly. — Difference bet-wixt a lively
Imagination aw^ Madnefs. — Of our fleeping Phantafms, or Dreams.
-—Difference bet'wixt Dreaming and Night-walking. — Of the Au-
thors -who have -written upon the SubjeB of Dreams. — viz. Ari—
ftotle, Synefius, and Baxter. — FaEls ioncerning Dreaming. — The
Dreamer is afleep. — Difinclions bet-wixt fleeping awJ waking made
by Ariftotle. — Di/linfiioti bet-wixt Dreams and other Appearances
in our Sleep — Defnition of Dreams. — Certain Pofitions laid do-wn
concerning Dreaming. — Inquiry into the Philofophy of Dreaming,
that is, the Caiifes of it. — iff. The Opinions fated of the three
Philqfophers abo-ue meiitioned -who have -written upon this Subje^,
beginning -with Ariftotle. — His Theory of Dreams. — They are, ac-
cording to him, the Reliifls of our Senfations during the Day. —
Dreams not prophetic, according to him, though there may be a for-
tuitous Concourfe of the Event -with the Dream. — ObjeSlions to A-
riftotle's Syffem of Dreaming. — It can only account for our Dreams
of things recent. — // does not define the Phantafia nor a Phantafm
properly. — General Obfervations upon his Philofophy. — O/'Syne-
fiu&'s
230 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
fius's Syf.em of Breaming. — Account of the Author. — A great be-
Uei'er in Divination hy Dreams — kept a Journal of bts Dreams. —
The Seat of Dreams., according to him, is the Phantafia. — It con-
tains the Forms of all Material Things, and is the Organ by "which
the Mind perceives them. — In the Fhantafiaj/y'j- Synefius, are the
Forms of all things paft, piefent, and future. — Thefe /^f Mate-
rials of our Dreams. — Our Dreams are of tivo kinds — plain and di-
ireft — or myfterious atid fymbolical. — Ihe latter kind the more com-
mon.— Thefe accounted for. — Of the Art of interpreting them. — No
tommon Art for interpreting all Di'eams, but an Art peculiar to each
Mail, nvhich he hiufl learn by Experience. — Objedions to Synefi-
us's. Syfl^m. — Apology for Synefius. — Baxter's Opinion concerning
Dreams. — The Author's Syflem upon the SubjeSI. — An Account of
the Phantafia — ivhich is divided i7ito retentive and a^t'ive^di/lin-
guijljed from Body — from the Vegetable— yro/« the Intel le6lual
Life — belonging therefore to the Animal Nature. — That Nature not
to be divided into three Parts, but one Nature operating differently.
— Nece/fity of thefe different Operations. — Progrefs of the Animal
Nature in Man. — The Phantafia exceedingly imperfe6l at firfl. — De-
finition of the Phantafia. — The fame nxnth the Common Senfe of h.-
riftotle. — It has a Poiuer of perceiving Likenefles and Differences
in Objedls of Senfe. — This comparative Faculty is ivhat is called
the Reafon of Brutes. — Of the Human Phantafia. — And, ift, Of
our Phantafia, ivhen ivaking 7 he Images in it exceed the Reality
of Nature. — Much influenced by the Habit of the Body. — By the
Love of Beauty it is di/linguifljed from the Phantafia of the Ani-
mal.— The Perception of Beauty, in the Intelleft. — The Phantafia
fubfervient to Intelleft, as the higher Power. — Difference betwixt
Genius and Tafte. — The Influence of the Ridiculous «/>« /^ Ima-
gination.— Of other Difpofttions of Mind — The Influence of the
Studies and the Purfuits of Life upon the Imagination.— Oar wa-
king Phantafia Jinder the controul of our governing Vowtx—but that
Poiver
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 231
Poiver not abfolute or unlimited. — 6'/rt2im^ ij/'Poets— o/'Philofophers. — Of the Dreams
of the wicked. — Thefe a great addition to their Mtfery. — The
Dreams of the generality of Men, betivixt thefe txvo, neither happy
nor miferable. — No Order or Regularity in the Phantafms of a vul-
gar Marty fleeping or waking. — Otherivife in the Brute and the
perfe(9: Man. — Baxter's Account of the Origin o/" Dreams refuted. —
0/^ Prophetic Dreams. — ObjeSlions to Synefius's Syflem concerning
them. — All Prophetic Dreams plain and direSl^ and proceeding
from Minds yap^n'or to ours. — Such Minds may cojnmunicate ivith
ourst though embodied. — The Revelation by Dreams in one of tnvo
Ways. — FaSls concerning Dreams — Particular Account of the
l!)reams o/*Ariftides^«n«^ 13 Tears; — Cured of a Difeafejhat lafl^
edfo longy by Advice that he got in DTeams.— Delivered fro?n other
Dangers in that Way. — Nothing incredible in the Narrative of A-
riftides.— iZ^^wjybr believing it to be true.—Obje^ions anfivered,
to theTeflimony o/'Ariftides. — The authority o/"Synefius in favour of
Dreams. — His ivhole Life condu6led by them. — Of the Final Caufes
o/'Dreams. — The Philojophy ^Human Nature v^ry imperfe6l ivith-
out the knoivledge of that Caufe. — That Cau/e the Happinefs of Scn-
fitive Intelligent Beings during their -whole Lives. — The virtuous
happy in that Way^ as the vicious are miferable. — Another End of
Dreaming, to convince us that ive are to exifl in a Future State.
The Final Caufe of Supernatural and Prophetic Dreams is the Direc-
tion of Human Life, "which othervuife cannot be properly dire£ied,
TH E phaenomena of Dreaming and Night- walking, of which I
have fpoken in the preceding Chapter, being fo curious, and as
the beft way we can judge of the operations of our Mind in a fepa-
ratc
232 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
rate ftate, and after death, is, by its operations in that death of each
day's life, as Shakcfpeare defcribes Sleep, the reader, I am perfua-
ded, will not be difpleafed that I return again to the fubjcdl, and
beftow a whole Chapter upon it. I do it the rather, that I think it
will make ftill more evident the diftin£lion I have endeavoured
to eftablifla betwixt our Animal and Intelledual Nature.
That Dreams of all kinds, whatever way they come to us, whe-
ther through the gate of Horn or Ivory, or whether, to fpeak
plainly, they are mere idle fancies or of fome Truth and Reality,
have their feat in that part of the Mind which is called the Phanta--
Jxa or Imagination, is acknowledged by every body. I will therefore
begin this inquiry with examining the nature of this wonderful fa-
culty of the Mind, and which, as I have faid elfewhere *, prefents
to us fuch ftrange fcenes, both fleeping and waking, that it may not
improperly be called the magic lanthorn of the Mind..
It is by this faculty that the want of the ufe of our Senfes is fup-
•plied ; for, by the means of it, we perceive objeds of Senfe, both
.when we have no ufe of our Senfes, as in Sleep, and when the ob-
jeds are out of the reach of them, which is the cafe of our Imagi-
nations when we are awake. But, though it operate without the
Senfes, it has fuch a connedion with them, and dependence upon
them> that it never prefents to us any objeds but thofe which we
have, either at fome time or another, adually perceived by our Sen-
fes, or which are of the fame nature with our perceptions of Senfe, but
magnified or dirainifhed, or put together in forms and fhapes differ-
ent from any thing that is to be feen in Nature. This manner of o-
perating of the Phantafia is not only to be obferved in our Dreams,
b'.it alfo when we are awake : For what we call caftle-building is of
that kind ; and a I'oet is nothing elfe but a fkilful caftle-builder.
It is therefore true, what I have elfewhere obferved, that the
Phantafia, however various and wonderful its operations may be,
prefents to us no new objed of Senfe, or, to fpeak more accurately,
no objed of a new Senfe. So that what the Schoolmen fay of the
Intelled
• Vol. I- page 90.
Chap. V. A N T I E N T M E T A P H Y S I C S. " 2jj
Intelle£t is undoubtedly tnje of ine Pnaatafia ; anu i would have the
propofition altered in this manner, Nihil ejl in Phantafia^ quod non
,'uit in Senfu. It is evident, therefore, that this faculty bckMigs to
the animal part of our Nature, and is, as I have fhown in the Firfl:
Volume *, an eflential part of it ; fmce, without it, the Animal
could not fubfift, nor perform the fundions for v/liich Nature has
deftined it.
There is, with refpedt to the Operations of the Phantafia in Man,
a diftindion to be made, which ought to be carefully attended to ;
and it is this. Sometimes we perceive the illufion of thofe fairy
fcenes in our Imagination, and fometimes we do not. The former
is generally the cafe when we are awake ; the latter when we are a-
fleep. I will begin with applying this diftindlion to our waking i-
maginations.
That there is a principle within us, fuperior both to Senfe and
Imagination, is what cannot be denied by any man who deferves
the name of a philofopher. This principle, which I call Intelkfl^
is the governing principle of our Nature. It therefore corrects the
appearances, both of Senfe and Imagination. And, particularly,
with refpeck to the Imagination, it informs us, when we are awake,
that the Scenes, it prefents to us, are no better than the fcenes
of a play, with which we may be amufed and entertained, but
ought not to believe them to be realities.
Of thefe reprefentations of the Phantafia when we are awake,
we ought to diftinguifh two kinds. The firft is of thofe which de-
pend upon our Will, and of which we may be faid to be the poets
or painters ourfelves. Of this kind are all the works of Fancy
Vol. XL Gg and
* Vol. I . page 90.
^34 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. BooklV.
and Genius, which give fo much delight, both to the performers,
and to the fpedtators or hearers. But of this kind there are fome
which are not altogether voluntary, but obtruded upon us by cer-
tain affcdions or paflions, under the dominion of which we are at
the time. It is in this way, that objeds that we have feen, and have
interefted us very much, come acrofs our fancy, and prefent them-
felves to us when we often would chufe not to fee them. But ftill
we know them to be no more than Phantafms or Imaginations, and,
by employing our thoughts another way, we may, if they be
troublefome, get free of them.
But there are fcenes of another kind, which our Imagination pre-
fents to us when we are awake. Thefe are not only involuntary,
but entirely unconnected with any afFedlion or paffion ; and there-
fore they are nowife interefting or affedling. The fcenes I mean
are fuch as appeared to the old man of whom Bonnet fpeaks in the
paflage quoted in the Firft Volume "*. And fuch are the appearances,
mentioned by Ariftotle t, of figures upon the wall to men in fevers.
Thefe, fays Ariftotle, the fick man knows to be illufions, if the fe-
ver be not very high ; but, if it be very high, he miftakes them for
realities. Thefe vifions, which Bonnet's old man faw, were, I
am
* Page 158 — I am well informed of another inflance of the fame kind. My in-
formation is from the late Sir James Stewart, who had a relation of his, an old gen-
tleman, whom I knew and efteemcd, that lived forr.e years in his houfe, and died
in it. Sir James, in a letter that I received i'rom him, on the publication of my
Firft Volume, told me that his old friend, who retained iiis fenfes to the laft, was
in ufe, when he was perfectly awake, and in broad day, to fee figures upon the
wall, not coaches and equipages, fuch as Bonnet's old man faw, but libraries and
colIe£tions of books, and fometimes %vomen fitting and fpinning. This he never
told to any body, for fear he fhould be thought delirious, till one day, that Sir
James happened to read to him the (lory from Bonner, which I have related, and
then he informed Sir Jimes of the vlfions that he had, and not once or twice, but
yery frequently.
t Ariftotle de Infomniis, cap. 2.
Chap.V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 235
am perfuaded, the efFefts of difeafe, not in the organs of fight, any-
more than the like apparitions to a man in a fever, but of the
Mind ; and, if the difeafe had gone much farther, I have no doubt
but he would have miftaken them for realities. And thus much of
our waking Phantafms, which we know to be fuch.
"What we are next to confider, is thofe Phantafms which appear
to us when awake, and which we miftakc for realities. This
I take to be the cafe of Madnefs, and of that leffer degree of Mad-
nefs in women or weak men, which we call Fapottrs, if they come
to a certain height. The Phantafia of the madman prefents to him
Vifions, which he believes to be realities, and a(5ls accordingly ; for
it is a fadt not more flrange than it is true, that, though the go-
verning principle of the madman cannot correct or redrefs thofe falfe
appearances in his imagination, yet it enables him to reafon and aCt
Gonfequentially, upon the fuppoiition of the appearances being real
exiftences. And he argues and afts commonly much more confidently
than thofe who do not miftake appearances for realities, buthave weak
underftandings, or Arong paffions, or both : Such men we call fools.
And here lies the difference, in my apprchenfion, betwixt the two :
The fool knows that the appearances in his Phantafia are not realities,
but reafons ill, and makes falfe conclufions from them ; the mad-
man miflakes them for realities, but reafons well upon that fuppofi—
tion.
As almoft all things in Nature run into one another, like fhades
of different colours, which makes it difficult to fay where the one
begins, or the other ends ; fo it is with refpedt to madnefs, and a
very lively fancy under the influence of ftrong paflions. A man of
that kind, though he have ftlll the faculty of reafon, yet his imagi-
nation may be fo heated, and the colouring of the pidtures there be
fo ftrong and lively, that he may fometimes, like a man at a play,
G g 2 when
236 A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
when he is much moved hy the reprefentation, forget himfelf, and
imagine thefe pictures to be realities, or, at leaft, not reflect upon
the illufion. While he is in that condition, he is truly in a ftate of
madnefs ; and the only difference betwixt him and thofe we com-
monly call 7nad^ is, that his phrenzy does not lall: fo long, and he may
be waked out of it, by the ufe of his reafon, like a man out of a
dream ; for, even in dreaming, as Ariftotle has obferved *, the im-
preflion may be fo ftrong upon us, that, after we are awake, we be-
lieve, for a confiderable time, that what we faw in our dream.s is a
reality : And if they are the dreams of a fick man, that impreflion
will continue as long as his ficknefs continues, as I myfelf experien-
ced in the fever above mentioned that I had not long ago.
Having faid fo much of the Phantafia in general, and of our wa-
king Phantafms, I come now to fpeak of what is the principal fub-
jed of this Chapter, our Phantafms in our fleep, and particularly
in our dreams. Night-walking is, as I have faid, very different from
dreaming ; and, indeed, the night-walker, though he adts upon
Bodies, as I am perfuaded feparate Spirits do, appears to me to be
in the World of Spirits, rather than in this world, and much more
feparated from the Body than the Dreamer is. For the Dreamer has
Confcioufnefs and Recolledtion of whatpafled inhis fleep ; and in that
way his fleeping life is conneded with his waking : Whereas the
Night-walker, when he is awake, exifts, as it were, anew, and is as
ignorant of what pafled in his fleeping life, as the Spirits mentioned
by Virgil were of their former life, after having drunk of the waters
of Lethe. And, befides, the body of the dreamer gets that refl: which
the animal requires, and which is the purpofe that Nature intends
by Sleep; whereas the Body of the Night-walker is as much em-
ployed as when he is awake ; fo that Night-walking is altogether
an
♦ De Infomniis.
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 237
an unnatural ftate *. But of Night-walking I have faid enough in
the preceding Chapter, and fhall now proceed to treat of Dreams.
Upon this fubjed, there is no modern author that has" written, as
far as I know, except Mr Baxter, in his treatife upon the Immate-
riality of the Soul. But there are two treatifes of Ariftotle upon the
fubjedt ; one of which he entitles, * Concerning Dreams,' and another
* Concerning Divination by Dreams.' And there is an excellent dif-
courfe upon Dreams by a moft learned Chriftian philofopher of the
fourth century, Synefius by name, who, in treating of this fo com-
mon phaenomenon, has taken occafion, as he informs us in his in-
trodudion, to enter into the moft abftrufe myftcries of philofophy.
And indeed it appears to me, that, nnce the days of Plato and Arif-
totle, there has not been a philofopher of greater depth than Syne-
fius.
From the writings of thefe authors, and from what has occurred
to myfelf, I have endeavoured to form a kind of fyftem upon a
fubjedl, which appears, at firft fight, to be fo ftrangely odd and whim-
fical, as not to be capable of any fyftem. And I will begin with
colleding the fadls relating to dreaming, as it is only upon fads
that any good theory, concerning any part of Nature, can be
founded.
One fa£l concerning dreaming is axlmitted by all, that it happens
while we are afleep ; and, therefore, before we go farther, it is pro-
per that we ftiould diftinguifti accurately and philofophically betwixt
fleeping and waking. And here, likewife, we are aflifted by Ari-
ftotle, who has written a fmall treatife, which he has entitled, ' Con-
* cerning
• I am credibly informed that a night-walker does not feel pain. The perfon,
who told me fo, faid that he himfelf made the experiment upon a female night-
walker, into whofe arm he ftuck a pin, and (he did not exprefs the lead fenfe of
pain. If fo, the night-walker mufl be in the ftate of a feparatc Spirit, which atls .
upon Body, but is not ailed upon by it.
238 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
* cerning fleeplng and waking.' The difference betwixt the two he
makes to be, that, in the one ftate, we have the ufe of our Senfe,%
in the other we have not. They both, therefore, belong to the
fame part of our Nature, viz. the Animal or Senfitive ; the one being
the Adion or Energy of our Senfes, the other the CefTation of that
Adion,
But this alone, as he obferves, is not fufficient to dillinguifli ac-
curately the two ftates ; for it often happens, that, when we are a-
wake, we have not the adlual ufe or exercife of any Senfe. We
muft therefore add to the definition of fleeping, that not only we
have not the ufe of our Senfes in that flate, but that we have not the
capacity of ufing them, during our continuance in that flate ; fo
that, while we are afleep, though objeds of Senfe be prefented to
us, and ad upon the organs of Senfe, as when we are awake, we
do not perceive them. And from Hence Ariflotle infers, that if, in
in our fleep, we fee any light, or hear any noife, as fome people do,
w^e are not perfedly afleep ; nor are fuch appearances in the Mind
Phantafms or Dreams, but real Senfations *.
It appears, therefore, as Ariftctle has obferved, that Sleeping does
not belong to any one Senfe, or to all confidered feverally, but to
the common Senforium, by which we fee, hear, fmell, tafle, and
touch, and diflinguifh one of thefe Senfations from another, and per-
ceive the difference betwixt Senfations of the fame kind. This is
what Ariftotle calls, ' the Common Scyijc -^ and that part of the Mind
to which it belongs, ' the Comynon Scnjor'ium f. And, as this Senfe
belongs to all animals, though they may want fome of the particu-
lar Senfes, and even all of them except touch, fleeping, there-
fore, belongs to the whole Animal Nature j and there is no Animal
that does not fleep.
Sleep,
• Lib. de Infomniis, cap. ultimum.
t Lib. de Somno et Vigilia, cap. 2.
Chap.V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 239
Sleep, therefore, Is a temporary incapacity of the Co?7imon Senfo-
r/«;;/, or Senfitive Part of our Mind, to perceive the impreffions made
upon the feveral Organs of Senfe, by external objedsj I fay tem"
forary Incapacity^ becaufe, if we fuppofe a perpetual incapacity,
then fuch a Body would not be an Animal, but a Vegetable, or feme
Inanimate Subftance. And as what never a£ls, mufl: be fuppofed
not to have the capacity of a£bing, which, in that cafe, would be
to no purpofe ; therefore all Animals, according to Ariftotle, muft,
at times, wake as well as fleep ; that is, at fome time or another^
they muft have the ufc and exercife of one Senfe at leaft *.
Thus, one lliould think that Sleeping was fufficiently diftinguifhed
from Waking : But it is not fo ; for, as Ariftotle has obferved, there
are temporary incapacities of perception by Senfe, which are not
Sleep, becaufe they proceed from difeafe, or from fome hurt. And he
inftances Fainting, in which we have no perception by Senfe, and yet
fee wonderful Phantafms f. The temporary incapacity, therefore,
of Senfation, properly called Sleep, is that which proceeds from Na-
ture, not from Accident or Difeafe ; for, as Ariftotle informs us,
the Operations of Mind, by means of the Body, fuch as Senfation,
cannot, by their nature, be perpetual ; and, therefore, when they
are continued for a certain time, the Senforium becomes wearied, as
it were, and incapable to perform its functions, and then the Ani-
mal falls afleep. And this, according to Ariftotle, produces the ne-
ceflity of Sleep in all Animals \. The Final Caufe, therefore, of
Sleep, according to him, is the relaxation and refrefliment of the
Animal, while the Senfes are locked up : And the Efficient and
Material Caufe is certain Vapours, which, he fays, arife from the
nourifti-
• Ibid cap. I.
t Ibid. cap. 3. in initio. See an extiaordlnary fact of/ iliis kind, mentioned
page 224.
± Ibid. cap. 3.
240 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
nourlfliment we take in, and afcend to the head, which they make
heavy and unable to fuflam iifelf ; then returning back again, and
going downward, they produce Sleep *.
Having thus fliown what Sleep is, namely, that it is a Cellation
of the Adion of our Senfes, proceeding from the wearinefs of Na-
ture, we are next to confider what Dreaming is, and to diftinguifli
it from fome phacnomena which appear to be Dreams, but are not.
And, in the firft place, it is agreed by all, that we can only be faid
properly to dream when we are afleep ; and therefore thofe Vifions
I juft now mentioned, which a man has in a fainting fit, are not
dreams, though they be the operations of the Phantafia, bccaufe wc
are not then afleep.
Secondly^ Thofe perceptions above mentioned, of Light, orNoife,
which fome people have while they feem to be afleep, are not Dreams,
for the fame reafon, and likewife for another reafon, namely, that
they are the perceptions, by the Senfes, of objedls of Senfe adlually
prefent, confequently not the operations of the Phantafia, which all
dreams mufl: necefl'arily be.
But, 3//0, Even all Phantafms in our Sleep, though they be the-
operations of the Phantafia, are not Dreams, unlefs the Mind be de-
ceived by them, and believe them to be real exiftences ; for, if the
Mind tell itfelf, as it fometimes does, that this is but a Dream and a
Delufion, then it is not, properly fpeaking, a Dream, but fuch an I-
magination as we have when we are awake and in our fober Sen-
fes f. And the reafon is, as Ariflotle has told us, that we are not
then perfedtly afleep ; becaufe the governing principle in us is adive,
and
* Ibid. cap. 3.
t Arift, de Infomniis, cap. 3. in medio.
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 241
and reviews our Phantafias, and correds appearances, in the fame
manner as it does when we are awake.
/^thly. There are other operations of this governing principle,
while we are aflcep, which we ought hkewife to diftinguifli from
our Dreams : What I mean is, our Reafoning upon the Phantafms
which our Dreams prefent to us ; for we often reaibn, and reafoa
very well, in our Sleep, upon the Suppofition that the ohjects ap-
»earing to us are real objects. But fuch Reafonings Ariflotle very
properly dillinguilhes from the Phantafms which give occafion to
them, and wluch alone are our Dreams *.
And here we may obferve, in pafling, a very great refemblance
betwixt Dreaming and Madnefs ; for the Madman has Phantafms
that he believes to be real, as well as the Dreamer, and, as I have
obferved, generally reafons very well, upon the fuppofition of their
being realities.
Further, we not only reafon in our Sleep, upon the fubjed of thefe
Phantafms, but fometimes abftradtly ; and there have been examples
of perfons folving difficult problems of geometry or arithmetic in
their Sleep, that they were not able to folve when awake. And
Plato fays, that, if we were to live temperately, and keep our Minds
free from diforderly pafTions, we fliould have Philofophic Dreams,
in which we might make great dilcoveries t. But fuch operations
being not of the Phantafia, but of the Intelled, are not what are
properly called Dreams.
Vol. II. H h Lajlfy^,
* 1 hefe reafonings Aridotle calls, ir»( t» rm »!»»« yitorou nx^ift; tttuxi, t«{« t«
^Mvrcts-fticrcc' 'ut tu^iv t>uTrn»> ;«, «AA cv tux. cap 2- in imtio.
•}■ — x«i yaf t' oy«^ tK Aim Krri, Iliad. I- V, 63-
And an l5 •? »*■(" XtcxiuiKt)t t$ccy;«^f<«THs or Sacred Scribes, of the Egypti-
ans, that is, as I underftand the word, they who underftood and could write the
facred Charafter, to which only thofe Myfterics were committed : And, lad of all,
the Dodrine of the Theologians of Delphi. Till 1 read thefe laft words, I be-
lieved that the Oracles, fo often quoted by Plotinus, Porphyry, Jamblichus, Pro-
clus, and Synefius himfelf, were only the Chaldaic Oracles. But jt appe.irs from
thefe words of Nicephorus, thnt the Delphic God, after he had ceafed lo be poli«
tical, and could no longer dirett the affairs of men by his councls, ftill k pt up
fome authority, by didating in matters of philofophy: And ptihaps fome of the
Oracles, quoted by Synefius in this work, and which are not fo be found in the
above mentioned collection of the Chaldaic Oracles made by Pietho and Pfellus,
aic from the Delphic Priefts. This, I think, is a curjous anecdote of Jueraty hiftory.
254 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
times, fuch as Plotinus, Porphyry, Jamblichus, and Proclus, were
great believers in Divination. In this work he fpeaks of fcveral
kinds of Divination ; but to all of them he prefers that by Dreams,
becaufe it is conftanlly carried about with us, requires no ap-
paratus, or expence, nor any thing clfe but a conflant attention to
our Dreams, and to what happens in confequence of them. For this
purpofe, he recommends it to every one to keep Night Journalst
(iTrii^ujcTtJtf, as he calls them), as well as «?iii/*if»^ff, or Day Journals ;
by which, fays he, we have the hiftory of our whole life. And it
is evident from what he fays, that it was his own practice *.
The feat of Dreams, according to him, is the Phantafia ; In which
he agrees with all philofophers, and alfo in another thing, that the
Phantafia belongs to the ^-^xij o"" -Animal Lifcy confidered as diftind
from the Nodj, or Jntelkd. This J-wX" ^^ holds to be embodied with
a thin vehicle of air, or aether, which he calls n^u/ita, or the o^"/**
7rfwToi/j in oppofition to the (rwf<.« {(rj(,«Tov, or Trtj ipA»)/ii« ofT{£U(J«, that is, the
outward body, which he hkens to an oyfter'sftiell inclofmg us. As the
intelled, fays he, contains in it the forms or fpeciefes twv oi/twi/, that
is, of things really exifting, fo the ^\)-/r\ contains in it the forms twk
yiwptvitfv, that is, of things which have no permanent exiftence, but
are perpetually in generation and corruption, fuch as all material
things. All thefe the Mind has in itfelf, but has the perception only
of fuch of them as are produced and exhibited to the Mind by the
Phantafia, which he confiders as the Organ by which the ^\>yi\ per-
ceives its objetSlst' As all material things are in time^ they are di-
{lin"-uilhed, according to the threefold divifion of time, mto prefenty
pnjl, vind future. And of all the objeds of each of the three kinds
there are Forms, according to him, in the Phantafia : For, though
all
• Page 129. 33 r.
I Page 100. and lot.
Chap. V. AN TIE NT METAPHYSICS. 255
all things here below confift of Matter and Form, it is only one
part of the compofition, viz. the Form, that appears in the Phantafia;
and it is the Forms of things prefent, paft, and future, in the Phan-
tafia, which make our Dreams.
From this account of the Phantafia given by our author, it is evi-
dent that it is the very fame with what Ariftotle calls the Common
Senfe, by which the Mind perceives whatever is reported to it by
the Senfes. And, indeed, our author exprefsly fays fo in page 103.
where he calls the Phantafia the MmtrxTov xiv^nm^iov^ and the «t(r6>io-)r
•«r6»i which he calls the Sacred Difcourfes^ writ-
ten not at all in the flyle of an Oration, though they are numbered
among his Orations, but in the ftyle of a plain narrative. Thefe
Powers
* Vol. i. p. 155.
■f Page 273. of the Oxford Edition*
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 281
Powers appeared to him under the form of different Divinities, fuch
as iEfculapius, Apollo, and Minerva, but particularly of iEfculapius,
whom he confiders as his tutelary God, and from whom he got the
moft particular diredions for the cure of his difeafe, which, at
laft, was cured accordingly. Thefe directions he did not at firfl: fet
down in writing, nor what he did in confequence of them ; but, af-
terwards, by the fpecial order of the God, he wrote them down, a^
far as his memory ferved him; and he has carriedthe narrative down
to the twelfth year of his difeafe, in the beginning of which he breaks
off abruptly *, being probably prevented by death from finifti-
ing it. Befides the Dreams, without number, concerning the cure
of his difeafe, he got directions, by Dreams and Vifions, in many
other things ; and, particularly, he efcaped being fwallowed up by a
great earthquake, which almoft totally deftroyed Smyrna while he
was there, by being ordered in a Dream to go to a certain place in
the neighbourhood of the town, and there to build an altar, and to
facrifice to Jupiter : And he fays the earthquake juft flopped at that
place t' Another time, he fays, Minerva with her iEgis, fuch as (he
was reprefented by- Phidias's ftutue of her in Athens,] appeared to him
when three other perfons were prefent, who did not fee her, as he did,
except when fhe mounted up into the air and went out of fight,
but heard her fpeak to him ; and he has told us what fhe
faid %. What was chiefly prefcribed to him by iEfculapius, (be-
fides many drugs which he mentions), was the ufe of the cold bath,
when the froft was fo fevere that he could not get kito the water
Vol. II. N n without
* Page 318.
t Ibid.
% Page 300. She put him In mind of the OJyffcy, and fjid that he ought to
believe, from what he then faw, that the afliftance which Homer faid (lie had given
to Uiyfles and Tclcmachus was not fabulous, and that he might cipeil the like af-
fiftance from her.
28a ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV,
without breaking the ice: And, in the fame weather, he was or-
dered to wear nothing but a linen tunic, to go barefoot, and to flcep
in the open air. Once, he fays, after ufing the cold bath, he was
not only immediately relieved, as to all his bodily complaints, but
he was in a flate of Mind fo pleafant, that, he fays, he cannot de-
fcribe it, otherwife than by telling us, that it was fomething more
than human *.
Thofe who believe that there is nothing in Heaven or Earth
but Body, will, I know, laugh at fuch ftories, becaufe they can-
not account for them by any Powers of Matter or Mechanifm;
but I, who firmly believe that I have a Mind, as well as a Body —
that there are other Minds in the Univerfe, infinitely fuperior to
mine in knowledge and power — and that thefe Minds may commu-
nicate with the Human, and at no time more probably than in
Sleep — cannot difcover any thing incredible in this narrative of A-
riftides. I therefore examine the evidence of it, as I do of any
other fa£l that appears extraordinary, but not impoflible ; and I can
fee no rcafon for rejeding the teflimony of a man of fuch reputa-
tion as Ariftides, fo much honoured and efteemed, by not only the
greateft, but the heft men of his age, particularly the Emperor Mar-
cus Antoninus, and by whole cities, fuch as the city of Smyrna,
that ereded a ftatue to him. When I alfo confider how much he
has been celebrated, not only in his own time, but by writers who
lived after him, without the leaft hint, by any one of them, of a fu-
fpicion that he was a liar or impoftor, which if Pope Pius the
Fourth had believed, he would never have ereded a ftatue to him
yet to be feen in the Vatican, I cannot perfuade myfelf that fuch a
man would have gone on, in a feries of lying and impofture, for
fo many years, without any motive, that appears, either of intereft
or
• Page 296.
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 283
or of vanity. Intereft he -could have none : And^ as to vanity, the
difcourfes, in which he gives an account of his Dreams, and of the
cures piefcribcd to him, are not, as I have obfcrvcd, written in the
Oratorial and Epidciclic Style ; nor does it appear that they ever were
pronounced as Orations. Neither does any author, who fpcaksof him,
fay that he acquired any reputation by his Dreams, but only by
his F.loquence and Learning,
I cannot therefore rejed fuch evidence, except upon the credit of
a found and folid fyftem of philofophy, fhowing that thcTe fcifts are
either abfolutely impofRble, or in the highefl: degree improbable.
But I am acquainted with no fuch philofophy. On the contrary,
the philofophy I have learned favours very much the credibility of
the narrative : For, in the Hrft place, it affures me that the Soul
will exifi feparated from the Body, after its union with the Body is
diflblved by Death ; and then, being difincumbered of its load, it
will exert its native Powers, and enjoy more freely the communi-
cation with Superior Minds : 2 Jc, It is natural to think that, though
the feparation betwixt the Body and Mind be not entire, as in death,
but .the connexion only impaired, and, in fome degree, loolencd
by difeafe, the Mind may even then aO. more by itfelf, and be more
favoured by extraordinary communications, than at other times :
3//0, The Mind, in ordinary Sleep, is more difengagcd from the Bo-
dy, and more at its eafe, than at other times, not being then difturb-
ed by the Senfes, which, when we are awake, are conftantly folicit-
ing it, and importuning it, zs it were, by the obje<3;s which they
prefent to it. The connexion, therefore, betwixt the Mind and Body
of Ariftides being loofened in both thefe ways, it is no wonder that
he had Dreams and Vifions of an extraordinary kind. — And, iajilry
however improbable it might be that a vulgar manfliouldbefo much
favoured of Heaven, yet, if we fuppofe that there may be an extra-
ordinary injerpofitipn of Providence in favour of any man, it may
N n 2 be
284 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
be well fuppofed in favour of fo extraordinary a man and a philofo-
pher, fuch as Ariftides was.
It may be objected, that, if we give credit to the Dreams of Ar-
riftides, we muft believe in the heathen religion, and in the ex-
iftence of fwch Deities as ^fculapius, Apollo, and Minerva, But to this
I anfwer, that, as we are to fuppofe that Ariftides was a believer in
the religion of his country, it was proper that the Spirits, that ap-
peared to him, fhould afllime fuch fhapes as would give them credit
with him, and difpofe him to follow their counfels.
But if, after all, the reader fhould be inclined to rejedl the autho-
rity of Ariftides, as a Heathen and favouring the Heathen reli-
gion, I fhould defire to know what objection he has to the credibi-
lity of the Chiiftian Bifhop Synefius. He fays that, in his Dreams^
he was forewarned of dangers that threatened him, which, by that
means, he efcaped * : By the fame means, he fucceeded in the bu-
flnefs in which he was engaged ; particularly in his embaffy to Arca-
dius the Emperor, from Cyrene and other Greek cities f : He philofo-
phifed too, he fays, in his Sleep, and difcovered things which he couli
not find out while awake : He compofed, likewife, in his Dreams ;
and, of what he had compofed before, while he was awake, he
fmoothed the ftyle, taking it down, and making it lefs turgidlf. This
very work upon Dreams he was directed to compofe by a Dream :
And he wrote the whole of it that very night §. And, from the ac-
count he gives of the efFed: it had, both upon himfelf and others,
when it was read over, it is plain that he thought he was infpired
when he wrote it. And it is probably to this ftory that Nicepho-
rus, his commentator, alludes, when he lays that he wrote like one
infpired ||. Even in hunting, by which, he fays, and by his books
he
* Page 123. 124. t Page 124.
t Page 123. From what he fays in this paflage, it appears that the obfcurlty of
his ftyle arofe chiefly from his imitation of the antient Attic, and his ufing new^
and ftrange words, which he made himfelf to exprefs his conceptions-
§ Epift. 153. towards the end, page 293. edit. Petavii.
K See page 253. of this Vol. in the Note,
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 285
he lived, he was direded, by his Dreams, when and where he was to
find the Game f- In fhort, from his account of the matter, it ap-
pears that, through his whole life, in his bufmefs, his ftudies, and
even his fports, he was guided by the counfels and fuggeftions of
a genius, that accompanied him through life, but communicated with
him chiefly in Dreams ; whereas the Genius of Socrates gave him
warning, for the greater part, when he was awake if, never inciting
him. to do any thing, (for he had no need of that, being by nature
difpofed to every thing good and virtuous), but reftraining him from
fome things which would have proved fatal, to him. Of this Plato
has given one or two examples,.
I afk again, upon the credit of what fyflem of philofophy I ought:
to rejedl the teftimony of fo eminent a bifliop of the primitive
church, who, befides, was the greateft philofopher of his age, arid
one of the worthieft and beft men of that or of any other age §,?
Againft authorities, fo refpedable, I know nothing that can be faid,
except that fuch things do not happen in our age ; and that men, in all
ages and|nations,have been always the fame, equally religious, virtuous,
and learned ; and that, in every age and nation, there have been at
all times fuch men as Ariftides, Synefius, and Socrates. But this, I
think, no man, who is either fcholar or philofopher, will maintain ;
and though he be neither, yet, if he is a man of common obferva-
tion, and has lived as long as I have done, he will perceive a de-
cline of men, even in his own time, both in Mind and Body.
But,
t Page 123.
J The Genius, or Daemon, as it was called, of Socrates, fpoke to him in an ao,-
diblc voice, as Plato relates in the Theages. E»1( ym( n Hut fcti^» 7ric^frtaii»i 'tfui 'm
»«|J»S ifS*"*"" 5*'A*»"«». ffi " ftiiTt pawii, ^, iricf yttnrtti, '«(« fitt «-is/(iciMi, • '«» ^iAX«
^mrrur,r»»fv *«*»t{«w»». «r{ir{iT(( Sf '(vSitrtTi, &c. It was the opinion o{ the An-
tients, that every man had a Genius that attended him through life, though he did
not manifeft himfeif, as the Genius of Socrates did, but was of a Divine Nature,
and therefore is called by Horace, Naturae Deus bumanae.
§ See a very particular account of him by Tillereiont, in his EcdeSaftical Hiftory,
Vol. xii. p. 49a.
2t6 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
But, if he is a philofopher, he will not only know that it is fo, but
he will know that, of neceflity, it mu/i be fo ; becaufe he will fee
it, as a philofopher fhould fee things, in its caufes.
It remains now only to inquire into the Final Caufe of Dreaming,
without the knowledge of which there could be no philofophy of
Dreams: For philofophy is the knowledge of Caufes; and the Final
Caufe, as I have obferved, is the Fiift and Principal Caufe, and may-
be faid to be the Caufe of Caufes. The works of man nobody pre-
tends to underftand, unlefs he knows the purpofe for which they are
intended ; and the fame is true of the works of God.
I will begin with thofe Dreams which I hold to be in the ordi-
nary courfe of Nature. Thefe, I think, I have fhown to be necefla-
ry ; fo that, unlefs the nature of our Minds and Bodies be al-
tered, there muft be Dreams. They are therefore a part of the
fyftem of Nature ; and, if that fyftem be the work of Infinite Wif-
dom, it is impoffible but that fome end muft be propofed and attained
by them : For every thing in Nature is for fome end ; and, though
there may be many things in Nature, of which we cannot difcover
the end, our limited underftandings not being able to comprehend
the whole fyftem, thefe things, for the greater part, are out of the
common courfe of Nature ; but it would be ftrange if we could dif-
cover no purpofe or defign in what happens every day, and with
refpe6t to ourfelves too, and in our own little world. Every body muft
acknowledge that our philofophy of Man would be ridiculoufly im-
perfe£t, if we could give no account for what purpofe we are in this
world, and to what end we live while we are waking. Now, our
Sleeping Life is nearly equal to our Waking ; and, therefore,
if we could give no account of it, we fhould know but half of hu-
man life.
If
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 287
If we believe that the Almighty is good as well as wife, we rniuft
likewife believe that his intention is to make all his creatures happy,
fo far forth as is confiftent with general Laws, without which it is im-
pofliblc that there can be a fyftem of Nature. Further, it is impofTible
but that Intelligent and Senfitive Beings, who alone are capable of
happinefs or mifery, muft, if they be in adion, feel either pleafure or
pain, and,confequently, muft, in fome degree, be either happy or mi-
ferable. And, therefore, as our Senfitive and Intelligent parts are un-
doubtedly adive in our Sleep, it is impoffible that ftate can be indif-
ferent to us, but muft be a fource either of happinefs or mifery.
Moreover, by the conftitution of our Nature, Virtue neceflarily makes
our Happinefs, and Vice our Mifery ; and", if they make the Happi-
nefs or Mifery of our Waking Life, it would be extraordinary if they
had no influence either way upon our Life in Sleep. But it has been
Ihown * that the Dreams of a wicked man make a great part of his
Mifery ; and, indeed, without them, he could not be faid to be com-
pletely miferabJe. Now, it would be a ftrange order of things, and
a very unequal diftribution of rewards and puniftiments, if they did
not likewife make part of the happinefs of a virtuous man ; and,
that they do fo, I think I have likewife fhown : And, indeed, it is
impoffible, by the nature of things, but that there fhould be a con-
formity betwixt our Sleeping and our Waking Thoughts ; and, as the
Waking Thoughts of the virtuous man are far better and happier,
fo muft alfo his Sleeping Thoughts be. As few men, however, very
few, are virtuous in any high d^^ gree, and fewer ftiil are philofo-
phers, it cannot be expefted that we fhould enjoy any great happi-
nefs in our Sleep, any more than Waking. But I maintain, that a
man, who has good fecial affedions, and has love and friendihip in
his nature, and whofe Body is not difordered by an unnatural diet
and an Improper manner of living, will pafs many a plealant night
in his Sleep, with friends and relations whom he loves and efteems,
and
• Page 274. 275.
28^8 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
and with the dead as well as the living ; or, if he has had the mis-
fortune, which, I doubt, is the cafe of many in this age, not to have
known much Virtue or Worth, but is an Antient Scholar, his Ima-
gination will raife from their tombs the heroes of Greece and Rome,
and make him enjoy their Society.
And here I beg leave again to quote Mr Thomfon, in his Caftle
of Indolence, the iineft allegorical poem in any language, and moft
complete, according to my judgment, both in ftyle and verfificatlon,
and particularly beautiful upon the fubjed of Dreams. It is where
he prays for good Dreams, in thefc fweet verfes, following the
ftanza above quoted concerning Dreams of horror and affright,
}"£• Guardian Spirits^ to ivhoni man is dear !
From thefe f mil Daemons Jhield the midnight gloom.:
Angels of Fancy and of Love ! be near, ,
And o'er the Blank of Sleep diffufe a bloom :
Evoke thefacred Shades of Greece and Rome^
And let them Virtue "with a look impart :
But chief, a ivhile^ 0 1 lend us from the Tomb
Thofe long-lojl Friends for ivhom in Love ivefmarty
And fill ivith pious a-we andjoy-mixt ivoe the heart.
But, if to virtue and learning be joined philofophy, and if to hoik.
be added that cathartic manner of life *, by which the later Platoni-
cians faid that they were difengaged from the Body as much as was
poflible in this life, and their Minds exalted to a communication
with Superior Minds, we fliall then enjoy the greatcft happlnefs that
Gur nature is capable qf in this ftate, and, in our Sleeping Life, ftiall
anticipate, in fome degree, the joys that are prepared for the reli-
gious and virtuous in the other life that is to come with the Sleep of
Death.
That
* Page 163. 17/
Chap. V. A N T I E N T M E T A P H Y S T C S. 28y
That there will be Dreams in that long Sleep, no man can doubt,
%vho fludies human nature as a philofopher, and confidcrs particu-
larly this phaenomenon of Dreaming ; for, if we have Dreams in the
death of each day's life, why fhould we not have them in that
longer death, which differs not from the other in any refped, ex-
cept that the one concludes the life of many days, the other that of
only one. In both, the Mind has no ufe of Senfcs ; and if, never-
thelefs, it be adive in the one, why not in the other ? And, upon
the whole, I think the argument in favour of a feparate ftate of the
Soul, and of a future life, is fo ftrongly fupported by Dreaming,
that, if it could not be proved to ferve any other purpofe, but to give
the righteous hopes of a blefled Immortality, and to deter the wicked
from their flagitious courfes by the fear of future mifery in a feparate
ftate, I fhould think that fufficient.
With refpe6t to fupernatural and prophetic Dreams, as I do not
believe with Epicurus, that the Divinity takes no concern in the af-
fairs of men, nor am convinced, by the arguments offome of our mo-
dern philofophers, that there is no fuch thing as a particular Provi-
dence, but that the affairs of men are governed by general laws,
fuch as thofe which govern Matter and Motion *, I believe moll
firmly, that, in fome ages and fome nations of the world,
future events were revealed to men in Dreams, by which great
calamities, both to private men and to nations, have been pre-
vented ; and my reafon for fo believing is, that I do not think hu-
man wifdom fufficient to condudl men profperoufly through this
Vol. II. O o Life,
• There is a Diflertation to prove this, In the preface of Hawkefworth's publica-
tion of Captain Coolc's firft voyage round the world. It is as foreign to the purpofe
as any thing that can be imagined : But fuch writers are fond of every opportunity
of (bowing their infidelity, like the French Abbe Chappe, who, in giving an account
of his journey through Ruflia and Siberia to Tobolfki, takes occafion to inform the
reader that the human boul is nothing but eledlrical Fire>
-90 ANTIKNT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
Life, without luch extraordinary communications with Superior
Minds. This was the opinion of all the antient world, philofophers
as well as other men ; and, accordingly, many different kinds of
Divination were pra£tifed by different nations, of which Dreams
appear to have been the moll antient. We fee from Homer what
credit was given to them in his time ; nor does there appear to have
been any other kind of Divination then pra£tifed, except that by the
flight of Birds : And, at this day, it is the only Divination among
the Indians of North America.
How this kind of Revelation has ceafed among us and in other
nations of Europe, and how we come to be reduced to the State in
which Ifrael was in the days of Saul, ' When the Lord anfwcred
* not, neither by Dreams nor by Prophets *,' is a matter of long
difcuflion, and belongs not to this part of my woi'k. All I fhall fay
at pr-efent is, that it appears to me moft evident, both from the phi-
iofophy and the hiflory of Man, that he is not the fame animal, ei-
ther in Body or Mind, that he was in former ages ; and, if he be
fo much degenerated, as I fuppofe him to be, it is no wonder that
he is not a fit velTel for Divine Infpiration, or proper for Communi-
cation with Superior Minds : Tor the order of Nature requires that
there fliould be an aptitude in every thing for certain ends ; and,
in one ftate or condition, a thing will be fit for a certain purpofe,
and, in another condition, utterly unfit. The age, in which Syne-
fius lived, was far from being one of the beft : Nor do I believe that
he could have had thofe fupernatural communications by Dreams,
which he mentions, unlefs his Mind had been exalted by the ftudy
of the fublimeft philofophy, exceedingly different from what we now
call philofophy, which is nothing elfe but Menfuration and Com-
putation, FaiSts of Natural Hiflory, Mechanics, ar;d Properties of
Lines
* I Samuel, chap. Jucviii. v. I. i5.
Chap. V. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 291
Lines and Figures, which never can give any confiderable elevation
to the Mind : Even in this more degenerate age, when men are
both born and educated worfe than they were then, I do not
think it is impoffible that a man, favoured of Heaven, may, by
Religion and the ftudy of the fame philofophy, be raifed fo much,
above other men, as to carry about with, him the fame oracle that
Synefms did.
Thofe who have not ftudied the hiftory and philofophy of Hu-
man Nature, nor have been taught to diftinguifli betwixt the natural
ftate of the Animal and bis artificial or civilized ftate, will be fur-
prifed to hear of fuch a degeneracy, as I fuppofe, of the Species. But
the learned in Man know that, from the time he forfook that manner
of life which God and Nature had appointed for him, he has been
conftantly degenerating in Body. — That, with refpedl to his Mind,,
he has, in the firft periods of his progreffion, wonderfully improved,
and, in a manner, created, or at leaft refufcitated, his Intellectual part.
But, as all fublunary things are, by Nature, doomed to decay and cor-
ruption, in the latter ftage of his progrefs he declines alfo in Mind,
But, if to this decline in the ordinary courfe of Nature be added
Wealth £;nd Luxury, and their neceflary concomitants. Vice and Dif-
eafe, his degeneracy gaes on with rapidity ; and he becomes, at lad,,
when he is grown as weak as he is wicked, the moft contemptible,
as well as the moft miferable, of all the creatures that God has
made * : For, in that degenerate ftate, he will be vain, and the more
O o 2. dege-
• Homer has faid, and from the motnh of Jupiter too, rhat, of all the Animals*
upon this earth, Man is the moft miferable :
n«i'T#r, ioVU Ti yXIXf tXIT'tlH T< »»t 'l^TH,
So wretched had Vice and Folly made Men, even in the days of Homer. Cut
they were then ftrong of Mind and of Body j and therefore they were not contemp-
tible
292 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
degenerate the more vain. Now, Vanity Is the proper objed of Ilidi-
cule and Contenapt : Nor is any Animal that God has made, even
the meaneft and lowed, without Vanity, ridiculous or contemptible.
Religion, Philofophy, and good Learning, may for a while ftem the
tide of Corruption and Depravity, and retard the dellrudion of fuch
a Nation ; but, if tliefe be wanting, the fall will be precipitate, and
the conclufion muft be the utter extinftion of the Nation : For
it is a law of Nature, that whatever gr6ws worfe, and continues to
grow worfe, muft end at laft. We fee every day the extindion of
Families ; and, as a Nation confifts of Families, for the fame reafon
that Families are extinguiflied, whole Nations may be fo. Accord-
ingly, we know, with the greateft certainty, that Nations dlminifh in
numbers ; and there are examples in the hiftory ofmankind, of whole
Nations, by gradual diminution, difappearing at laft altogether. But,
as all the works of God are eternal, either as individuals or by fqc-
ceffion, nothing perifhes utterly, but every thing is renewed in fome
fhape or another ; and therefore I believe what the wife of antient
limes have taught, that there is to be a ■^x^tfymtrHf or Renovation of
Things^
lible. But the fame Poet tells us, from the mouth of Neftor,that the men in his time,
or even in the time of the Trojan war, were nothing like thofe of the age preceding.
This, I know, the young men of the prefcnt age will not believe, but will think
it a vain boaftiiig of old men, pcevifli and difcontented with the prefcnt times. But
I defire to be informed how they can know paft times, otherwife than by the teftimo-
ny of thofe who lived in them. For, in order to compare two things, it feems ne-
ceffary that one fhould know both : And there is nothing but an extraordinary fupe-
riority of genius that can enable a young man to judge better of prefent and paft
times, than an old man who has known both. By the fame fuperiority of genius,
thsfe men pronounce decifively, that the modern life in Europe is preferable to thelife
of a Savage of North America, contrary to the judgment of many, both French and
Englifh, who have tried both lives, and could not be perfuaded to forfake the Sa-
vages, and return to their countrymen and friends.
Chap. V. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. 295
Things^ at certain periods. Upon this fubjeft we have a mofl excel-
lent Poem of Virgil in his fourth Eclogue*.
But, to conclude this long chapter upon Dreams, I think, I
have fhown that the Final Caufe of all Dreams, natural or fu-
pernatural, is the fame as the Final Caufe of all the works of
God— ——the happinefs of all Intelligent and Senfitive Beings du-
ring their whole Lives, not only their Waking but their Sleeping
Life. And I will only add, that if I have not given full fatis-
faftion to the philofophical reader, I have, at leaft, the merit of
treating the fubjed more fully and methodically than any other
modern author, and of giving him an opportunity of thinking
upon it himfelf, and trying to difcover fomething better with refped
to a phaenomenon, which, if it were not fo common, would be
thought the moft extraordinary belonging to Human Nature, and
which alone appears to me fufficient to convince the moft deter-
mined Materialift, that there is fomething in our compofition be-
fides Matter and Mechanifm.
Magnus ab integro faeclorum nafcitur ordo :
Jam rcdit ct Virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna ;
Jam nova progenies coclo demittitur alto.
V. 5. ttfeq.
CHAP.
894 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
CHAP. vr.
Of Inftindl, and the Nature of it — different from every other Power ^
Mind hitherto mentioned. — ft isfhoivn chief y in the Generation and
the Education of theYowng. — Shoivn in Incubation — in the Flights
of Birds o/'Paflage. — In^mOifronger in the Natural State of the
Animal, but ivond^rful Examples of it even in the Tame State. —
This Inftinft of Animals, fuperior to Human Intelligence. — What
Inftind Man bad in his Natural State. — Not fo much neceffary to
him as to other Animals in that State. — His prefent State is direBed
by Intelligence, infeadofln^in^. — Tha.t not fufficient to make Men
happy, ivithout the Afftfiance of Superior Powers. — I'his the OrJ^
gin of Religion.
THAT Power of Mind, by which It operates fo wonder-
fully when its connexion with the Body is loofened either
fey Sleep or Difeafe^ and which I have endeavoured to explain
and account for in the preceding Chapter, is common, in fome
degree, to us and to the Brute. But the Power I am now to men-
tion is peculiar to the Brute, and fhows, more, I think, than any thing
elfe, how impoffible it is to account for the operations even of the A-
nimal Mind by Matter and Mechanifm, and manifefts, at the fametime,
the wifdom and goodnefe of Providence in providing fo wonderfully
for the prefervation of the Animal race, which alone is capable of hap-
pinefs. The power, I mean, is denoted by a name well known, In-
fintl : But the thing itfelf is little underftood ; for, I believe, very
few know that it is a power quite diftin(!l: from Senfation, Imagina-
tion, Memory, or even Reafon, which are generally believed to be
the only faculties belonging either to the Animal or Intelledual Na-
ture : Neither* is it acquired by imitation or inftrudion.
It is employed, both for the prefervation of the individual and
the contimiation of the race ; but, as the latter is more particular-
Chap. VI. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 295
ly the care of Nature, It is in ii lliat the power of Inftind is mofl
eminently dlfplayed. The ufe of the parts of generation, and the
various methods of copulation pradtifed by dificrent Animals, are
certainly not difcovered by any of the faculties of Mind above
mentioned; nor are they pradifed from imitation or inftrudion:
But it is Nature herfelf that direds the Animal to do what is nccef-
fary for the propagation of the kind.
The education alfo of the young is n wonderful efleiTc of this In-
ftin£t ; and likewife the preparation for it in fome animals, particularly
inthofe v/hom Nature has direded to pair, being a thing neceifary for
rearing the offspring of certain (peciefes of animals. The beafts that
couple prepare holes and layers convenient for their purpofe: And the
fowls make nefts, fome of them of moft artificial conftrudion, where
that is neceflary; and this, whether they be made by young or by old
birds; fo that it is plain they do not learn by pradice and experience,
p.s we do.
The procefs of incubation in the bird-kind alfo fhows a mofl:
wonderful Inftind ; for the female who fits upon the eggs turns
them once in twenty-four hours, and alfo changes the place of
them, fo that they all may be in their turn immediately under her
breaft. And, after the young are in this way bi ought forth, it is
amazing how both the parents join in the labour of rearing them.
There are fome birds v/hofe oeconomy requires that they fliould
-go over feas at certain feafons : And, accordingly, thefe birds of
pafTage, as they call them, know at what time to begin their flight,
and what courfe to hold tlu-ough the pathlefs air without chart or
compafs.
I (hould write a Volume, if I were to enumerate all the dif-
ferent ways in which Inftind direds animals to preferve the
individual, as well as to continue the race, fome of them much
exceeding
1^ ANTIKNT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
exceeding what human art or fcience can do. But I do not
propofe to write a Natural Hlftory of Animals ; my intention
being only to Ibow what InfliniH; is. 1 fhall, therefore, only
further add, that, as Infl.in<£l is from Nature, it is no doubt
moft perfedl in the natural ftatc : And yet there are animals in a
tame and domefticated ftate, which fhow a great deal of it. The dog,
for example, who, in his natural ftate, is an animal of prey, as
much as the fox, being, as is now certainly known, of the fame
fpecies, becomes fo fond of his houfe and home, that, when he is
carried away from it, he can find his way hack again, which, in
many cafes, it would be impoffible for us to do with all our art and
fcience : For it is a fad; well known, that dogs, who have been
carried by fea from Scotland to London, have found their way
back again by land to the very place from whence they had been
taken away ; and in fo fhort a time, that it was evident they
muft have taken the neareft way : And I have heard a ftory
from a perfon whom I can believe, of a Ship Dog, that is, a
dog bred aboard a fhip, who had been accuftomed always to fail
with the fhip, but having been left by fome accident at Leith
when the fliip failed, found his way acrofs the country to
Lochfine, where the fhip was fifhing for herring. Whether the
dog had ever been there before with the fhip, I could not
learn with any certainty ; but I was allured that he had never
travelled before from Leith to Lochfine by land. I am alfo well
informed of a Tame Serpent, in the Eaft Indies, which belonged to
the late Lord Pigot, and was kept by him in the fuburbs of Ma-
drafs. This ferpent was taken by the French, when they invefted
Madrafs in the laft war, and was carried to Pondicherry in a clofe
carriage. But from thence he found his way back again to his
old quarters, which, it feems, he liked better, though Madrafs be
diftant from Pondicherry above loo miles. This information I have
from a Lady, who was then in India, and had feen the Serpent of-
ten before his journey, and faw him after he returned.
Noi"
Chap. VI. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS.
^97
Nor is it for no purpofe that Nature has given to thefc animals
this wonderful power of Mind ; fince without it they could not car-
ry on their oeconomy, or picferve themfelves and their race. For
this purpofe, Human Intelligence, as 1 have obferved, would not be
fufficient ; nor could the Dog and Serpent, in the inftances 1 have
given, have found their way home, to which Nature had given
them the difpofition to return, if that Intelligence had been their
only guide.
Here, therefore, we have a faculty of Mind, dilTerent from Hu-
man Intelligence and fuperior to it in fome refpeds, beftowed by
the Author of Nature upon the Brutes for enabling them to anfwer
the ends of their being, and to live the life for which they were
deftined by Nature.
Thofe who are not acquainted with the extenfive views which
the antients had of Nature, and who judge of Mind only by the
powers which they fee exerted by the human Mind in its prefent
ftate, do not know what to make of Inftindt, and think it one of
the myfteries of Nature not to be explained. But thofe, who have
ftudied the philofophy of Plato and Ariftotle, know that Nature, as
they define it, comprehends the Brute, as well as the Vegetable and
Bodies unorganized — in fhort, whatever has not Intelligence and
Confcioufnefs. Now, if even Bodies unorganized, Brute and lifelefs
Matter, as it is commonly called, has an inward principle which
governs its motions, and makes them all lublervient to the purpofes
of Nature, there would be fomething very defcdive and anomalous
in Nature, if her nobler produdion, I mean the Animal race, was
not governed by the fame principle. We are not, therefore, to won-
der, that the Animal docs things which cannot be accounted for
from any faculties that we at prefent polTefs, fuch as Senfe, Memo-
ry, Imagination, and Reafoning, provided it appear that thofe
Vol. II. P p things
298 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
things are conducive to the being or well being of the Animal : But,
on the contrary, it would be wonderful if faculties fuperior to ours
were not required to carry on the bufmefs of Nature.
It may be fald that an Inftind, fuch as that of the Dog
and Serpent above mentioned, is not neceflary, either for the pre-
fervation of the Individual, or the continuation of the Kind. But
Nature is fo benevolent, as to intend, not only the prefervation of
Animals, but their pleafure and happinefs. Now, it is well known
what delight the tame and domefticated Animals have, both in the
Men and the other Animals with whom they are brought up, and
what a fondnefs they contradt for their houfe and home : And Na-
ture has been fo kind as to furnifh them with an Inftinft, which en-
ables them to gratify that inclination ; and which not only gives
pleafure and fatisfadtion to ihem*, hut is of great advantage to us; for
without it the animals we have tamed would be of little advantage to
lis, and could hardly be kept by us. It is an inclination fo natural
to the whole animal race, that I think thofe men who have not an
attachment to their natale folum^ their country, family, and friends,
are deficient, even in the animal part of their nature, and ought to
be accounted imperfedt animals, as well as worthlefs intelledlual crea-
tures..
' And here we may perceive that the fame diftindlion, which I have
made betwixt Man and Brute, is to be made betwixt Man and Na-
ture ; for Nature is that which ads without Intelligence, Confciouf-
nefs, or knowing what it is doing, whether in Brute, Vegetable, or
Unorganized Bodies ; being a Principle, which the great Author of
Nature has bellowed upon them, in order to make them fulfil the
purpofes of Nature : Whereas Man has Intelligence, Confcioufnefs,
knows what he does, propofes certain ends, and devifes means to
accomplish thofe ends.
The
• See p. 103. where I have fpokcn of this pleafure which the Brutes *njoy, and
which, I fay, is a pleafure of Mind, and not of Bod^.
Chap. VL ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 299
The operations of this Power ofNaturc,which we call Indind.are fo
wonderfully artificial in feme ani.nals, that I am not furprifcd that a
man not learned in the philofophy of Mind flioulJ believe that they
have Intelligence as well as we. Bclidcs the examples I have already
given, I will give one more, taken from that moft curious little infect^
the greatcfl artift, perhaps, of the Brute kind; I mean the Bee. I be-
lieve nobody will maintain, except it be for the pleafure of difpu-
ting and contradicting, that this animal knows the rules of Geome-
try, by which it makes its hexagons, and joins them together in
fuch a way, that, with the leaft expence of materials, it makes its
cells contain the greateft quantity of honey poiTible, as has been
clearly demonftratcd. it is therefore admitted that the Bee is no
Geometer : But ftill, it may be faid, that the Bee has Intelligence,,
as we fee many men have, though it be not methodiied into Art and
Science. But I aik,Does the Bee know for what endlhe woiks r and
I think we muft anfwer, That fhe does not ; for, if otherwife, we muft
fuppofe that the unorganized Bodies, fuch as falts, which being dif—
folved, form themfelves again into cryftals of figures as regular as the;
cells of the Bees, know for what end they ad, which, I believe, is
more knowledge than any man has. If,^ therefore, the Bee does not
know the end for which fhe ads, ihe certainly does not know that
the means fhe ufcs are fubfervient to that end; and, if fhe knows nei-
ther end nor means, it is clear that fhe has not Intelligence, and alfo
that fhe ads without deliberation, without intention, and neceflarily.
But has fhe not Confc'ioufnefs ? Does fhe not know what fhe is doing ?
— And I fay fhe does not ; for, otherwife, flie would not only have
Intelligence, but that prime faculty of Intelled, by which it recog-
nizes itfelf and its own operations. — In one word, fhe would rejle6l :■
For every Animal, that knows what he is doing, refleds ; a thing which
we ourfelves do not always do : For nothing is more true than what
is commonly faid, that we often ad without knowing what we are
doing. The Bee, however, ads by Intelligence, though fhe has it
not herfelf, but by an Intelligence much fuperior to the human, no
P p a lefs
300 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
lefs Intelligence than the Divine. Nor ought we to be furprifed that
a Being not intelligent fhould a£t intelligently : For it often hap-
pens, even among us who have Intelligence, that we a£t by an In-
telligence fuperior to our own, doing what we are direded to do by
men wifer than we, without knowing for what purpofe we adl.
And this I fay is the cafe of every well governed fociety, where by
far the greater part of the fubjefts a£t by rules, of which they do not
underftand the reafon *.
Tlius, the diftindion betwixt Man and Nature, as well as betwixt
Man and Brute, is manifeft ; as alfo the diftindion betwixt God and
Nature. As to the diftindion betwixt God and Man, it does not
belong to the fubjed now in hand to enter minutely into it. It is
fufficient for my prefent purpofe, to obferve, that man, in this lower
world, is in a kind of middle ftate betwixt God and Nature, fupe-
rior to Nature, in fo far as he has Intelligence in himfelf, and in that
refped participates of the Divine Nature ; but it is an Intelligence
inferior, in infinite degrees, to the Divine f.
But, as Intelledl is latent for a confiderable time in the indivi-
duals among us, and muft have been latent for a very long time,
perhaps for ages, among Savages, it is not to be fuppofed that Na-
ture, in that natural and primitive ftate, would leave us unprovided
with what fhe has fo bountifully beftowed upon other Animals.
"What particular Inftind: Man then had is difficult to fay ; but this we
may be aflured of, that he had all that was necefTary for his being
and well being : But not fo much would be neceflary to him, as to
other
• See what I have faid further upon thisfubjed, vol. i. p. 216.
f See vol. i. book 2. chap 17. where I have defined Nature (p. 218.), and (hown
the difference betwixt God, and Nature, and Man ; and I have alfo faid a good deal
upon this fubjed of Inftind, to which I beg leave to refer the Reader, as alfo to
what I have faid in page 4<5. of this volume.
Chap. VI. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 301-
other Animals, whofe oeconomy is more artificial than that of Man,
his being very fimple, and much refembling that of cattle and horfes.
After he had acquired Intellect, Reafon would, in fome meafure,
fupply the place of Inftindl : And there remains nothing now of
Inftindl among us, except what appears in our infants, before they
have got the ufe of Reafon, fuch as their applying to the brcaft of
the mother for nourifhment. By the ufe of Intellect, and the Arts
and Sciences invented by us, we have formed a fyftem of life al-
together different from the natural ; for the perfection of which we
believe Intelligence alone is fufiicient. But this was not the opinion
of the wifer Antients, who thought that human reafon alone could
not properly conduct human life, without the counfcl and affiftance
of Superior Powers : And this has been fo much the general fenfe
of mankind, that, in all ages, and in all nations, fome methods have
been pradifed to obtain that favour and affiftance. There has, there-
fore, always been religion in the world, grounded upon this perfua-
fion, that Man, with all his fuperior faculties, has not wifdom fuffi-
cient to make himfelf happy : But, as men, the more they dege-
nerate, grow the vainer, they come at laft to believe, that, without
Divine affiftance, by their own wifdom merely, they may be hap-
py ; and in fuch a degenerate ftate, even a philofopher * may arife,
who
* Mr David Hume has been fo kind as to give his countrymen this information,
making it a part of the valuable legacy he has left the public in his pofthuinous
works. See his Dialogues upon Natural Religion, p. 243. where he fays, in fo ma-
ny words, That the profperous and happy times of all nations are thofe in which the
religious fpirit is never regarded or heard of. And for the truth of this he appeals
to hiftory, ami the evidence of fadls. It is true, that he puts this affertion into the
mouth of Philo, the Sceptic in the Dialogue. But that it was really his own opi-
nion, I think is very plain from the whole tenor of his writings ; and, if it were o-
therwife, I ftiould believe him to be intent tonally the greateft enemy of his country.
If this opinion be right, the whole policy of the modern nations of Europe muft be
wrong; and, particularly, our legiflaturc muft be very much miftaken, who have
thought
302 AN TIE NT METAPHYSICS. Book TV.
who will inform them, that, the lefs religion they have, the happier
they are.
thought that the chief fecurity the King has for his crown, ami the fubJecEls for
their lives and properties, is the religion of an oath. And, as to the antient na-
tions, the grcateft among them was the Romans; and they were the mod religious
of men; and though they were excelled, as Cicero tells us, by other nations in o-
ther things, in religion they excelled all men. And while they continued reli-
gious, et nondum ilk, qui nunc tenet fecutum, contemptus Deum venerat, (to ufe an
exprefiion of Livy's), they were the mod flourlihing and powerful nation that ever
exifted. The Greeks, too, were a noble and fine people, excelling in arts and armsj
but they were fo no longer than they continued to be religious ; for, after fuch a
philofophy as Mr Hume's was introduced among them, I mean the Epicurean,
which taught that all religion was vain and unneccffary, they became, as Polybius
informs us, the moft worthlefs and faithlefs of men ; and, particularly, he fays that
they were not to be bound by a thoufand oaths. And, in general, I defy any man
to give me an example of any one nation, fince we have any record of human af-
fairs, that has been happy and flourifhing, renowned for the wifdom of their go*
vernment, and great in arts and arms, that was not religious.
As to what I have faid of Vanity being the fource of irreligion, I think it is evi-
dent, both from the nature of the thing, and from the charadcrs of the men who, in
different ages and nations of the world, have been the great apoftles of Infidelity.
See what I have faid upon this fubjeft, p. 247.
CHAP.
Chap. VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS, 303
CHAP. VIU
A 'wonderful ^ality of Mind not hitherto mentioned. — It exifis in «•
particular Time or Place — is not in the Body, as in a Veflel "which
contains it. — It is, ho'wever, fomewhere, afid in fome time. — // is
in Space and Time, but not as Body is — is converfant "with Objeds
dijlant in Time and Place — therefore mufl exifl in thofe diftant
Times and Places. — Difference bet'wixt us and the Brutes in this
refpefl. — In "what Senfe the Mind is confined to the Body. — Anf-wer
to the Obje^ionof ourfeeing Things at great Difiances. — Difference
bet'wixt our Mind and /^^ Divine in this refpe6l. — The Study of our
O'wn Minds may give us fome Conception even of the Ubiquity of
the Deity. — Of the Kno'w ledge of the Future — notfo different from
the kno'wledge of the PaftrtJ is commonly imagined. — The Brutes have
it in their natural State ajy^r as is neceffary for theOeconomy of their
Lives — they haveit eveninthedovntK\c^\.tdS\.2iK.t. — AFa^ concerning
the Hanoverian Boy. — Alteration made, as to the Divining Power
of the Human Mind, by Society and Civilization. — That Alteration
fill greater m //;f degenerate State of Society. — Of the Difference
bet'wixt the Minds o/" Savages flMJ(?/"Civilized Nations. — Diference
bet'wixt the Animal and Intellectual Minds and the Vegetable.
Neceffity that the Vegetable Part of the Animal fJjould be al-ways
adive, and never abroad. — Thefe Minds have no Situation in any
Part of the Body.
I Will conclude this Book with obferviug a quality of Mind riot
hitherto mentioned, and which, to a reader not accuftomed to
metaphyfical fpeculations, will appear ftill more extraordinary than
any
304 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book IV.
any I have hitherto mentioned : I fay that the Human Mind, even
our Animal Mind, is not confined either to Place or to Time.
As to Place; the general opinion is, that our Mind is confined to
our Body,.which it inhabits while we exift in this life; and it is only
by death that it is releafed from this confinement. Even Ariftotle,
who believed that the Mind was not, by its nature, moveable, has
faid that it is moved by accident, or k«t« (ru/*j3»j3>ixoc, as he ex-
prefTes it *, when the Body is moved ; like a man in a boat, who is
not moved of himlelf, but is moved when the boat is moved '\: From
whence it would appear he thought that the Mind was contained in
or bounded by the Body. If that be true, it muft of neceflity occu-
py Space ; for every thing that is contained in another thing, occu-
pies Space in that other thing. Whereas I maintain, that the Mind
occupies no Space, and therefore is not moved, neither of itfelf, nor
by accident : And, in this refpeit, as well as in every other, it is ef-
. fentially difteient from Body, which muft occupy Space, that is,
muft have a Place, and only one Place at a time.
As to Time, the general opinion is, that the common dlvifion of
Time into Paft, Prefent, and Future, applies to Mind as well as to
Body ; that the Mind has been in the Paft Time, ivill be in the Fu-
ture, and is in the Prefent Time ; but that it is impoffible that the
Mind, in the prefent inftant, Ihould exift in the Paft or the
Future : "Whereas I maintain that the Mind does adlually exift in that
way, however ftrange it may appear ; and in this, as in other re-
fpedls, it eflentially differs from Body, which cannot be conceived
to exift adually but in the prefent inftant.
It
• This is a common expreflion in Ariftotle's philofophy ; and it means that what
happens, is not from the nature of the thing to which it happens, but from fomething
adventitious to it. See what I have further faid on this fubjcft, Vol. i. p. 39. and
292.
% See Vol. i. p. 21. and 791.
Chap. VII. A NT I EN T METAPHYSICS. 305
It will be afked, Where or When Mind exifts ? or ceafe to cxift. But, as the Vegetable Life is always at home,
the
Chap. VII. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 315
the machine flill goes on, in the fame manner as it does in Sleep,
when neither the Senfitive nor Intelledlual Mind is adivc.
I fhall conclude with obferving, that, if this Theory of mine be
right concerning the Animal and the Intelledbual Mind, thofe philo-
fophers and phyficians have loft their labour who have inquired fo
curioufly in what part of the Body thofe Minds were fituated ; for
the fad is, that they have no fituation, becaufe they are not extend-
ed. Even the Vegetable and Elemental Minds, though of degrees
much inferior, yet, not being material, nor confequently extended,
have no fituation, though they be attached to the Bodies which they
animate, in fo far, that they can not only not move any other Bo-
dies, but have no perception of any thing external to thofe Bodies.
Rr 2 BOOK.
3i6 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
BOOK V.
Of the Principles of Sir Isaac Newton's Astronomy.
CHAP. I.
Of Aftronomy, and the difference betivixt it and Phil ofophy.— Sir
Ifaac Newton's Principia a Work o/* Aftronomy, not Philofophy. —
Sir Ifaac, hoivevery has philofophifed concerning /^f beginning and
continuation o/" Motion. — If he is in an error in this Philofophy ^
it belongs to this Work to take notice of it. — Short Account of Sir
Ifaac's Syftem. — The Motion of the Planets co?npofed of 'Pro]Q(Xion
cwi Gravitation — both thefe Poivers ailing in Right Lines. — Their
Elliptical Motion, therefore, to be analyfed into a Polygon of an infi-
nite Number of Sides.— -Sir Ifaac thought that both the Motions
ivere produced by Bodily Impulfe. — Reafons for afferting this to be
his Opinion. — Sir Ifaac, ivhen he ivrote his Principia, did not think
(?/"Mind as a Moving Power; — tivo Reafons for that. — Therefore
made a Machine of the Heavens. — Has laid it doivn that Body is
indifferent to a State of Motion or Reft. — This fubverfive of the
antient Philofophy of the difin5iion betivixt Mind ^«J Body.—
Dangerous alfo to the Syjlem of Theiim, by denying the Providence
of God over the Works of Nature. — 77?^ Mechanical Syftem cannot
be confined to the Heavens, but muf defend to the Earth — muf go
even the length of Dr Prieftley's Philofoph) — But Sir Ifaac's Ma-
chine
Chap. T. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 317
chine of the Heavens, not a perfect Machine— //a^/d' to tivo Dc'
fecls^ ivhich even Human Machinery may be free of.
I WILL conclude this Volume, as I did the laft, with fome obferva-
tions upon the principles of Sir Ifaac Newton's Aftronomy, which I
think are neceffarily connected with what I have faidin the preceding
partof this Volume,concerning the nature of Mind and ZJo^Z/jand of
the Motions produced by them. What is contained in the Appendix to
my Firll Volume, upon this fubjed, I know, is underftood by many
as an attempt to overturn Sir Ifaac's Syftem of Aftronomy ; but, on
the contrary, I think I have endeavoured to eftablifh it upon found
principles of philofophy, and fuch as are confiftent with genuine
Theifm, and the true Religion of Nature ; and if I have fuccecded, I
fhall deferve the thanks of all thofe who admire Sir Ifaac as much as
I do, and, I would fain hope, of the nation that has given him
birth, and to which he does fo much honour.
Aftronomy, fo far as it is a fclence, and not confifting of fads
merely, is nothing but the application of Geometry and Numbers to
the Motion of the Celcftial Bodies, and, in that way, difcovering the
Law^s of their Motion. According to this definition, the jPn;2r//m
of Sir Ifaac Newton is the greateft work of Aftronomy that ever
was written, and he himfelf the greateft Aftronomer that ever lived :
For he has firft, by a moft wonderful indudion, difcovered the laws
of the Planetary Motion, and then has applied thefe Laws, thus dif-
covered, to the calculation of their Motions and the folution of the
Phaenomena concerning them; proceeding in the way that I am per-
fuaded all Sciences have been difcovered and brought to perfedion,
that is, firft by Anahfis, and then by Synthefts. But ftill this is no
more than Aflronomy^ not Philofophy : For Philofophy is the know-
ledge of Caufes ; and however fuccefsfuUy we rjay apply Geome-
try
3i8 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
try and Numbers to the Motions of Bodies, p.nd mcafure and com-
pute ever lb well, yet, if we do not know the Caufcs of thefe Mo-
tions, we are not Fhilofopbcrs.
Neither fhould we confound, as many do, the generalizing of any
Eircvfl with the knowledge of itsCaufe. Though I know that a (lone
falls to the ground, not only here, but every where in Europe, Afia,
and America, yet I am not more learned as to the caufe of it, than it
I knew that it happened only in one fingleinftance : And, in general,
we muft diftinguilh betwixt Natural Hiftory and Philofophy ; for,
though we know ever fo many fads of Natural Hiflory, and their
feveral connexions and relations to one another, yet, if we do not
know their Caufes, we are not philofophers.
Unlefs, therefore, the admirers of Sir Ifaac Newton will maintain
that he was as great aPhilofopher as he was an Aftronomer, Geometer,
Scientifical Mechanic, and accurate obferver of the Phaenomena of
Nature, and particularly that he excelled in Metaphyftcs and the
Firjl Philofophy^ which inveftigates the Firjl Caufes and Principles
of things, they ought not to be alarmed at what I have faid in the
Firft Volume, and fhall further fay in this, upon the fubjed of his
Prhicipia ; nor think that it is an attack that I make upon his Syflem
of Aflronomy ; for it is only concerning the beginning and continuance
of Motion, with which Sir Ifaac fets out in that work, that I find
fault. Now, he may be in an error as to the Cauje of the Motion of
the Planets, and yet be perfedly right as to the Laivs of that Mo-
tion, and may have calculated and meafured it with the greateft de-
gree of exadtnefs. And the candid reader will the more readily ex-
cufe me, that, in my apprehenfion, Sir Ifaac was under no neceflity
at all to fay any thing of the Caufe of the Motion of theCeleftial Bo-
dies, which, as I have faid, belongs to a Science quite different from
Aftronomy. If, therefore, he has gone out of his province as an
Aftronomer, and intrenched upon that of the philofopher, and at
the
I
Chap. r. AN TIE NT xM E T A P H Y S I C S. 319
the fame time, maintained principles that I think dangerous to the
Syftem of Theifm, though, I am perfuaded, without intending it, it
certainly belonged to a work of this kind, the chief purpofe of which
is to maintain that SyRem, to take notice of any error that Sir Ifaac
may have fallen into in this refpedl.
Sir Ifaac's Syftem of the Heavens is, as I underftand it, fhortly
this : The Planets are, by an impulfe, or vis imprejfa, as Sir Ifaac
calls it, fet in Motion ; which Motion continues in a ftraight line, by
virtue of that Power which Sir Ifaac csilh vis in/tta ; and by this
Power it will continue forever to be moved in a ftraight line, unlefs
its Motion be flopped by fome obftacle, or unlefs it be adled upon
by fome other Power. In this way, the planets would have gone
on forever in a redlilineal couife, as our author hasfaid in his intro-
dudlion to that abridgment of his philofophy, which he has given
under the title of ' The Syftem of the World: But, in order to pro-
duce their Elliptical Motion, he fays that another Power is employed,
which he calls the Vis Centripeta, by which the Planet is carried out
of the Redlilineal Diredlion, towards a certain point, as its Centre.
How this Power ads upon the Body, whether by Pulfion or Tru-
fion, by propelling or by drawing it. Sir Ifaac has not explained in
the Definition he has given of it ; which is in thefe words, * Vis
* ccntripeta eft, qua corpora verfus pundlum aliquod, tanquam ad
* centrum, undique trahuntur, impelluntur, vel utcunque tendunt.'
But, in the demonftration he has given of the effeds of this Centri-
petal Force in the firft propofition of the fecond fedion of the tlrft
book of his Principia, he fuppofes it to ad, not by drawing, but by
impulfe; for his exprefTion is, ' Agat vis centripcta impulfounicofed
' raagno, efiiciatque ut corpus de reda declinet.' And his dodrinc
of Prime and Ultimate Ratios, which he has explained in the firft fec-
tion of his fecond book, is chiefly intended for the purpofe of ihowing
how a Circle or Ellipfi? may be analyfed into a Polygon of an infi-
nite
320 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
nite number of fides *, always increafing in number and decreafing
in length, till at laft they become evanefcent, as he exprefles it ;
and, if it can be fo analyfed, it muft be fo compounded.
From this account of Sir Ifaac's Syftem, I think, it is evident, and,
indeed, it is admitted by all his followers, that he underftood the
Motion of iheCeleftial Bodies to be actually compounded of a tenden-
cy to go on in a Straight Line, and a tendency towards the Centre ;.
or, as he exprefTed it, of a Centrifugal and a. Centripetal Force ; or,
as it is more commonly exprefled, of Proje£lion and Gravitation.
2^0, Further, I am of opinion that Sir Ifaac, when he wrote his
Principia, believed that both Motions were produced by bodily im-
pulfe ; for, though Sir Ifaac was undoubtedly a Theifl, and therefore
believed that God was ultimately the Author of all Motion in the
univerfe, yet he appears to have thought that the Motions of this our
Syftem were produced immediately by Bodily Impulfe, and car-
ried on by Matter and Mechanifm merely, without the inter-
vention of the Supreme Mind, or of any other. And, as this
Mechanical Motion was to continue forever, or for a very
long time, without the immediate adtion of any Power, whe-
ther of Body or Mind, he has fet out with eftablifhing, by his firft
axiom, the perpetuity of Motion once begun by a Vis Imprejfa. This
would have been altogether unneceffary, if he had not wanted to
make our Solar Syftem go on of itfelf after it was once fet agoing.
But, as I know many of the Newtonians are unwilling to believe
that Sir Ifaac's Syftem is fo Mechanical as I have rep»refented it, I will
give my rcafons for fo thinking.
And, to begin with the Vis Imprejfa producing the projedile Mo-
tion of the Planets, which, according to the firft axiom, is to laft for-
ever
• Ste :*hat 1 have further faid upon this fubjc£l, Vol. I. p, 525.
Chap. I. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. 321
ever in a ftraight line, when once begun. — This firfl: axiom, I muft
fuppofe, applies to the Motion of the Planets : And, indeed, Sir Ifaac
fo applies it himfelf, in his oblervations upon it ; nor could it other-
wife have flood, with any propriety, at the head of his fyftem of
Aftronomy. Now, as I prefume that Sir Ifaac knew fo much of the
nature of Mind, as to believe it to be an immaterial fubftance, I can-
not fuppofe that he would have ufed the words Vis Imprcjfa or hn-
pulfus^ to exprefs the Aclion of Mind upon Body ; for it is impof-
fible to conceive that an Immaterial Subftance can adl upon Body by
Pulfion, Trufion, PrelTure, or, in Ihort, in any way in which Body
ads upon Body *. I therefore underftand this firft axiom to relate to
Motion produced by Bodily Impulfe only, fuch as is the Motion of
Proje£tiles here on earth ; but I do not underftand it, for the reafons
above mentioned, to be confined to the Motion of Projedtiles, but to
be underftood likewife of the Motion of the Planets, which, there-
fore, Sir Ifaac fuppofes to be produced by Bodily impulfe, as Projec-
tiles here are moved.
2^0, Astother/j Centripeta^ which produces the Motion of Gravi-
tation, if It be admitted that the Vis Imprejfa is Bodily Impulfe, I think
it is impofllble to deny that the Vis Centripeta is fo likewife, in the
language of Sir Ifaac ; for, in his fourth definition, he confiders it as
a fpecies of the Vis Imprejfa : His words are, ' Eft autem Vis Imprejfa
* diverfarum Originum, ut ex I6iu^ ex Prejlone, ex Vi Centripeta ;'
where we may obferve that he joins it with I^us and Prejfio^ by
•which words he never could have meant to exprefs the adtion of
Mind upon Body. And, in his fifth definition, he applies to it the
words dranving and impelling^ which can only be underftood of the
adion of Body upon Body. In the demonftration above mentioned,
of the firft propofition of the fecond fedion of his firft book, he is
Vol. II. S s more
• See this explained at more length, page 47.
322 ANT IE NT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
more prcclfc in the account he gives of its manner of operating ; for
he fiiys that it afts Unico Impulfu, that is, in the very fame way that
the Projedlile Force adts, with this difference only, that the Projedlile
Force adts but once, whereas the Adtion of the Vis Centr'ipeta is in-
cefliintly repeated, as he fuppofes in that demonftration. It is there-
fore not to be wondered that Sir Ifaac endeavoured, as it is well
known, to account for Gravitation from Bodily Impulfe. And if he
believed Gravitation to be fo produced, there can be little doubt
of his having the fame opinion concerning Projedtion ; for, as Gra-
vitation adts inceflantly upon Bodies, and fo far refembles per-
fedtly the Adlion of Mind upon Body, (for which reafon it is now
admitted, I believe, by all the Newtonians, that Gravitation is the
operation of Mind), if Sir Ifaac believed that it was produced by
Bodily Impulfe, he muft, a fortiori, have believed that the Projedtile
Force, which adls only by one Impulfe, is produced by Body.
3/io, If Sir Ifaac, when he wrote his Principia, had thought of
any other Motion befides that produced by Bodily Impulfe, he
would not have fuppofed, as he appears to have done, that all Mo-
tion is, by its nature, redtilineal. Upon this hypothefis, as I have
obferved. Sir Ifaac's whole Syftem is built; and the Jefuits, his com-
mentators, have laid it down in fo many words in their Commen-
tary upon the Firft Law of Motion ; from which they fay it follows,
Omnem mo turn ejfe Naturafua aequabilem et reSiilineum. Now, this is
undoubtedly true of Motion produced by Bodily Impulfe, but is cer-
tainly not true of Motion by Mind, which being produced by incef-
fant energies, the diredtion of it may be varied in every inftant of
the Motion ; and confequently the Circular or Elliptical Motion may
be immediately and diredily produced by Mind, of which every
body may convince himlelf by the Motion of his hand in the air or
upon the table *.'
And,
* Sea upon this fubjeft, page 48.
Chap. I. A N T I E N T M K T A P H Y S I C S. 323
And, hijlly, if Sir Ifaac had believed, as Dr Clarke did, that the
Motion of the celeftial Bodies was carried on by X.\\t conftant agency
of Mind, and not by viitue of any original impulfe*, he never could
have thought either of a Vis Imprejfa, or of a Vis Infita, by which he
fuppofes the Motion to be continued after the Vis Imprejfa, orthe/w-
pulfcy has ceafed ; for both of thefe are entirely unneceflary, accor-
ding to Dr Clarke's Syftem and mine. Nor would he ever have
thought of the Eternity of Motion, which he has laid down in his
firfl: Axiom : For he would have known that, if the Motion be car-
ried on by Mind, it will laft as long as the Mind continues to a£l:
upon the Body ; and that will be as long as it pleafes the great Au-
thor of Nature, and is fuited to the Syftem of the Univerfe.
I will therefore venture to affirm, that Sir Ifaac, while he
was writing his Principia, had no thought of Motion by Mind,
but only confidered Motion by Body : And, however extra-
ordinary and unaccountable this may feem, there are two rea-
fons that may be given for it. In the firft place, the Motion
produced by Bodily Impulfe is the mod obvious to Senfe ; and,
indeed, the only Motion of which we can, by our Senfes, per-
ceive the Caufe : Whereas the Caufe of the other Motion cannot
be perceived by any Senfe, and is only difcovered, as I have elfe-
where obferved, by Confcioufnefsf, with which Geometers and Me-
chanics have nothing to do. id/jr. The Mechanical Phyfics were
fo much in fafhion at the time Sir Ifaac wrote, and tlie Philo-
fophy of Mind and of Nature were confidered to be fo perfectly di-
ftindt, that, if Sir Ifaac had endeavoured to account for the Motions
of the Celeftial Bodies by Mind, no body would have liftened to
him. All, therefore, he could do, in the ftate he found Philofophy,
was to deliver the Heavens from the Vortices of Des Cartes ; but, in
place of them, he was obliged, by the opinions of the times and the
S s 2 preju-
• See Vol. I. p. 512,
t Page 47.
324 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V,
prejudices of men, to fubftltute two other Mechanical Powers in the
place of them, viz. Projection and Gravitation.
It would be faying too much, if I faid that Sir Ilaac had no Idea
of Body being moved by Mind, fince he, no doubt, believed that
God was the Author of all the Motions in the Univerfe : But I
think it is evident that he had no notion of the Planets being fo
moved ; and I hope I (hall be forgiven if I fay that I do not think
Sir ll'aac, when he wrote his Principia, had any clear conception of
the way in which Mind moves Body, or the difference there is be-
twixt the manner in which Mind moves Body, and Body moves Body*.
To
• Whoever reads the following paffage in the Principia, will, I am fure, forgire
me for this affertion. It is where he is fpeaking of Attradlion or Gravitation,
•which, I believe, every Newtonian now allows to be produced by the immediate
and conftant agency of Mind : * Vocem attra^ianis, hie generaliter ufurpo pro
' corporum conatu quocunque accedendi ad invicem : Sive conatus ifte fiat ab aftione
* corporum, vel fe mutuo petentium, vel per fpiritus emiflbs fe invicem agitan-
* tium ; five is ab a£tione .^thcris, aut Aeris, mediive cujufcunque, feu corpirei
* {tu incorporei, oriatur, corpora innatantia in fe invicem utcunque irapellcntis ;'
Principia, lib. \. fe3. II. Scholium. Where I think the ftrange Notion, of Bodies
floating in an incorporeal medium which impells them towards one another,
fhows evidently that Sir Ifaac had not, at leaft when he began this work of the
Principia, any clear Idea, I believe, I may fay any Idea at all, of the manner in
which Mind moves Body. But, not only when he wrote the Queries to his Op-
tics, but even before he finiflied his Principia, he appears to me to have difcovered
that Mechanical Caufes could not account for the Motions in the Univerfe, — that
Mind mud be neceffarlly employed, and that it a£ls upon Body in a manner very
different from that in which Body adts upon Body; for, in his Scholium Generate,
fubjoined to his Principia, fpeaking of this fame Gravitation, he has thefe words :
* Oritur ut que haec vis a caufa aliqua quae penetrat ad ufque centrum Solis et
* Planetarum, fine virtutis diminutione ; quaeque agit, non pro quantitatc fuperfi-
' cierum particularum in quas agit, (ut folent caufae Mechanicac), fed pro quanti-
' tale Mciteriae Solidae " What I hsve faid in the courfe of this work, and {hall
further fav, upon the difference betwixt Mechanical Motion and Motion by Mind,
may be corrfidered as little more than a Commentary upon thefe words ; and, in-
deed, when to them I join what he has faid in his Queries, of which more after-
wards, 1 can have little doubt but thit I agree with Sir Ifaac, at leaft with his latter
thoughts, in my Philofophy concerning the Principle of Motion in the Univerfe.
Chap. I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 325
Tc know this belongs to the Philofophy of Mind, and to tliat Fird
Ph'.lofophy which diftinguilhcs accurately betwixt Body and Mind,
and fhows the different natures of each. Now, there are not any
two Sciences more different than Geometry or Mechanics, in which
Sir Ifaac exceeded all men, and the Philofophy of Mind, in which
he might have excelled too, if he had applied to it, which he had
not done when he wrote his Principia ; at leaft, it is not to be dif-
covered from that work, where there is nothing but Geometry and
Mechanics, Menfuration and Calculation. Nor, indeed, does he fay
any thing pofitively concerning the Caufe of the Planetary Motion ;
and it is only by inference and dcdudlion from his manner of rea-
foning concerning their Motion, that we fuppofe he believed their
Motion to be produced by Bodily Impulfe. It is only in the Scho-
lium Generale, quoted in the preceding note, that he gives fo much
as a hint that he knew any Caufe of Motion that was not mechani-
cal. But, in his Queries fubjoined to his Optics, he has been more
explicit ; and there, I think, I have fhown, and fhall further fhow
in the fequel, that he faid Mind was the Caufe of the Motions of the
Univerfe.
From what I have faid, I think it Is evident that the Mo-
tions of the Celeftial Bodies are, according to Sir Ifaac's no-
tions when he wrote his Prmcipia, mechanical. He therefore has
made a Machine of our Solar Syflem ; for, whatever Motion
goes on of itfelf by the Power of Body merely, is, as I have
fhown clfewhere *, a Machine, in the proper ki\{e of the word,
even fuppofing, as I am perfuaded Sir Ifaac did fuppofe, that the
Motion proceeded originally from Mind. In order to carry on tliis
Mechanical Motion, he has laid it down as an axiom, that Body is
indifferent to a ftate of Motion or Reft, and has no natural determi-
nation to the one any more than to the other; fo that, being once put
in Motion, it continues in Motion by the fame neceflity of its na-
ture,
* See Pages 501. and 502. Vol. I. where, I think, I have explained this matter
diftinttly and fcientitically.
326 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
ture, as It continued at reft; before it was moved *. If this be true,
there is an end of the antient philofophy, which I have endeavoured
to maintain in this and the preceding Volume, and of the diftindion
I have made betwixt Mind and Body, by which I make Mind to be
the only moving Power in the univcrfe, whereas Body is that
which only is moved, and which, by its nature, is abfolutely inca-
pable of moving itfelf, or of either beginning or continuing Motion.
As this diftindion is the foundation of my whole Philofophy, and
as it is undoubtedly a metaphyfical queftion of very great impor-
tance, What is the Caufe of the continuation of Motion ? which ne-
ver can be properly determined, without knowing accurately the
nature of Body, and wherein it differs eflentially from Mind, I hope
the reader will not think that, from the vanity and affedation of
matching myfelf with fuch an antagonift as Sir Ifaac Newton, I have
gone out of my way, when I have endeavoured to defend my Philo-
fophy againft principles that are entirely fubverfive of it, and to
fhow that Sir Ifaac has not rightly determined this metaphyfical
queftion concerning the continuation of Motion.
If any further apology were neceflary for my differing from Sir
Ifaac, I think I can fay that the Syftem of Theifm, to maintain
which, as I have faid, is the principal defign of this work, is materi-
ally concerned : For, if it be admitted that our Solar Syftem has
gone on for fix thoufand years ^ without the agency of any Mind,
Supreme
* This is evident from Sir Ifaac's definition of the Fis Infita, which is in thefe
words : • Materiae Vis Infita cfl potcntia refiftendi, qua corpus unumquodque,
' quantum in fe eft, perfeverat in ftatu fuo vel quiefcendi vel movendi uniformiter
' in diredlum.* So that, according to Sir Ifaac, by the fame neceflity of its nature.
Matter or Body, for he does not diftinguifli thefe two, refts, or is in Motion ;
whereas, it is a fundamental maxim of the philofophy I defend, that Body is, by its
nature, abfolutely pafTive and inactive, fo that Motion is altogether foreign to its
nature, and adventitious, proceeding from a thing whofe nature and efllnce it is
to move, as much as it is the nature and eflcnce of Body to be at reft.
Chap. I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 327
Supreme or Subordinate, it will be impofTible to convince the A-
theifts that it might have not fo gone on forever j nor will he be e-
verperfuaded to make the diftindion the Newtonians make, betwixt
the beginning and the continuation of Motion, that is, betwixt the
firft remove of the Body from the place that it occupied when the
Motion began, and its after removes from the feveral places which
it fucceffively occupies in the courfe of the Motion. Even the
Theifts of old, fuch as Ariftotle, who maintained the eternity of
the Material World, would tell us that this dodtrinc of the con-
tinuance of Motion made Deity quite ufclefs in the bufinefs of
Nature ; and that we might as well remove the Gods out of the
world altogether, and place them in certain intermundane Spa-
ces, as Epicurus did, who, therefore, according to a very juft ob-
fervation of Cicero, took away the Gods in faft and reality, and
only left them in words. And, indeed, I cannot help faying that,„
to deny the Providence of God over all his works, and his adual
prefence by Himfelf, or by Subordinate Minds, in all the operations
of Nature, and, particularly, in the Motions of the Celeftial Bodies,
which we fo much admire, and which declare, more than any thing
elfe, the glory of the Lord, is to take away the better part of Reli-
gion, and that which muft have the greateft influence upon the
minds of men *.
But this Mechanical Philofophy cannot, I think, be confined to
the Celeftial Regions, but it muft come down to Earth, and go
through all Nature ; for, if the great Motions of the Univerfe are
Mechanical, what fhall we fay of the lefFer Motions here on Earth,
fuch
* Sec what I ha»e further faid upon this fubjeft, Vol. I. page 498. It was in
this fcnfe of Religion and Providence, that Cicero fays, and, I think, moft tru-
ly, that his countrymen excelled all the nations then known. After enumerating
other things, in which other nations excelled them, he adds, * Sed Pietate et Reli-
* gione, atque hac una Sapientia, quod Deorum immortalium numine omnia P^egi
' Gubernariquc perfpeximus, omnes gentes nationefquc fuperavimus.' Orattj di-
jlrufpicum Refponfis.
328 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
fuch as the Magnetic, Ele£lrical, and Chymical Attradions and Re-
pulfions ? Muil not the Motions of Plants and Annuals, their Or-
ganization, Generation, and regular Succeflion, be produced alfo
by one fingle iinpulfe, according to the philofophy of Des Cartes : And
muft not Man likewife be a machine, according to the philofophy of the
AbhePrade* andDr Prieftley ; for their philofophy is nothing elfe but
Materialifm carried to its full extent : And 1 think Dr Prieftley has
fome reafon to boaft, as he does, that he is a perfed Materialift ;
whereas the other Philofophers of this age are only Demi-Materia-
lifts : And I agree with him alfo, that thofe who maintain there is a
Mind in Man, but not in other Bodies in this Univerfe, are but
Demi-Spirituaiifts. How different is this Syftem of Philofophy
from the Antient Philofophy of Mind, and the dodtrine of Theifm
as delivered by Cicero in his Tufculan Queftions, where he tells us
that, without Mind, this goodly frame of Nature could not fubfift a
moment ; ' a truth,' fays he, 'which ail the Plebeian philofophers (fo
* I call all thofe that differ from Socrates, Plato, and that family,)
' can never overturn +.'
But, fuppofmg that the Mechanical Syftem could be confined to
the Celeftial Regions, (and I do not know that the Newtonians at
prefent carry it farther, though Sir Ifaac has faid fomething tending
that way, as I have elfewhere obferved if, which I wifh he had not
faid), the Machine of the Heavens ought to be a moft perfed one,
and worthy of its great Author. But this is far from being the
cafe.
In
* See concerning him, Vol. I. page 499 ; and concerning Dr Prieftley, p. 58.
of this Volume.
+ See the pafFage quoted at length, Vol. I. page 202.
% See Vol. I. page 547. and page 275. where Sir Ifaac's words are quoted in the
end of the Principia. There he fays, that even Senfation, and the voluntary Motion
of Animals, are produced by a moft fubtile Spirit, which pervades grofs Bodies,
and is latent in them.
Chap. I. A N T I E N T METAPHYSICS. ^29
In order to make a machine perfcd: and complete, two things are
nccefTarily required : i/?, Tliat the Moving Power fhould never
fail, fo that the machine may not flop for want of it ; 2^//, That
the machinery fhould iiot be difordered or deranged by the adtion,
or interference, of the fcveral parts with one another. And accor-
dingly, even a machine of human invention, if it be well contri-
ved, will not flop through either of thcfe defedts. And what hi-
therto has rendered a Perpetuiim Mobile impofhblc to be contri-
ved by human art, is the fridtion of the parts upon one another, and
the necefTary tear and wear thereby produced. This defedt of hu-
man machinery we cannot conceive the Celeflial Bodies liable to.
But we are to confider, whether the Heavenly Machine may not
have the two defedts above mentioned, from which even a machine
of human invention may be exempted.
And, firjl, as to the Moving Power, which is two-fold ; either
Gravitation, or the Projedlile Force. As to Gravitation, if it were
the Operation of a Fluid, as Sir Ifaac fuppofed it might pofTibly be,
it is not eafy to fay whether it would ever ceafe or not, Sir Ifaac
never having fufhciently explained the nature of this fluid, which
he only fuppofed might exifl. On the other hand, if this Power be
Mind, as is no\v generally agreed by the Newtonians, it is evident
that it can never ceafe, except by the Will of the Great Author of
Nature, upon whom every thing muft depend for its prefervation
and continuance, as well as for its exiflence at firfl j but, as to the
other Moving Power, the Projedlile Force by which the Celeflial
Bodies are to be carried on forever, it is evident that it mufl be de-
creafmg every moment, and mufl at laft ceafe altogether. This, in-
deed, could not happen, according to Sir Ifaac's hypothefis of the
eternity of Motion once begun, if it were true, as he fuppofes,
that there was a perfedl vacuum in the celeflial regions. And, ac-
VoL. II. T t cordingly,
^3o ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
cordingly, he has faid that the planets will revolve perpetually in
their orbits *. But this is certainly not the cale ; for there is light
there, which is undoubtedly a Body, however fubtile, and, there-
fore, muH; refirt more or lefs, and confequently retard the Motion,
and, at laft, make it ceafe altogether.
But, sJ/y, This is not all ; for Sir Ifaac's Machine, by his own
confeflion, has the other defeat of the machinery being fo ill con-
trived, that it diforders and deranges itfelf ; for he has told us, that
the planets difturb one another's motions, and the comets the mo-
tions of them all ; and, therefore, he has been obliged to admit, that
his fyftem will require the mending hand of the Creator. This is a
conceflion which the foreign philofophers have laid hold of, parti-
cularly Mr Leibnitz, (as appears from the letters of correfpondence
that paffed betwixt him and Dr Clarke), to which no good anfwer
has been given, or can be given, upon the fuppofition that the folar
fyftem is a machine. But, if it be true, as I fuppofe, that the Pla-
nets are all moved by the immediate agency of Mind, we ought not
to fay that there is any difturbance or diforder in their Motions ;
but that fuch irregularities, as we perceive in thefe motions, are all in
confequence of general laws, and for fome good purpofe, though we
cannot tell what it is. And the fame is to be faid of the changes we
obferve in the heavens, which, though they may portend fome alte-
ration of the prefent fyftem, or may be fuppofed to prepare the way
for a new heaven and a new earth, are not to be accounted defeds or
irregularities, but parts of the grand plan of the univerfe, formed by
Infinite Wifdom, and which, I am perfuaded, has its periods and re-
volutions, as \ve fee every thing on earth has, though it is likely by
much flower degrees : For every thing in the material world exifts
by change and fuccefTion ; nor is there any thing fixed and immove-
able, except the Eternal One.
Thus,
• See the paffage quoted. Vol. I. p. 533.
Chap. I. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 331
Thus, I think, I have proved, that tlie progreffive Motion of the
Planet, in its Orbit, is mechanical ; and, further, that it is not perfed of
the kind. But there is another Motionof the Planet, different from the
Progreffive Motion, which is alfo mechanical, according to Sir Ifaac's
Syftcm, and liable to the fame dcfedl : The Motion I mean is that
on its Axis, which the Newtonians fay is alfo produced by a Pio-
jedile Impulfe, fo that the Planet being once fet a fpinning, like a
top, continues for ever to do fo, without any agency of Mind*.
This makes the Machinery of the Heavens not a little complicated :
And, if the Planetary Motion, in all its parts, is underftood to be pro-
duced by Bodily Impulfe, there muft, I doubt, be three Bodies em-
ployed ; one to give the progreflive Impulfe, by which the Planet is
carried round in its Orbit ; one to give it the Centripetal Motion ;
and a third to give it the Motion on its Axis.
Nor do I think that the matter will be much mended, by fuppo-
fmg, as I believe all the Newtonians now do, that one of the Mo-
tions, viz. the Motion of Gravitation, is produced by the conftant
agency of Mind : But, on the contrary, I think it makes the Ma-
chinery more perplexed and intricate, and Sir Ifaac's Syftem much
lefs regular and uniform than it would otherwife be ; for, according
to this hypothefis, two parts of the Motion of the fame Planet are
produced by Bodily Impulfe, and the third part by Mind. So
complicated a Syftem feems to be far removed from that wonderful
T t 2 ^ fimplicity
• Sir Ifaac, in his explanation of his Firft Law of Motion, has thefe words :
' Tiochus, cujus partes cohaerendo perpetuo retrahunt fefe a motibus reQilineis,
* non ceffat rotari nifi quatenus ab ai:re rctardatur." And this theory of the Mo-
tion of a wheel he applies to^the Motion of the Planets in the following words :
' Majora autem planetarum ct cometarum corpora, motus fuos, et progrefTivcs et
* circulares, in fpatiis minus refiflentibus fa£los, confervant diutius.' But, as to
the duration of the Planetary Motion, he exprefll-s himfelf much more ftrongly in
h\& Scholium Generate : ' Corpora omnia in iflis fpatiis liberrime moveri debent ;
' et propterea Planetae et Cometae, in Oibibus fpecie et pofitione datis, fccundum
' leges fupra expofitas perpetuo revolvi.'
332 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
fimpliclty which we obfervc in the works of Nature, where nothing-
is produced by feveral caufes, that can poffibly be produced by one.
Nor is Sir Ifaac's Syftem lefs mechanical, for this amendment, as it
is fuppofed to be, that has been made upon it by his followers : For
it is ftill true, that the Motion of the Planets is carried on by the
Power of Matter and Mechanifra merely ; becaufe the Centripetal
Motion, or Motion of Gravitation, only gives a diredion to the
Motion of the Planet, but does not carry it on.
CHAP.
Chap. TI. ANT I EN T METAPHYSICS. :iii
CHAP. 11.
Comparifon betrvixt the antient and modern Materialijh. — Sir Ifaac's
FirftLaw o/"Motion, the Foundation of all the Mechanical Philofo-
phy of modern Times. — Ought therefore to be mofl carefully exami-
ned.— That this yJxiom /honld not be knoivn to the Antient s^ extra-
ordinary.— To judge of the Truth of it^ belongs to the Firft Philofo-
phy. — Of the Nature o/" Motion; — a thing of conjlant Change and
SuccefTion. — Reft, the oppoftte 0/ Motion. — Improper, to apply the
fame Terms, atid drazv the fame ConcluJionSy concerning Oppofites. —
Other Improprieties of Expreffion by zvhich moving and being mo-
ved, are confounded, and Vis Inertiae applied to Body in a State
©/"Reft and in Motion. — Of the fe'veralWays in ivhich the Motion
can befuppofed to be carried on after the hnpulfe has ceafed. — Thefe
are four. — // is generally underflood by the New'tonians to go on by
Virtue of one of thefe, viz. Impulfe. — ^fo, Sir Ifaac's Term of
Vis Infita, unnecejfary and improper; — not to be underflood of
Mind. — The Firft Law of Motion not a general Propofition, be-
caufe not applicable to Motion begun by Mind — only to Motion be-
gun by Body — nor to all Motion of that kind — only to Pulfion. —
Biflinclion betivixt Pulfion and Trufion. — Two kinds of Trufion
alfo to be difinguifloed. — Similarity betivixt Motion by Mind, and
Motion by Trufion. — ObjecTion, that there can be no Motion by Tru-
fion in Vacuo, anfivercd.^
IN the preceding Chapter, I think I have fliown, that the Ma-
chine which Sir Ifaac has made of the Heavens, fo complicate
and intricate, and which is moft extraordinary, and without ex-
ample.
334 ANT I EN T METAPHYSICS. Book V.
ample in Nature or Art, in this refped, that it continues to be
moved after the imoving power has ceafed to a£t, and goes on of it-
felf, and forever too, without the agency of either Body or Mind,
is a Machine very imperfe£l and defedive, and altogether unworthy
of its Great Author. — But, fuppofe the reader fhould differ from me
in this, and believe that Sir Ifaac's Machine is perfedly well contri-
ved, I would have him ferioufly confider whether a man, who can
behold
Hunc Soktn et Stellas^ et decedentia certis
7'empora monientis Ho RAT.
and can obferve all the wonderful Motions of the Celeftial Bodies,
fo conftant and regular, and yet fo various, and believe them all to
be carried on by mere Matter and Mechanifm, ought to be account-
ed a perfedt Theift, as he does not believe in what I hold to be the
better part of Theifm, that which maintains the Providence of God
over all his works. For my own part, I cannot think that man truly
religious, who has not a fenfe of a prefent Deity in the works of
Nature, as well as in the affairs of men *.
The foundation, not only of Sir Ifaac's Mechanical Syftem of the
Heavens, but of Des Cartes's Mechanical Syftem both of Heaven
and Earth, and, in general, of the whole Mechanical Philofophy,
is Sir Ifaac's Firft Law of Motion, which ought therefore to be
moft fcrupuloufly examined by every genuine Theift, who, though
he may have ever fo great a regard for Sir Ifaac as an Aftronomer
and Geometer, yet, if Sir Ifaac has thought proper, in complai-
fance, as I have faid, to the prejudices of the times, to put his A-
ftronomy upon Pilnciples inconfiftent with the dodlrine of Theifm,
he ought not, for that reafon, to adopt thefe principles, more efpeci-
ally if I can fhow, as I hope I fliall do in the fequel, that Sir Ifaac's
Aftronomy can be fupported without the aid of them.
The
* See further upon this fubjecl, Vol. i p. 498.
Chap. II. A N T 1 E N T METAPHYSICS, 335
The propofitiou is thus exprefled by Sir Ifaac : * Corpus omnc
' perfcvcrat in ftatu fuo quiefcendi vel movendi uniformiter in di-
* redlum, nifi quatenus a yiribus impreffis cogitur (latum ilium mu-
' tare.' The propofition, thus exprefled, I believe, would be hardly
vmderftood by an antient Roman * ; but, to us, who are accuftomcd
to the modern philofophical Latin, very different from that of Ci-
cero, it is intelligible enough, and may be thus rendered into Eng-
lifh : ' All Bodies perfevcre in their fl:ate, whether of Reft, or of
* Motion uniformly in a ftraight line, unlcfs in fo far as, by fome
' force imprefled upon them, they are obliged to change that ftate.'
This propofition, which Sir Ifaac calls an Axiom, and lays down
as the foundation of his whole Syftem, aflerts, that Body, once put in
Motion by the impulfe of another Body, (for fo I underftand the
Axiom, for the reafon given in the preceding Chapter), will con-
tinue always to be moved in a ftraight line till its Motion be flop-
ped, or altered, by fomething foreign or extrinfic to it. And in this
refpeft Reft and Motion are faid by Sir Ifaac to be governed by the
fame law ; for he fays, as the Body continues at Reft till it be mo-
ved by fomething extrinfic to it, fo it alfo continues in Motion till it
be ftopped in the fame way.
And here it muft, at firft fight, appear very extraordinary, that
an Axiom, fuch as this is faid to be, (that is, a Propofition, the truth
of which is immediately acknowledged by every man of common
fenfe, though uninftrudted in any art or fcience), fliould not have
been known to any of the antients. It is, I think, degrading the
antients lower than hitherto they have been degraded by the great-
eft vanity of modern times, to fuppofe that they were ignorant even
of Axioms and Firft Principles. Now that the antients knew no-
thing
• See what I have faid concerning the language of this PropofrtioD, Vol. i.
page 530.
33<3 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
thing of this Axiom, as it is called, the negative argument would be
fufficient to prove. That there is nothing like it to be found in all the
writings, or in any accounts, that we have of the opinions of their
philofophers concerning natural things. But, befides this, there is
pofitive evidence that Ariftotle at lead knew nothing of the matter.
This appears from a paffage above quoted concerning Dreams, and
from another in his book De Naturali Aufcultatione *.
But this propofition, whether true or falfe, is fo far, in my ap-
prehenfion, from being an Axiom, that it is impoffible to judge of
the truth of it, without knowing accurately the nature both of Body
and of Mind, and likewife of Motion ; to know whicTi certainly
does not belong either to Geometry or Mechanics, nor to any other
Science, except the Firfi; Philofophy. And therefore Sir Ifaac, in
beginning his Syftem of Aftronomy with this propofition, has gone
out of the limits of his Science, as much as Euclid would have done,
if he had begun his Elements with the definition of Quantity, of
Body, or of Magnitude. I do not, however, blame Sir Ifaac for
this, as I hold the principles of all fciences to be founded in Meta-
phyfics, or the Firfl Philofophy ; but, on the contrary, I commend
him for laying the foundations of his Science fo deep, and giving
the reader fo much information, which he certainly was not obliged
to give him, — if the propofition be true.
In examining the truth of it, I will begin with confidering the
nature of Motion, which is the fubjedt of it. For this purpofe, I do
not think it is neceflary to have recourfe to Ideas of fo high ab-
flradion, as Poiver and Energy, by which Ariftotle has defined
Motion t ; but it will be fufficient to mention that Quality of it,
,, ,. -T which
'f jf«i 1
• Pages 246. and 251. The other paffage is in his Fourth Book, De Naturali
Ju/cultatitne, parag. 8. From which, and the Commentary of Simplicius upon it,
page 157, it is evident that he had no notion, either of the impulfe, after it had
ceafed, being the Caufe of the Motion of Projediles, or that the Motion continues
forever : The way he accounts for the continuation of it, fo long as it continues, is
from the Prefl"ure of the Air upon the Body in Motion, as I have explained at fome
length, page 246.
f Vol. I. chap. 3.'
Chap. II. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. ^^^
which is fo obvious to common fenfe and obfervatlon, and which e-
vcry body muft acknowledge to be effential to it ; I mean Change of
Place, and Succeflive and Continued Change ; for Motion is a thing
of conftant change and fucceffion. The firft change, from Reft tft
Motion, is not more a change than the change from Motion to Reft,
or any of the intermediate changes. It is true, indeed, that the
firft change from Reft to Motion, or the laft from Motion to Reft,
affeds the Senfes more, and therefore is more diftindtly perceived
than the intermediate changes : IJut thefe are not for that the lefs
real. Motion, therefore, is, like TimCj a thing confifting of parts,
which have no co-exiftence. And, in this refpeift, Motion is eflen-
tially different from quantity coutinuous, or magnitude, which is di-
vlfible likewife into parts infinite in number ; but thcfe parts are co-
exifteut-
The very oppofite of Motion is Reft ; for the very definition of
Reft is, that there is no Change of Place : It is, therefore, by its
nature, a permanent and fi.Ked thing.
This being the nature of thefe two things, it muft appear, at firft
fight, very extraordinary that the fame term fliould be applied to
both, and that we (hould hear of ^7?^/^ both of Motion and of Reft.
A State of Reft every body muft underftand, becaufe Reft is, by its
nature and eflence, a fixed and permanent thing : But the State of
a thing, which exifts only by fucceflion, and whofe very nature and
eflence confifts in Change, is, I think, impoffible to be underftood.
We might, with the fame propriety, fpeak of a ftate of Tittle, which
is a Being, as I have faid, of the fame nature with Motion : And,
accordingly, it is the Meafure of Motion, and, again, Motion is the
meafure of Titiie ; which ftiows that they are things perfedly fimi^
lar in their nature, otherwife they could not be a meafure or ftandard
for one another. We are, therefore, not to wonder that there is no
Vol. II. U u fuch
338 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
fuch language to be found in Antient Philofophy ; for a Status Mo-
tus., in Latin, or a xaTao-Touo-if xima-ta?, in Greek, would have beeij
thought, among the Antients, a moft abfurd and nonfenfical expref-
fion. And I am perfuaded that, as inaccurate fpeaking leads to
inaccurate thinking, it has been this inaccuracy of expreffion that
has led the Newtonians to believe that, as there was a ftate of
both Motion and Reft, fo that State was governed by the fame
Law.
If the Newtonians had not confounded two things fo different,
and, indeed, fo oppofite in their natxire, as Reft and Motion, and
had not confidered them both as 3ijiatt, it appears to me impoflible
that they would have fallen into this error, of fuppofmg that
both ftates will continue till they are altered by fomething cx-
trinfic ; for they argue in this way : A Body at Reft continues in
that State, till it is moved to Motion by fomething extrinfic to it ;
and, therefore, a Body in Motion being alfo in a ftate, it continues
in that ftate till it is forced to change it. Now, they ought to have
drawn a quite difl'erent conclufion : For the nature of the two things
being not only different, but diredly oppofite, their qualities will be
alfo oppofite ; fo that, if Reft, by its nature and eftence, conti-
nues till it be changed into Motion by fomething extrinfic, Motion,
being the dired: oppofite of Reft, will not continue in the fame way,
but will ceafe of itfelf. It was in this way the Antients argued con-
cerning oppofite things, and particularly that great mafter of the
Reafoning Art, Ariftotle, who, in his book of Topics, has taught
us, that, if two things be oppofite, oppofite things will follow from
them. Thus, as Health and Sicknefs are oppofite, if Health be a
Good, Sicknefs will be an Evil; if Vice and Virtue be oppofite, and
if the confequence of Vice be Mifery, the confequence of Virtue
will be Happinefs *.
There
* i\riftotle expreflcs this rule of reafoning in his (hort way ihus: E< t» unvrttt e»<«i«-
Chap. 11. ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. 339
There is another diftindion, of great Importance, which the
Newtonians, as I have elfewhere obferved, do not appear to me to
have accurately made : — It is betwixt fnoving, and being moved ;
for, if they had not confounded thefe two things, according to
the ufe of vulgar and unphilofophical language, they could hare
been at no lofs to make a diftin<3:ion of ftill greater importance,
I mean the di{lin£tion betwixt Mind and Body; for Mind would
have immediately appeared to be that which moves^ and Body
that which is moved. And we fhould have feen at once in
what that Vis Inertiae, which all the Newtonians afcribe to Bo-
dy, but which they do not appear to me to underftand, confifts ;
for the Vis Inertiae is nothing elfe but that perfeft paflivity
and inactivity, which makes Body abfolutely incapable of moving
itfelf, or of exerting any Power of any kind. Of what ufe this ob-
fei'vation is, will appear in the fequel of this argument.
There is another inaccuracy of expreffion in this matter, which it
is proper to obferve, and that is the calling by the name oiVis Iner-
tiae this paflive quality of Body, which, I think, is very improper,
even when applied to it in a ftate of Reft ; for the expreflion un-
doubtedly denotes a Force, or adive Power, by which a thing either
continues or changes its ftate. Now, I deny that Body has any
power of either kind ; and therefore I think it is improper to fay,
that Body continues itfelf in a ftate even of Reft.
But it is ftill more improper, and, indeed, I think, abfurd to fay,
that Body continues itfelF likewife in Motion by its Vis Inertiae. It
fhould have been called by a name very different, viz. Vis Mobilita-
tis ; for it is truly no other, according to the hypothefis of the New-
tonians, than a power of moving itfelf from place to place, and this
forever.
U u ^ Before
340
ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
Before I go farther into this argument, I think it is proper that I
fliould underftand how the Newtonians conceive the Motion to be
continued forever, in confequence of one impulfe. That the im-
pulfe is the Firft Caufe, or Occafion, of the Motion, there is no
doubt. But the queftion is, How it is carried on after the impulfe
has ceafed ? And that can be done, I think, only in one or other of
fourways : For, either the Body niuft carry on the Motion itfelf, and,
by a power eilential to it, as much asExtenfiou or Impenetrability is ;
or, itmuft be carried on by the Impulfe or PiefTure of fome other Bo-
dy, fuch as a Subtile Fluid or Ether, which has been employed to ac-
count for Motion, by fome philofophers both antient and modern ;
or, pio, The Motion goes on by virtue of the Original Impulfe,
without any other Caufe j or, Ai/?/v, It is carried on by Mind, as I
fuppofe.
As to ihcfrjl of thefe ways, I have reafon to believe that even
thofe Newtonians, who, in deference to the authority of Sir Ifaac,
maintain this Eternity of Motion, are unwilling to afcribe it to any
power efTential to the Body, by which it could continue to move it-
felf forever ; for an Eternity of Motion, however begun, by a Power
eflential to Matter, would be giving much too great an advantage to
rhe Materialift, who will deny, as Ariftotle does, that Motion e-
ver had a beginning, and who will fay, that, if Matter can carry
on itfelf in one direction, it can carry itfelf on in every direc-
tion, and, in that way, can do every thing that we fee is done
by Mind and Intelligence *. — Neither do the Newtonians now
maintain, that the Body is carried on by any invifible Fluid or
Ether ; nor does Sir Ifaac appear to have thought of any
fuch thing when he wrote his Piincipia, It remains, therefore,
that, if Mind be not the adive power which carries on the Motion,
according to ray hypothefis, it muft be the third thing I have men-
tioned, viz. the Original Impulfe ; and it is this hypothefis which I
am now to examine, and which I underftand to be generally the
,..;;,' fenfc
• Ste more of this, page 37.
Chap; II. ANTIENT iMETAPHYSICS. 341
fenfe of thofe Newtonians who yet defend this Firft Law of Mo-
tion.
And, if it be fo, I think it is evident that Sir Ifaac has ufed au
improper, as well as an unneceflary, expreffion, when he faid that
the Motion is carried on by a Vis Jnfita^ which certainly leads us to
believe that it is fome power inherent in the Body, which carries it
on. And, as he conftantly diftinguifhes it from the Vis Imprejfa^
by which the Body is fet in Motion, I think it is plain that he be-
lieved the one power not to be intrinfic, or belonging to the nature
of Body, but extrinfic, or from without, as much as the impreflion
of a feal upon wax is, or any preffure or impulfe of one Body upon
another ; whereas the other Power by which the Body continues m
Motion, he confidered as intrinfic, and of the nature and effence of
Body. And this being the cafe, 1 confefs I am a little furprifed that
he has only faid barely, that he did not affirm Gravitation was ef-
fential to Body : Whereas he ought to have affirmed pofitively, as
Mr Cotes does in his Preface to his edition of the Principia, that it
•was an inherent quality of Body, and effential to it. And I am fure, of
the two, it has much better prctenfions to be of the nature and ef-
fence of Body, than what Sir Ifaac calls the Vis Injita : For Gravita-
tion adts always, and is the mod conftant Motion we know here on
earth ; whereas the Vis Injtta ads only occafionally when the Bodf
is impelled by another Body.
I was once much difpofed to believe that Sir Ifaac, by the 7is In-
fita, which carries on the Motion of the Body after the impulfe has
ceafed, meant to denote Mind : But, upon confidering more at-
tentively his definition above mentioned, of this Vis Inftta^ I think it
is evident that he could not have that meaning ; for he makes it to
be a power by which Body continues in Reft, as well as in Motion.
Now, it is evident that it is not by Mind, but by its own nature and
effence.
34* ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V.
cfTence, that a Body, being at Reft, continues at Reft. And, by the
fame nature and eflence, I am convinced that Sir Ifaac imderftood
Body to continue a Motion once given it by the Vis Tmprejfa : And
therefore I hold that the prefent Newtonians differ from their ma-
tter, when they lay afide the Fis Inftta^ and maintain that the Body
continues the Motion by virtue of the Impulfe^ or the Vis Imprejfa^ only.
Underftanding, therefore, the axiom in the fenfe in which it is
now generally underftood, I proceed to inquire whether it be a ge-
neral propofition, extending to all kind of Motion, however begun,
whether by Body or by Mind. That Sir Ifaac applies it only to Mo-
tion produced by Bodily Impulfe, I think is evident, for the reafons al-
ready given ; and fo far, I think, he is in the right, that it only can be
applied to motion of that kind ; For we have no experience or obferva-
tionthat can carry it to Motion begun by Mind ; but, on the contrary,
our daily experience convinces us that the Motion begun by Mind
continues no longer than the Mind continues to operate, except in cer-
tain cafes, where the a£tion of one Mind prevails over the action of
another, as in the cafe of an Animal Body falling or running down
a fteep defcent ; in which cafe, the elemental Mind, that carries the
Body downward, is too ftrong foi the volition of the Animal that
would flop it.
And this difference, betwixt the Motion by Mirid and the Motion
by Bodily Impulfe, is, I think, clearly deducible from the different
natures of Body and Mind : For Body can only aft upon Body by
its furface ; whereas Mind, having no furface, canrtot poffibly
a6t upon Body in that way, but operates in a manner quite different,
as I have explained above, that is, by Animation, which operates,
not by Impulfe, producing a Motion that continues fome time after
the impulfe ceafes, but by inceffant energies, repeated in every in-
ftant of the Motion, which being difcominued, the Motion ceafes.
It
Chap. II. A N T I E N T M E r A P H Y S I G S. 343
It appears to me, therefore, evident, that this Law of Motion
•will apply only to Motion produced by the a£tion of Body upon
Body. But the queftion is, Whether it will apply to all Motion,
even of that kind ?
In order to determine this qucflion, we muft diftinguilli two ways
in which Body adling upon Body produces Motion. The firft is by
Pulfion, that is, when the Body that ads upon the other propclls it,
fo as to make it go on of itfelf, without the Body propelling it ;
and this way of moTing Body is commonly called Impulfe. For
producing this kind of Motion, it is neceflary that the Body impelled
fhould have a certain degree of elafticity ; for it is by that quality
that it acquires the force which carries it on by itfelf. A Body,
therefore, fuch as nvool^ ^'>'^Jkf^ ^^^y^ "ot being compa, X.XI Tx ^ur», icxi Tec ttr?iit tu> rufimrtit, iitt yn, nxi uvf, *»i cciip, tmi ■'^'J.
T«t/T« y«{ iirai, xKi T« Ttiovrtc, »ymi r* \hk» ttv, k«< (x*! t« 9«t« a-jtio' (■>•<; •iiTf «T«f/T«v '(>•»« yoiracc itmi kt (<^(yyi>i«-<«;. AftCf
this, Simplicius goes on, and, having fliown th?.t this principle of movement a£ls in-
animals and plants for a certain purpofe, but without Intelligence, he fliows that
the fame principle operates in the fame way alfo in elemental and unorganized Bo-
dies, according to the dodlrine of Ariftotlc, in the paflage above quoted ; and then
he concludes with thefe words, Mii»-»ri «u> • A^imnxnt ipvnt k*xu kk rut ^vj^tf rut
T« «ri(i r^fi* KicT*yit$fttf»t. So that Simplicius agrees with me, that, according tO'
Ar\&ot[Cf.. Nature is Mind ailing in Body, but without Intelligence But, indee