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, « 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 /^t», 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 «/>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