,,essays1 ,,or ,,discourses1 ,,selected ,,from ,,the ,,works ,,of ,,feyjoo1 ,,and ,,translated ,,from ,,the ,,spanish1 ,,by ,,john ,,brett1 ,,esq4 ,,volume ,,the ,,fourth4 ,,london1 ,printed for the ,,translator3 ,sold by ,h4 ,,payne1 ,pall-,mall2 ,c4 ,,dilly1 in the ,poultry2 and ,t4 ,,evans1 in the ,strand4 ,,mdcclxxx4 ,,contents ,,of ,,the ,,fourth ,,volume4 ,,physical ,,paradoxes page #a ,,sceptical ,,philosophy #cf ,,the ,,shew ,,or ,,affectation ,,of ,,learning #acg ,,moral ,,and ,,political ,,paradoxes #afc ,,the ,,great ,,and ,,masterly ,,authority ,,of ,,experience #bbf ,a ,,display ,,of ,,the ,,intellectual ,,faculties ,,of ,,the ,,various ,,people1 ,,with ,,remarks ,,on ,,the ,,talents ,,of ,,the ,,different ,,ones #cbi ,,physical ,,paradoxes4 ,i4 ,the ,greek word ,paradox1 or ,paradoxologia1 does not properly signify a false or implicatory proposition1 but an improbable or incredible one2 and therefore1 this word is commonly applied to those propositions1 which in the eye of the generality of mankind1 at first sight seem false and contradictory1 and difficult to be assented to2 but upon examining them strictly and with attention1 appear to be either true or probable4 ,in this discourse1 we shall treat of some of the things of this species1 which are to be found in the line of natural philosophy4 ,,paradox ,i4 ,elemental ,fire is not hot in the highest ,degree4 ,,sect4 ,i4 ,,ii4 ,vulgar physics1 distribute the four qualities which are called first1 among the four elements1 assigning to each element one of them that is intense in the highest degree1 and another which approaches1 or comes near to the highest4 ,thus to fire they attribute heat in the highest degree1 and dryness which is nearly approaching to the highest4 ,to the air1 humidity in the highest degree1 and heat near to it4 ,to the water1 coldness in the highest degree1 and moisture near to it4 ,to the earth1 dryness in the highest degree1 and coldness near to it4 ,this distribution1 which if regulated1 not by a nice examination of the nature of things1 but only by an imaginary proportion1 is exposed to three serious and weighty objections which are started against it by the modern philosophers2 and it is only to the proposition that fire is hot in the highest degree1 that they have hitherto made no difficulty of assenting2 but that is the point ,i at present mean to controvert4 ,,iii4 ,that elemental fire is not hot in the highest degree1 may be evinced1 by shewing there is another heat which is much greater1 and that is the heat of the sun1 when its rays are concentrated in a burning-glass4 ,it is certain1 that the most vigorous effects and operations of elemental fire1 does not come up in any degree of comparison1 to those of that most ardent star4 ,this has been proved evidently1 by the experiments made with the burning-glass invented and fabricated by ,mons4 ,villete1 an eminent artist of ,lions in ,france2 a description of which1 was printed and published at ,liege in #agae1 and was afterwards inserted in the ,memoirs of ,trevoux of the year #agaf4 ,the instant the focus of this burning-glass was applied to any sort of wood1 be it ever so green or moist1 it set it as suddenly in a flame1 as elemental fire would do dry tow4 ,in less than a minute1 it melted metals which were the most difficult of liquefaction1 such as copper1 iron1 gold1 and all minerals in general4 ,the highest operation the chymists have found elemental fire capable of performing1 is that of vitrifaction1 which is so called from its reducing matter to a species of glass2 but the most intense fire1 besides its being tardy in this operation1 can perform it only on particular subjects2 whereas the burning-glass vitrifies in a short time1 every kind of matter1 tiles1 bricks1 cement1 bones1 stones of all sorts1 even marble1 and porphyry2 and what is most extraordinary1 it vitrifies those sort of stones also1 with which they make the bottoms of furnaces for melting iron ore in1 which although they will endure that intense heat for many years together1 will begin to dissolve almost immediately1 upon applying the focus of the burning-glass to them4 ,,iv4 ,although this is very wonderful1 what we are about to relate is still more so4 ,the analytic resolution of gold1 or what is the same thing1 the separation or division of its principal component parts1 had till then been deemed impossible2 for the misers are not more tenacious of hoarding or preserving their gold1 than the gold is of preserving its intrinsic texture2 for in spite of all the tortures by fire1 which the chymists could invent to break this texture1 they could never make it lose its original form4 ,yet notwithstanding the valour of this generous metal1 it submitted obediently to the power of the sun exerted through the burning-glass2 as if that power to whom it is said to owe its existence1 was the only one to which it could bear to be subject4 ,v4 ,mons4 ,homberg1 of the ,academy ,royal of ,sciences1 was the first who experienced this rare phenomenon1 by resolving into smoak1 with the focus of the burning-glass1 at the ,palace ,royal at ,paris1 a great portion of its mass1 which this celebrated chymist judged to be the mercurial part of the gold1 and when this was gone1 the residue which remained1 appeared to be a terrestrial matter1 mixed with somewhat of sulphur1 that afterwards vitrified4 ,so that in the opinion of ,mons4 ,homberg1 sulphur1 and mercury1 together with a portion of earth1 is what gold is composed of1 and although the two first are by their nature volatile1 and capable of being dissipated and divided by the power of fire in all other metals1 and in all other mixtures1 they in gold are so intimately united1 that no other force or influence can separate them1 but that of the sun2 it follows then1 that the heat of the sun is much greater than that of elemental fire1 and that this last cannot be hot in the highest degree1 which is what we undertook to prove4 ,,paradox ,,ii4 ,the ,air ought rather to be esteemed cold1 than hot4 ,,sect4 ,,ii4 ,,vi4 ,the quality which ,aristotle attributes to the air1 is cold somewhat under the highest degree1 or nearly approaching to the highest degree4 ,other philosophers1 with more foundation of reason1 esteem it indifferent to heat and cold2 and ,i1 without setting about to combat this second opinion1 say it is more reasonable to suppose it cold than hot4 ,which ,i shall attempt to demonstrate in the following manner3 in order to make a judgement of the qualities appertaining to a particular thing1 we should consider it in a state1 where it is divested of the influence of any extrinsic agent1 by the operations of which it may be affected2 the air then so circumstanced1 will always be found to be cold2 and from thence it should be inferred1 that it naturally is cold4 ,the minor of this proposition is proved1 by the air being only warm while it is affected by the rays of the sun1 and by its being found1 that whenever that influence is withdrawn1 it becomes cold again1 and that it is by so much the more cold1 in proportion to the absence of that influence4 ,from whence it is observable1 that in the temperate zones1 the air is coldest when the nights are long2 and that in the sub-polar1 and circum-polar ones1 it is extremely cold1 on account of the influence of the sun being withdrawn from them for the space of six months together2 and that when it returns to enlighten them1 because of the obliquity of its rays1 it still continues cold1 far beyond the degree of mediocrity4 ,,vii4 ,nor is saying that in the absence of the sun1 the earth is the agent that cools the air any reply to this2 for if this was so1 the lower region of the air would be colder than the middle one1 as being nearer to the infrigidating cause2 but this is contradicted by our experience2 for we very commonly see1 that the water does not freeze in the lower region1 when in the middle one it is frozen into hail in the clouds2 and very often also1 that which was frozen above1 thaws suddenly upon its falling down4 ,,viii4 ,if it should be objected to this1 that ,aristotle and the ,peripatetics1 when they say the air is warm1 speak of the elemental air1 and not of the air of the atmosphere which is mixed with an infinite number of heterogenous corpuscles1 by some of which it may be made cold1 and especially by the many nitrous ones with which it is impregnated4 ,to this ,i answer first1 that in the country where ,i am now writing1 there is not the least appearance of the air being nitrous1 for that there is not a grain of nitre to be found in the whole country1 notwithstanding which1 the cold in winter is sometimes pretty sharp4 ,i answer secondly1 that we can only talk of the pure elemental air by conjecture1 for no mortal has yet ever breathed any of it1 nor is it possible that any one ever should1 on account of this element being an open expanse1 exposed to the inroads of the effluvias of all other bodies2 and we should reason upon sensible qualities1 by pursuing the thread of palpable experiments2 and not by pursuing that of ideal proportions1 as ,aristotle did in making the division of his elemental qualities2 for the ,author of nature is not confined to pursuing only such proportions as fall within the compass of our comprehension4 ,this is the false principle1 upon which all the ,pythagorean and ,aristotelic philosophy has proceeded1 and with respect to the doctrine of the four elements1 that seems to be tainted with the same vice1 as ,i shall shew more fully in another place4 ,all that ,i shall say at present is1 that ,aristotle dealt out1 and distributed the four qualities among the four elements1 as if he had been the absolute master of them all1 and could dispose of and arrange them agreeable to his will and pleasure4 ,,paradox ,,iii4 ,water considered according to its ,nature1 is rather disposed to be solid1 than fluid4 ,,sect4 ,,iii4 ,,ix4 ,this may be demonstrated1 upon the same principle the antecedent paradox was2 remove for any length of time1 the interposition of any extrinsic agent that may contribute to warm the water1 and it will always be found to be solid1 that is1 in a frozen state4 ,this then being so1 we may conclude1 that is the state it is disposed to continue in agreeable to its nature4 ,this is evinced by the sea under the ,poles1 and in the adjacent parts1 being1 during the whole six months the sun is absent from them1 frozen to such a degree1 that after the sun has revisited them1 and continued its influence for the other six months1 it is never totally thawed2 and it is for this reason1 that it has always been found impracticable to sail to ,china by that rout4 ,x4 ,the water being under this influence1 is a proof ad hominem1 that it cannot1 agreeable to the doctrine of ,aristotle1 be cold in the highest degree1 for if that was the case it must ever continue in a frozen state2 so that we can only say1 that by its nature it is most disposed to solidity4 ,,xi4 ,frozen water being easily made liquid by a moderate heat1 is no proof that it is not naturally inclined to solidity4 ,metals may be liquified by an intense heat1 but that does not shew that they are not of a solid nature2 and a thing being more easily1 or with more difficulty dissolved1 makes no difference with respect to this mode of reasoning2 and therefore the water being made liquid with a less intense heat1 than is found necessary to liquify metals1 does not prove1 that it is not disposed in its nature to be solid as well as them4 ,,paradox ,,iv4 ,either all ,qualities are occult1 or none of them are so4 ,,sect4 ,,iv4 ,,xii4 ,the school philosophers call all those qualities occult1 which are not reckoned among the four elemental ones1 and which do not result from the various combinations of these elemental ones1 because they suppose their operations move in a line superior to those which may be supposed to proceed from humidity1 dryness1 cold1 heat1 hardness1 softness1 colour1 favour1 c4 ,and although it is true1 that some by pursuing the system of assigning second qualities1 which result from the various combinations of the first2 or third qualities1 resulting from the various combinations of the second2 and among these third1 have placed the wonderful virtues of the load-stone1 the operation of purges1 and others of those which they call occult1 and which by these means they have attempted to reduce to manifest ones2 this mode of proceeding1 has been abandoned by the generality of philosophers1 and with reason2 for it is very clear1 that combine1 and recombine1 the qualities of humidity1 dryness1 heat1 and cold1 in what way you will1 you will not be able to find out1 that they are capable of directing the load-stone to the ,pole1 or of causing it to attract iron4 ,,xiii4 ,it is not my intention1 to examine the nature and origin of all1 or either of these qualities2 but shall only say1 that they are all equally occult1 or are all equally manifest4 ,in order to demonstrate this1 we will compare the calefactive virtue of fire which is looked upon as the most manifest1 with the attractive virtue of the load-stone1 which is reputed the most occult4 ,all that is known1 or that is taught by the peripatetic doctrine1 of the calefactory virtues of fire1 may be reduced to this1 that it is a property appertaining to that substance1 or a quality that springs from1 or arises out of its form1 that produces the effect which we call heat1 and that the action with which it causes it1 is called calefaction2 but so it is1 that it is just in the same manner that we know the attractive virtue of the load-stone2 viz4 that it is a property or quality1 springing from1 or arising out of the form of this entity1 that produces the sensible effect of drawing the iron to it1 and that the action with which it causes it to approach towards it1 is called attraction2 it follows then1 that we know just as much of the attractive virtue of the load-stone1 as we know of the calefactory virtues of fire2 and therefore1 both of them are equally occult1 and equally manifest4 ,,xiv4 ,and if we were to speak the truth1 how could we deny1 that the quality we call heat is occult1 when it is even occult1 whether it is or is not a quality8 ,not only the corpuscular philosophers deny it to be possessed of all quality or form1 but many of those who admit those properties to be contained in it1 constitute the heat to proceed from a vertical1 or vibratory motion of the insensible particles of the body4 ,and so long as we shall remain without an argument to convince us of the truth of these opinions1 we shall not know which of them is right4 ,,paradox ,v4 ,it is false1 in a general and comprehensive sense1 that ,virtue by being united becomes the stronger4 ,,sect4 ,v4 ,,xv4 ,the axiom ,vis unita fortior1 ,i apprehend1 applies more justly to civil and political things1 than to natural ones4 ,if we attend1 we shall find that two agents1 each of which is strong in proportion to four1 by being joined together1 will not be stronger than in proportion to eight4 ,if two men separately can support but four half hundreds each1 by joining them together1 you would find them not able to support above eight4 ,it is true1 that a man who breaks arrows one by one1 cannot break a bundle of arrows tied together1 which is the comparison that ,scilurus availed himself of 7,plut4 in ,apophth47 to persuade his sons to continue in fraternal union2 but we should not understand by this1 that by binding them together1 each arrow separately acquired any additional strength1 for this example was only intended to shew1 that he who could with ease break each arrow separately1 was not sufficiently strong to break the whole bundle united together4 ,suppose1 for instance1 the bundle was to consist of twenty arrows1 if there was any thing less than a twentieth part of the force exerted to break a single arrow1 than it was necessary to exert to break the whole bundle1 it is as certain that that single arrow would not be broke1 as that the whole bundle would not4 ,thus this example does not prove1 that there is any additional virtue or strength added to the wood of which the arrows are made1 by uniting them together1 but only1 that twenty joined together can resist a greater force than one singly1 which is a thing that is self-evident4 ,,xvi4 ,nothing can be plainer than this2 but abstracted from the force of this reasoning1 experience has shewn us1 that in some agents1 in contradiction to the common opinion1 their union has diminished their strength4 ,it is the general sentiment1 that two threads twisted together and united in one cord1 will support more weight than they will separately2 and that a rope made of many fine threads1 is stronger than all these threads divided4 ,mons4 ,reamur1 of the ,academy ,royal of ,sciences1 demonstrated in #agaa1 that the fact was quite otherwise1 and that the threads separate would support a greater weight than they would united4 ,he made this experiment with two single threads1 and found that each by itself would support nine pounds and a half1 which put together make nineteen pounds2 after this he caused them to be twisted together1 and they were broke with sixteen pounds4 ,he made another experiment with three threads1 one of which supported six pounds and a half2 another eight1 and another eight and a half2 the sum of all which put together amounted to twenty-three pounds2 and after causing them to be made into a cord1 they would not sustain more than seventeen4 ,,xvii4 ,it may perhaps be answered to this1 that the threads in twisting them together might be stretched and made finer1 and their strength weakened2 and that besides this1 they might have been strained by supporting the weight in the first instance2 but this objection1 although specious1 is insufficient2 for by attending to the relation of this matter in the ,history of the ,academy ,royal1 we shall find1 that by order of the ,academy1 another experiment was made in a quite opposite way1 for a small silk cord which supported a little more than five pounds1 was afterwards untwisted1 and they found that the single threads among them all sustained six pounds and a half4 ,,xviii4 ,the true cause of this phenomenon in my judgment1 is1 that the threads in the twisted cord do not bear equally alike1 because it seems to me morally impossible in the twisting1 to preserve the exact length or bearing of all the fibres1 but that some of them must be more tense or tight1 and some of them more slack than others2 in consequence of which1 the bearing of some must vary more from the perpendicular or central line of gravity1 than that of the others1 and that some part of them are upon the stretch1 and others rather slack at one and the same time4 ,from hence it follows1 that the weight at first is not supported by all the fibres1 but only by those which are the most tense1 and the least distant from the central line of gravity1 which not being of themselves sufficient to resist the strain1 give way1 and that the weight afterwards falling upon the others1 they do the same2 and that this is the case may be evidently seen1 by observing when more weight is hung to a rope than it is able to sustain1 it does not break instantly1 but successively1 and although the total separation is performed in a very little time1 there is space enough before it is compleated1 for us to perceive1 that some threads break first1 and others afterwards4 ,,xix4 ,but although my opinion should not exactly coincide with the experiments made in the academy1 ,i conclude1 that the judgment we should make of this matter is1 that both in this1 and all other physical agents1 virtue united is the same that it is separate2 for the cord breaking with a less weight than the threads sustained separate1 did not result from these last being stronger separate than they were united1 but from the fibres of the threads acting more together in their separate state1 than they did in their united one1 as in the last case1 the resistance of the fibres to the force1 was made more in succession than it was in the first2 or to speak more properly1 although the threads were united in the cord1 their power or virtue of resistance to the force1 was not united or exerted together4 ,,paradox ,,vi4 ,the ,sun in consequence of its own proper ,nature1 and intrinsic ,disposition1 heats and enlightens unequally at different ,times4 ,,sect4 ,,vi4 ,,xx4 ,the common causes of our experiencing more or less heat1 or more or less light from the sun1 are the serene or loaded state of the atmosphere2 the oblique direction with which the sun's rays are reflected on us2 the position1 or situation of places2 the length or shortness of the days2 the tranquillity or agitation of the winds1 and our vicinity to cold or warm places1 such as snowy mountains1 or warm subterraneous effluvia4 ,but1 abstracted from any of these sublunary or inferior causes1 ,i say1 that in the sun itself1 is contained a cause1 that occasions it to reflect more or less light or heat1 and that it actually does reflect more or less light and heat1 at some times than it does at others1 and that this is in virtue of its own proper nature and disposition4 ,,xxi4 ,the reason of which phenomenon is1 the transitory spots1 which the astronomers have for some time past observed in the sun4 ,these are a sort of darkish places1 unequal in size and duration1 which seem as if they were on the superficies of the star1 and which at different times are more or less numerous1 although it has happened1 that for years together none of them have appeared4 ,some believe that the antient ,chaldeans had some knowledge of them1 for in the ,book of ,job1 we read the following expression of ,job's friend ,eliphaz to him1 that the ,heavens themselves are not exempt from their spots3 ,cli non sunt mundi in conspectu ejus4 ,on the other hand1 the want of telescopes among the ancients1 did not render their making observations on these things impossible2 for some of these spots are so large1 as to be visible without a telescope2 as for example that was1 which was seen in the year #agjf1 whose superficies according to the computation of the astronomers1 was thirty-six times larger than the whole earth2 and when they arrive at this magnitude1 or if they are even much less1 they may be discerned1 by looking at the sun with a glass tinged with any dark colour4 ,,xxii4 ,but the first person we have any account of1 who observed these spots1 was ,father ,christopher ,scheinerus a jesuit1 who applied himself to it with such diligence1 that between the years #afaa and #afbg he had made fourteen hundred observations of them1 which he gives an account of in his ,rosa ,ursina4 ,the celebrated ,galileus ,galilei began also to observe them about the same time that ,scheinerus did2 and since them1 the most laborious astronomers of the last and the present century1 have applied themselves to making the same observations2 so that this is a matter1 which at present there is not the least doubt about2 and although some have entertained suspicions whether these spots were in the body of the sun1 or at a little distance from it2 others have removed those difficulties1 by demonstrating1 that they are inherent in1 and exist on1 the superficies of the sun2 for they not only revolve in the same proportion the sun does1 but they most probably remain upon it during the whole time it takes in making an intire revolution1 which it does in twenty-seven days1 and they are to be seen compleat for half the time of that period2 which could not happen1 if the spots were inferior to the star4 ,,xxiii4 ,and whether these spots are sooty or smoaky vapours1 which arise from the great furnace of the sun1 as some think1 or are any other different thing2 it is clear1 that during their continuance1 the light and the heat of it reflected on the lower elemental regions1 must be diminished in proportion to the size and number of the spots2 and to this cause may be attributed1 some of the notable diminutions of the light and heat of the sun1 which we find recorded in history1 provided they were not occasioned by some obstructions in the atmosphere4 ,mayolus tells us1 that in the time of the emperor ,justinian1 the light of the sun for the greatest part of a year was so dim and faint1 that it scarce exceeded that of the moon2 and ,plutarch tells us1 that at the time of the death of ,julius ,csar1 the light of the sun was equally feeble for a whole year together2 which ,virgil also takes notice of in the following verses of the ,second ,book of his ,georgics3 ,ille etiam extincto miseratus ,csare ,romam ,tunc caput obscura nitidum ferrugine texit3 ,impiaque ternam timuerunt scula noctem4 ,,paradox ,,vii4 ,the ,rays of the ,sun reflected on a ,concave ,body1 produce a greater ,heat in ,winter than in ,summer1 which ,heat is greater still in ,proportion to the coldness of the weather4 ,,sect4 ,,vii4 ,,xxiv4 ,the experiments to prove this1 were to the admiration of all the by-standers1 repeatedly made with the burning-glass of ,mons4 ,villete1 which we have spoken of before2 and it was observed at the time of making them1 that by so much the more cold the burning-glass was1 by so much the quicker and stronger was the operation of the focus2 and that by so much the warmer it was1 by so much the more tardy and remiss were its effects4 ,among those who read these accounts1 some looked upon them as wonderful1 and others as incredible4 ,,xxv4 ,but with all this1 the reason of the phenomenon is not very hidden4 ,it is certain1 that cold condenses bodies1 and that heat dilates them4 ,it is also certain1 that the more dense a body is1 the more apt and fit it is to cause reflection1 and that it is least so1 the more lax it is4 ,from these two premises it may be clearly inferred1 that the effects we have mentioned were things of course2 but for a further explanation of this matter1 ,i will say they were so from two causes2 for the burning-glass by being in a warm state1 must consequently be less compact and hard1 and the operations of its focus more remiss and languid4 ,in the first place1 because a great portion of the rays were absorbed in the pores of the metal1 which had been dilated by the heat1 and made no reflection at all4 ,secondly1 by their being dilated1 and as we may say1 become more spungy1 the concave superficies of the metal were less smooth and equal1 from whence it would follow1 that many rays by being obstructed in their descent by some insensible prominences1 would not make their reflection in a right line on the point of the focus4 ,this may be better understood1 by attending to the reflections of a ball1 that is struck against a wall with an unequal surface2 and it is a position agreed to by all the mathematicians who have treated of catoptrics1 that light and heat in their reflections1 follow exactly the same rules1 that heavy bodies do4 ,,xxvi4 ,nor is there are any difficulty in supposing1 that a body as hard as metal1 may undergo some insensible rarefaction when it grows warm2 for in the first place1 if a very intense heat can dilate metal1 so as to make it break all its ligatures and become fluid1 a less heat would have the same effect1 in proportion to the degree of it1 and might dilate and rarefy it a little4 ,secondly1 experience teaches us1 that every sort of metal is more sonorous when it is cold1 than when it is warm2 from whence it may be evidently inferred1 that heat and cold do somewhat alter its texture2 it being certain1 that upon the texture1 depends its being more or less sonorous4 ,,paradox ,,viii4 ,a flame extending itself upwards in a pyramidical or conic form1 is occasioned by a violence done to the flame itself4 ,,sect4 ,,viii4 ,,xxvii4 ,the endeavour of the flame to ascend1 is the proof which is vulgarly exhibited1 of there being an element or sphere of fire above us1 by those who maintain that position2 but we shall shew1 that this is a very feeble proof1 even admitting their own state of the case1 because every thing that is lighter than the fluid that surrounds it1 will1 if it is not by violence restrained from doing so1 rise above it1 without being invited to ascend by a sphere of its own species that is aloft2 and it is from hence1 that flame1 smoke1 vapour1 an infinity of elemental effluvia1 and divers other species of things ascend1 without the assistance or intervention of any other cause1 except that of their being lighter than the inferior gross air4 ,,xxviii4 ,to this we shall add1 that there is not in the flame1 the propensity to ascend which they suppose1 and which seems to be indicated by its rising upwards in a conic form2 for this ascent is violent1 and not natural to the flame4 ,we shall illustrate this paradox1 by an experiment which my ,lord ,bacon mentions in the first ,book of his ,centuries4 ,a small wax candle1 fitted into an iron tube1 and placed perpendicular in a vessel filled with spirit of wine1 in which it must be immersed to such a depth1 that when they are both set fire to1 the flame of the candle shall not rise higher than that of the spirit2 and you will see1 the flame of the candle and that of the spirit being distinguishable by their different colour1 that the flame of the candle will appear in the middle of that of the spirit1 extending itself in breadth1 and not in a pyramidical1 but a round form1 that occupies four or five times as much space1 as that which it used to occupy when burning in the open air4 ,this experiment proves1 that the pyramidical form which the flame regularly assumes1 is caused by the pressure of the air that surrounds it2 and this is the sentiment of the modern philosophers1 who without adverting to the experiment we have mentioned1 would make no scruple of pronouncing1 that the form it assumes is a violence done the flame4 ,,xxix4 ,by this example it may be seen1 that experiments1 provided they are made with judgment1 and attended to with subtil reflection1 are the only means by which we can attain any certain knowledge of natural things2 but if they are made in a lumping way1 and without due attention1 and exactness1 they are the occasion of innumerable errors4 ,many have arisen1 from attributing to a native inclination1 or intrinsic virtue of some body1 effects1 which are only caused by the impulse of some other neighbouring body4 ,before the gravity and elasticity of the air were discovered1 it was looked upon as a thing demonstrated by experience1 that the water's rising in the pump1 was from its inclination to obstruct or oppose a vacuum1 and now it is a thing evinced by experience1 that the air is what impels it to that ascent4 ,,paradox ,,ix4 ,in the composition of all vegetables1 there is contained a portion of metal4 ,,sect4 ,,ix4 ,,xxx4 ,this is a novelty in physics1 which has not been discovered till of late years4 ,mons4 ,gofredy of the ,academy ,royal1 having examined the ashes of many different plants1 found in them all1 some fine particles that would adhere to the load-stone2 from whence he concluded1 that these particles were either particles of iron1 or else were particles of the load-stone itself4 ,but1 as it was a doubt which had never yet been cleared up1 whether the load-stone would not attract other metallic particles1 which were not part of itself1 nor of iron2 the ,lemeries father and son1 made some fresh enquiries1 which removed all doubts respecting the matter4 ,they with a burning-glass melted the particles which the load-stone had attracted from the ashes of the plants2 which after much sparkling1 liquefied into the very form and substance of the load-stone1 and of iron also2 and when grown cold1 formed a lump of the consistence and hardness of metal4 ,even in honey1 after it has been distilled1 have been found these particles which were attractable by the load-stone2 from whence it may be inferred1 that this metallic composition1 exists in1 and is diffused through the most subtil juice of flowers and blossoms4 ,,xxxi4 ,but1 after all this had been done1 it still remained to be ascertained1 whether these particles pre-existed in the plant2 or were the production of the fire1 and the result of their calcination2 which second opinion appeared the most probable1 because there seems no difficulty in supposing1 that the fire might transmute into metal some of the particles of vegetables2 but there appeared a very great one1 in conjecturing that so heavy a metal as iron1 could rise to the summit of trees1 and pervade the most subtil fibres of their leaves4 ,,xxxii4 ,mons4 ,lemeri the son cleared up this doubt1 by various subtil and curious experiments1 which not only evinced the volatility of iron1 but also excited a belief1 that this metal contributed greatly to promote the vegetation of all kinds of plants4 ,the most remarkable experiment he made was the following one4 ,having poured spirit of nitre upon the filings of iron1 there succeeded a violent effervescence1 which after some time ceased1 and left the metal dissolved into a red liquid2 by afterwards pouring oil of tartar per deliquium to this liquid1 another fermentation was excited1 which went on increasing1 till1 at last1 it formed on the sides of the vessel1 various subtil branches1 which after all the sensible fermentation had ceased1 continued to grow till they reached the top of the vessel4 ,,xxxiii4 ,and although the first time he made this experiment1 he obtained only the rude lineaments of a tree1 by varying afterwards the quantity of the oil of tartar1 till he hit upon the just proportion of it1 he obtained a perfect metallic vegetation1 and produced a tree completely formed1 with its roots1 trunks1 branches1 leaves1 and flowers4 ,this able chymist concluded from his various observations on this matter1 that both the volatility1 and the vegetation1 were owing to the filings of the iron2 for without them1 he could only produce some crystalline lumps at the bottom of the vessel1 which he concluded proceeded from the nitre that had been dissolved4 ,whoever is desirous of knowing more of the manner and effects of these operations1 may read the accounts of them in the ,journals of the ,academy ,royal1 of ,november #agjf4 ,,xxxiv4 ,but we are not to conclude from hence1 that metallic vegetation is only to be produced by iron4 ,the ,abb ,vallemont in his first volume1 on the natural ,curiosities and ,art of ,agriculture1 says1 that there were exhibited at ,paris1 such like artificial metallic vegetations1 produced from gold1 silver1 iron1 and copper4 ,but that which was the most common1 and the most in vogue there1 was the vegetation procured from silver1 which the chymists called the ,tree of ,diana2 and which was produced in the following manner4 ,dissolve an ounce of silver1 in two or three ounces of spirit of nitre4 ,evaporate this dissolution in a sand-heat2 till nearly half of it is consumed4 ,mix the remainder in a vessel1 properly proportioned and suited for the business1 with twenty ounces of clear water1 and two ounces of quick-silver4 ,by leaving this mixture afterwards in a state of rest for forty days1 a silver tree will grow1 and in that space of time will be compleatly formed1 very nearly resembling a natural one1 in shape and figure4 ,mons4 ,homberg1 a celebrated chymist of the ,academy ,royal1 by making use of the same materials1 contrived to form a metallic tree in less than a quarter of an hour2 the receipt for doing which1 together with the physical explanation of this phenomenon1 given by ,mons4 ,homberg1 may be seen in the ,memoirs of the ,academy ,royal1 of the thirteenth of ,november #afib4 ,,xxxv4 ,these metallic vegetations1 joined to the discovery beforementioned1 of our having found iron in the ashes of all sorts of plants1 not only prove that metals may1 by virtue of certain fermentations1 be made sufficiently volatile to enable them to rise upwards1 and pervade all the tubes through which the alimentary juices of plants circulate1 but also make it probable1 that to this metallic mixture1 they in great measure owe their vegetation4 ,,xxxvi4 ,this is the substance of what1 in support of this paradox1 ,i have found in the ,works of the before-quoted philosophers2 to which ,i shall add a conjecture of my own1 which appears to me very efficacious to render credible1 the formal existence of particles of iron1 or load-stone1 in all vegetables whatever2 whether they are of load-stone1 or iron1 makes very little difference1 as all experimental philosophers are agreed1 that load-stone is nothing else but a fat or rich vein of iron4 ,,xxxvii4 ,my conjecture is founded on a theory1 which is embraced at present by all the mathematicians1 and confirmed by conclusive reasonings1 which are founded on the earth being endued with a magnetic virtue4 ,the truth of this theory1 is proved by innumerable observations4 ,it has been found1 that the magnetic needle poised in equilibrio1 accommodates itself to the meridian of the earth1 in the same manner the load-stone does1 that is1 it does not point to the poles of the heavens1 but to those of the earth2 for it has been observed in the northern regions1 that it does not appear to elevate or point towards the pole of the heavens1 but rather seems to depress1 or point down towards that of the earth2 and generally1 in all1 and every particular1 the magnetic needle has been found to be affected in the same proportions with respect to the terraqueous poles1 that it is with respect to the load-stone4 ,the various declinations that it is liable to1 from the pole of the earth1 in different places1 cannot be attributed to any other cause1 than that of the unequal magnetism1 of the terraqueous globe in different regions2 and the different declinations of the poles of the load-stone are attributed to the unequal magnetism or perfection of the parts of the stone4 ,it has been found1 that the earth itself1 can communicate the magnetic virtue to iron2 for if you take a bar of iron red-hot from the forge1 and place it perpendicular in the earth1 and there let it remain till it becomes cold1 it will manifestly acquire the magnetic virtue2 and if it is afterwards poised in equilibrio1 it will point to the poles of the earth1 in the same manner as if it had been touched by a load-stone4 ,it will also acquire the same virtue1 if it has remained for many years in a perpendicular position1 without its having been placed so in the earth red-hot2 and the same has been experienced with respect to bars1 that have been set before windows in an upright position4 ,the same effect will also be produced1 by laying a hot bar upon the ground1 exactly in a north and south direction1 till it gets cold2 but if it is so laid without being previously heated1 and suffered to continue in that position for several years together1 it will be found to be impregnated with the magnetic virtue4 ,whoever is desirous of seeing an account of these observations more at large1 and to satisfy himself how they evince the magnetical quality of the earth1 should read the mathematical authors who treat of the load-stone1 and he will find1 that all the modern ones make some remarks upon that particular4 ,,xxxviii4 ,this magnetic property of the terraqueous globe being admitted1 it may be inferred from it1 that excepting the exterior crust of the earth1 which is composed of such heterogeneous parts1 as are necessary for the growth and increase of the various productions and mixtures with which it abounds1 all the rest1 is nothing else1 but a solid quarry of load-stone2 and this is the opinion that is strenuously maintained by some2 although there are others1 who think that the magnetic virtue1 is distributed through all the parts of the terraqueous globe4 ,,xxxix4 ,both these opinions may be right1 for they do not seem incompatible one with another2 but in favour of the second1 which is that which conduces best to support my sentiment1 we may urge another celebrated piece of experience1 which evinces efficaciously1 that this very exterior earth which we touch and stand on1 is impregnated with many insensible particles of load-stone or iron2 and this is manifest1 from the earth itself being endued with this magnetic virtue1 or inclination of pointing to the pole2 for bricks that are made from it1 and are well burned and purged or freed from all foreign humour or moisture1 and especially if they are made long and narrow1 by being touched with a load-stone will acquire the virtue of pointing to the poles2 and they will even acquire it without being touched1 if they are laid in a north and south position1 and suffered to continue so for many years together4 7,see ,father ,dechales1 lib4 #a #b1 de ,magnete47 ,it being then certain1 that this quality of pointing to the pole1 is peculiar to the load-stone1 or the iron1 and incommunicable to all other substances1 it must evidently be inferred from this property in the bricks1 that the very earth we touch and stand upon1 is impregnated with particles of load-stone or iron4 ,all vegetables then receiving their nourishment from the earth1 it is not wonderful that there should be found in them all1 some of these particles4 ,,xl4 ,i would recommend it to those who take delight in philosophy1 to endeavour to inform themselves1 whether it is not probable1 that all other mixtures are impregnated with these particles2 for if that should be found to be the case1 we should discover the cause of the descent of heavy bodies2 for there being in the earth the magnetic virtue1 and in all other mixtures particles of iron1 in spite of all our endeavours to separate them1 they always would be brought together again by attraction4 ,but as he who is a lover of the truth1 should conceal no objection that may be made to any supposition that he advances1 ,i will not dissemble1 that ,i find a terrible one against this idea of mine2 which is1 that according to this system1 iron should be heavier than gold2 for although we should admit1 that some iron1 or magnetic particles are mixed with the gold1 it is not credible1 that the quantity of them should be equal to those in the iron itself2 for if that was the case1 the load-stone would attract the gold1 as it does the iron4 ,but whether there is in the terraqueous globe1 another attractive quality distinct in kind from that of the load-stone1 in virtue of which1 all bodies may be disposed to approach it which we call heavy1 by having in themselves a propensity to do it correspondent to that there is between the load-stone and the iron1 is very difficult to be proved4 ,,on ,,sceptical ,,philosophy4 ,,sect4 ,i4 ,i4 ,there is so great a latitude in scepticism1 and its gradations are so different1 that according to the various extension that is given to the meaning of the word1 it is used to describe the most extravagant error1 and the most prudent mode of philosophizing4 ,rigid scepticism is a wild delirium1 moderate is prudent caution4 ,but those who in this age1 have undertaken to combat the moderate sceptics1 have either from ignorance or malice1 confounded them with the rigid4 ,when ,i reflect how gross a thing ignorance must be in such a case1 it makes me think they acted from malice1 and when ,i consider how detestable a thing malice is1 it makes me conclude what they did was through ignorance4 ,,ii4 ,although the ,greek word scepsis1 from whence sceptic and scepticism are derived1 signifies inquisition1 investigation1 and speculation1 custom has in a great measure altered the meaning of the term2 on which account1 sceptical at this day1 implies doubt1 or doubting2 and scepticism1 that particular avowal which sceptics make of doubting1 or withholding their assent to all matters1 that are liable to be controverted or disputed4 ,,iii4 ,this doubt or suspension of assent1 may be more or less rational1 in proportion to the greater or less extent that is given to it1 or according to the matters to which it relates4 ,thus1 although doubting of many things would be prudence1 doubting of all would be madness4 ,,sect4 ,,ii4 ,,iv4 ,and although authors commonly represent to us1 some subtil philosophers of antiquity1 as obstinately persisting in suspending their assent to every thing that was proposed to them1 and which was evident both to their reason1 and their senses1 and likewise represent them1 as earned defenders of universal scepticism1 to which opinion they refuse to admit of the least exception2 yet for all this1 it is very doubtful to me1 whether these were their real sentiments2 and ,i am rather inclined to think1 they did it1 to shew their ingenuity1 and to display their talent for disputing2 or that from some other motive1 they spoke differently from what they thought4 ,the most famous among this tribe1 were ,archesilaus1 ,carneades1 and ,pyrrho4 ,but the first1 if we believe ,sextus ,empericus1 was in reality a ,platonist1 and only a sceptic in appearance2 whose method it was1 always to dispute problematically upon every thing in public1 but was ever careful to suggest in private1 to such of his disciples as he found were the most capable1 the ,platonic doctrine4 ,cicero says1 that his zeal for contesting every thing that was advanced by his school-fellow and rival ,zeno1 carried him to the dangerous extreme1 of endeavouring1 although it was against the conviction of his own mind1 to refute whatever was advanced by ,zeno4 ,we may add to this1 that according to the testimony of ,diogenes ,laertius1 ,archesilaus never went to the extreme of doubting the evidence of his senses1 but rather treated with contempt and derision1 those who carried scepticism to that length4 ,v4 ,carneades was a most subtil philosopher1 and so eminent as an orator1 that ,cicero in various parts of his works speaks of him with admiration and envy2 and assures us1 that by the keenness of his ingenuity1 and the fertile torrent of his elocution1 he could persuade his hearers to believe whatever he thought fit1 and ,quintilian1 and ,numenius1 declare the same2 and it is probable1 that his propensity for disputation1 and his ambition of shewing his ingenuity1 excited him to contest the most established axioms2 which together with his affecting to distrust the evidence of his senses1 made him pass for a rigorous sceptic4 ,but we may venture to assert1 that if an historical anecdote which is related of him by ,numenius is to be credited1 ,carneades believed his eyes as much as any man living2 for having surprized a concubine of his in the embraces of his beloved disciple ,mentor1 he was so offended at his treachery1 that he broke with him for ever1 and excluded him from being the successor to his academy4 ,how happened it then1 that like a good sceptic1 he did not doubt whether the representation of that obscenity1 might not be a deceptio visus8 ,i for my own part am inclined to think1 that there never yet was a sceptic in the world1 who after the exhibition of such evidence1 could maintain his heart and his mind in a state of suspence4 ,,vi4 ,it is commonly said of ,pyrrho1 who was by so much the most famous of all the sceptics1 that he in a manner obscured the others1 by giving his name to the system of universal doubt1 which at this day is called ,pyrrhonism1 and the sectaries of it ,pyrrhonists2 and he was so positive in maintaining1 that we should suspend our opinion1 with respect to all we saw1 or felt1 that he would not turn the least aside1 to avoid being run over by a mad horse1 or bit by a mad dog2 nor would he slacken his pace1 although he was warned that he was advancing near the edge of a precipice2 and that he would have perished a thousand times by these dangers1 if his friends1 who were attentive to his safety1 had not prevented his running headlong into them4 ,but although this account of him is much vulgarized1 ,i do not know whether any other antient author1 except ,antigonus ,carystius1 a ,greek historian1 who was contemporary with1 or lived very nearly in the days of ,pyrrho1 has vouched the truth of it2 at least the learned ,la ,mothe de la ,vayer1 quotes him as the only author1 who attests the relation2 and it is even doubtful whether ,antigonus ,carystius asserts the thing positively1 because in the ,prparat4 ,evang4 lib4 #ad4 cap4 #ah4 of ,eusebius1 we find this author quoted for a fact1 which contradicts that relation2 which is1 that ,pyrrho1 when a dog was once about to run at him1 climbed up a tree to get out of his way1 and avoid the danger4 ,upon which occasion1 those who were present1 raillied him upon the difference there was between his doctrine and his practice4 ,,vii4 ,but let ,antigonus ,carystius1 who is an author ,i have not seen1 or any other whatever1 say what they will1 to give sanction to this relation1 we may without the apprehension of being accused of injustice1 condemn as incredible1 the account of ,pyrrho's having carried his extravagance to such a length4 ,this philosopher lived to the age of ninety1 and through the whole course of so long a life1 it is not probable1 he should always have friends at his elbow1 ready to save him from the many dangers1 to which a man of so rash a conduct must unavoidably have been very frequently exposed1 and especially1 in the long voyage he made to ,india to consult the ,gymnosophists4 ,diogenes ,laertius1 who is the person that gives us the account of the great age to which ,pyrrho lived1 and of his voyage to ,india1 assures us1 that ,pyrrho led a very solitary and retired life1 which is not very compatible with his having always been attended by his friends1 nor is it reasonable to conclude1 that a man who was so very ridiculous as he is described to have been1 could have very many1 or very sincere ones4 ,finally1 the citizens of ,elis1 his countrymen1 elected him the high priest of their religion4 ,now how is it credible1 that they should have confided such an employment to a person1 who if his scepticism had been carried to the length we have mentioned1 they must certainly have looked upon as a mad man8 ,from this circumstance1 it may also be inferred1 that the charge of impiety1 which was generally imputed to him1 was an unjust one2 because his countrymen would hardly have elected him the supreme minister of their religion1 if they had known that he professed to be of no religion at all1 and that he doubted the existence of a deity4 ,what devotion or zeal could they expect for the service of the temple1 from a man1 who either was ignorant of1 or doubted whether the object of their worship existed8 ,,sect4 ,,iii4 ,,viii4 ,i not only think1 that these philosophers did not in their hearts1 adopt the system of universal doubt2 but ,i also believe1 there never was any one who sincerely did it2 because there are objects1 with respect to which1 there can be no doubt but by implication4 ,no one1 for example1 can doubt of his own existence4 ,the very act of doubting1 is affirmative of a certain knowledge1 because he who doubts1 must certainly be convinced that he does doubt2 and if the sceptics are not certain that they doubt1 how can they affirm they do with such obstinacy and stiffness8 ,therefore we should conclude1 that it is not from sentiment1 but from their fondness for disputation1 that some of them defend the system of universal scepticism2 and if there ever was any one who truly assented to it1 we should not consider him as a philosopher1 but as a lunatic2 for it would be improper to call maintaining such a system1 a particular mode of philosophizing1 as we ought with more justice1 to term it a particular mode of raving4 ,,ix4 ,it is most likely then1 that the most rigid sceptics1 and those who were truly and bona fide such1 admitted of some exceptions to the universality of their system1 or understood it in some determined sense1 which limited or restrained it4 ,socrates1 whom some look upon as the primitive father of the sceptics1 said of himself1 that he knew nothing with certainty1 except it was his ignorance of all things4 ,this however1 was placing some sort of limitation to the system1 although it was but a very small one4 ,but ,i am of opinion1 that ,socrates1 who was a very modest man1 only meant to say1 that what he knew amounted to but a small matter1 and that therefore we ought to understand his declaring himself totally ignorant1 as an hyperbolical expression4 ,saint ,justin the martyr1 and other fathers who highly applauded that philosopher1 would not have done it1 if they had taken him for a rigid sceptic1 which would have amounted to the same1 as his having been an impious man2 because it is evident1 that he who doubts of every thing1 cannot be a person of any religious principles2 but he was so far from such a kind of man1 that it is most probable1 the ,athenians condemned him to death1 because he affirmed the existence of one only ,god4 ,it is at least certain1 that he treated the multifarious number of the heathen gods with great derision2 from whence we should conclude1 that he knew this important truth1 that the ,godhead admits of no multiplication4 ,x4 ,other sceptics1 who said that they doubted of every thing1 and that we ought to doubt of every thing1 did not perhaps mean to exclude all certainty1 but only scientific and demonstrative certainty1 which except in mathematical cases1 we must confess is very rare to be found4 ,even many mathematical demonstrations1 and especially those which are very complicated1 are not exempt from the suspicion1 of there being some occult fallacy contained in them1 on which account they ceased to be true demonstrations4 ,how many have presumed to demonstrate they could square the circle1 whose modes of doing it1 and their reasonings upon the subject1 when they came to be submitted to rigorous examination1 have been found to have some sophism involved in them1 or to have been built upon some supposition which was taken for certain1 when in reality it was not so4 ,the geometrical demonstrations1 with which they prove the infinite divisibility of the continued quantity1 are sufficiently simple2 notwithstanding which1 there are authors1 who because the infinite divisibility of the quantity is imperceptible1 suspect1 that there is some occult sophistry involved in those demonstrations4 ,,xi4 ,others have refused to credit the evidence of their senses2 but not so grossly1 but that they have condescended to make use of them to direct their actions in the common affairs of civil and human life4 ,they govern themselves by them for the purpose of living1 but not for that of philosophizing4 ,the information of their senses serves them to chuse the useful1 and avoid the pernicious1 but not to determine the theory of an object4 ,,xii4 ,the arguments they assign for this distrust of their senses in the last instance1 may be reduced to three4 ,the first is1 the distinction we should admit between the impression which objects make on our senses1 and the absolute essence or quality contained in the objects themselves4 ,for example1 we say that hemlock is bitter4 ,if by this expression1 we mean to declare1 that this herb makes on our palate a determined impression or sensation1 which we call bitterness1 we speak properly2 but if we mean to say that the herb in itself contains an absolute quality1 which we describe by the same name1 we speak improperly2 for if this was the case1 all the animals who relish hemlock would find it bitter2 but it happens otherwise1 for the goats are fond of it1 and eat it greedily4 ,in the same manner do all those reason1 who adopt this mode of arguing with respect to all other sensible species4 ,they say1 the fire produces in us that kind of impression1 which we call heat2 but that we ought not from thence to conclude1 that it is hot in itself4 ,thus although by approaching very near to it1 it produces pain in us1 still it is not sensible of any itself4 ,therefore we ought not for this reason1 to say the fire contains pain1 it being at most only capable of occasioning pain2 neither ought we to call it hot1 but only capable of producing heat2 nor can we call it hot but by equivocation1 as we say1 ,medicine is healthy1 because it produces health in the animal4 ,,xiii4 ,this distinction is the fundamental maxim1 by which the modern philosophers maintain their rejection of all the sensible qualities1 which are assigned by ,aristotle and his followers to objects2 and they carry the matter so far1 that they will positively assert to you1 that neither snow is white1 nor charcoal black1 nor a bell sonorous1 nor a flower fragrant2 and if you mean to express by these denominations1 intrinsic qualities1 or such as proceed from some accidental intrinsic form contained in objects2 they will not allow such descriptions of things to be good and valid1 but only so far as they signify certain determined impressions1 which by means of the physical and corporeal impulse of the insensible particles of matter1 are made on our organs1 which are of the same use to us1 to enable us to chuse the good1 and avoid the pernicious1 as our knowledge of the real intrinsic forms would be4 ,they proceed to assert1 that men would equally abstain from eating arsenic1 if they believed the moderns1 who say this mineral kills by dissolving the blood1 by the rapid motion of its particles2 as they would by believing ,aristotle1 who imputes all the mischief it occasions to be the effect of a venomous quality existing in the arsenic1 and that they would be equally anxious to acquire gold1 by believing the moderns1 who say its brilliant yellow hue is the effect of a determined impression made by the light on the retina1 where it appears reflected in that colour1 from the particular texture of the insensible particles of the gold1 as they would1 by believing ,aristotle1 who says1 the colour proceeds from an accidental form1 inherent in the gold itself4 ,i know very well1 that a learned philosopher said1 a little while ago1 that the ladies had great reason to complain of ,descartes1 for having taken from their faces that delicate smooth whiteness which makes them look so tempting1 and for having placed it in their admirer's eyes4 ,but although this may do very well as a joke1 it is certain1 that the charm has an equal effect to make them appear desirable1 whether it is stamped on the eyes1 by the particular reflection1 which1 by the determined texture of the insensible particles of the skin1 is made by the light1 or whether it is produced by the intrinsic quality1 which the ,aristotelicans assign as the cause of colours2 and ,i much doubt1 whether to this day1 the ,carthesian philosophy has served any man as a preservative1 against the venom of that sweet poison1 which we call beauty4 ,,sect4 ,,iv4 ,,xiv4 ,the second reason assigned for distrusting the evidence of our senses1 is the experience we have of the alterations which are produced on sensible species1 either by the interposition of a medium1 or the different dispositions of our organs4 ,the species1 which by passing through a uniform1 or homogeneous medium1 appears straight1 by being passed through a different one1 will seem crooked1 as may be evinced by passing a straight wand from the air through water1 which1 by virtue of the refraction of rays produced in its passage from one element to the other1 will make it appear crooked4 ,to him who has a jaundice1 every thing he looks at seems yellow2 and although it is true1 that this is the effect of a preternatural accident1 we are not certain1 whether abstracted from all morbific dispositions1 there are not in various individuals1 different temperaments and configuration of parts1 which are capable of producing different sensations with respect to the same object2 and it seems most probable1 from all that is evident and manifest to our observation and experience1 that the thing is so1 for we don't see any one individual1 who is perfectly and exactly like another2 and we have known men1 whose right eyes have represented objects1 both with respect to colour and magnitude1 different from their left4 ,,sect4 ,v4 ,,xv4 ,the third ground for the said distrust1 is derived from the erroneous representation of things made by the imaginary faculty1 which fancies external sensations of objects that do not exist4 ,such1 for example1 as the imagination of him who has had a leg cut off1 representing to him a pain in the leg or foot that has been amputated2 or that of an hypocondriac person1 who fancies himself to be glass1 earthen ware1 a wolf1 or a dog1 whose imagination represents those strange forms1 as evidently and manifestly palpable to his senses2 so that he who fancies himself glass1 will swear with invincible firmness1 that he perceives in his own person the transparency1 and feels on his own skin the smooth surface1 which is proper and peculiar to that artificial composition4 ,,xvi4 ,this error is common to all men in their wanderings when they are asleep2 because he who dreams1 believes he perceives those objects with his senses1 which he only perceives with his imagination2 and from hence1 the rigid sceptics deduce a most pernicious argument1 by way of proving1 that we should doubt of every thing2 because they say no man can be positively certain1 whether he is asleep or awake2 according to which mode of reasoning1 no one can be certain1 whether he sees1 hears1 or touches any thing whatever2 for notwithstanding his having the greatest confidence that he is awake1 it is possible that he may be sleeping2 and that the things which are represented to him as seen1 heard1 c4 are all imaginary4 ,for example1 ,i consider myself as now writing1 and reading what ,i write4 ,but what certainty have ,i that ,i am writing and reading8 ,have not ,i dreamed a thousand times1 that ,i was reading and writing8 ,and at those times1 such occupations appeared to me1 not as things that ,i was dreaming of1 but as exercises that ,i was really and actually practising2 and therefore1 that may be the case with me at present4 ,,xvii4 ,i have said already1 and with reason1 that this argument is a most pernicious and dangerous one2 for whatever answer you make to it1 your adversary turns upon you1 and urges the opposite opinion as forcibly1 as you can support your reply4 ,at least ,i have never seen any solution of this matter1 which could more or less vanquish the force of the difficulty4 ,it has been objected to this sort of reasoning1 that the argument proves too much1 and tends to involve in1 and reduce to the same state of doubt1 all the sacred dogmas of religion4 ,this remark is a just one1 for he who comes to doubt1 whether all he hears or sees is not a mere imaginary representation1 must necessarily doubt of the reality of all the instruction he has received1 both with respect to religion1 and every other matter4 ,but what advantage shall we gain1 by insisting upon this against a sceptic1 whose intention perhaps is to destroy all religion8 ,and although he should not argue with this depraved view1 but should reply to these objections out of wantonness1 or from motives of vanity and ostentation1 and a fondness of shewing his parts1 it would be wasting time to dispute with him1 or to press the argument1 because these instances1 notwithstanding they are good ones and may be fairly insisted on1 are not answers4 ,,xviii4 ,it is certain there are some truths1 that maugre the clearness and confidence with which the understanding assents to them1 are not exempt from being exposed to difficult objections2 or to speak more properly1 there is no truth whatever1 be it ever so firmly established1 against which1 some sophistical objection may not be raised4 ,it would therefore not be right upon all occasions1 to give up a maxim1 whose truth we clearly perceive and are convinced of1 only because we can't reply to every argument that may be urged against it4 ,there are truths of such a nature1 that although they would strike1 and be clear to any man of ordinary understanding1 still1 the giving an answer to every objection that could be raised against them1 might possibly be found a difficult task to a person of very subtil ingenuity4 ,and notwithstanding we should not be able to hit upon an argument1 that would confront or silence those which are used by the sceptics1 to persuade us to doubt whether we are sleeping or waking1 we should not abandon ourselves to such a doubt1 but support ourselves in a firm confidence1 that we are not mistaken with respect to the state we are in4 ,and in truth1 the arguments used to make us doubt of it1 are not of such a nature1 as that a clear1 solid1 and unembarrassed answer may not be given to them4 ,,xix4 ,and in order to do this1 ,i shall begin with supposing1 that evidence in this case may be of two sorts1 mediate1 and immediate4 ,an evident proposition1 supported by immediate evidence1 is1 when without the assistance of any kind of proof1 it presents itself so clearly to our understandings1 that the mind is constrained by invincible necessity to assent to it4 ,an evident proposition supported by mediate evidence1 is1 when of itself1 it is not represented to our understandings with all this clearness1 but is necessarily inferred from some other self-evident proposition4 ,,xx4 ,i will suppose1 secondly1 that immediate evidence should be divided1 into metaphysical and experimental4 ,the first is governed by universal principles1 which of themselves persuade or convince the understanding2 such as these1 the whole is greater than a part2 two contradictory propositions can't be both true at one and the same time4 ,experimental evidence is derived from certain singular truths1 which strike every individual with infallible conviction2 such as these1 that ,i at present have such or such a desire1 or that ,i think of such or such a thing1 that ,i suffer some pain1 or that ,i am affected with some particular sensation2 for example1 joy1 sadness1 or anger4 ,,xxi4 ,that every individual feels this experimental evidence in some particular instances1 no one can doubt1 and even if any person1 by giving to his scepticism all imaginable extension1 should be desirous of doubting of every thing1 he could never stifle the experimental evidence that he doubted4 ,and here ,i can't help remarking1 that experimental evidence is a thing of such moment to the ,carthesians1 that all their metaphysical testimonies depend on1 or are derived from it2 because1 from that first maxim or proposition1 ,i think1 is inferred immediately1 the proof of their own existence2 and mediately1 all the other demonstrable truths1 are established upon experimental evidence only4 ,,xxii4 ,it is also certain1 that from the truths which are established upon experimental evidence1 you can deduce no demonstrative reasoning2 or at least of that sort1 which the logicians call priori4 ,the reason is1 because they are evident of themselves1 or else are supported by immediate evidence1 and are not dependant upon any other thing from whence they are inferred4 ,therefore1 although for example1 ,i at present am convinced that ,i am desirous of eating such or such a thing1 ,i cannot persuade any other person that ,i fancy it1 by any immediate demonstration2 because this is evident to me1 not from any principle that is notorious to all mankind1 and from whence may be inferred the existence of such a desire2 but because the appetite itself1 is intimately connected with my spirit1 and ,i feel it so forcibly1 that ,i cannot doubt of its existence3 the same thing happens in the cases of those truths1 which are established upon immediate metaphysical evidence4 ,if ,i should be asked1 how ,i know that the whole is greater than one of its parts1 ,i should answer1 that ,i do not know it from any principle from whence it may be inferred1 but because the truth1 that the whole is larger than a part1 is so clearly evident to my mind1 that it is as incompatible with doubt1 as the light of the sun with midnight darkness4 ,if any one should deny to me1 the truth of the maxim1 that two contradictory propositions cannot be both true at the same time1 it would be impossible for me to prove the truth of the maxim1 either by arguments deduced priori1 or posteriori4 ,the reason is plain1 because if ,i was to argue the point1 the most ,i could do1 would be insisting on the manifest contradiction1 and asserting the impossibility of the thing1 which is the last resource of logical dialect4 ,but observe1 when we are got thus far1 my adversary1 to act consistently with his first caprice1 thinks fit to change his ground1 and to admit both extremes of the contradiction1 and to insist they are both true4 ,now how1 in this case1 am ,i to prove that they cannot be so8 ,why ,i can do it by no other means1 than by having recourse to the axiom1 that it is impossible two contradictory propositions can be both true at the same time4 ,but this is begging the question from the beginning1 and proving what is denied1 by the same proposition which is the subject of the dispute4 ,,xxiii4 ,the suppositions we have just made1 contain all the solutions we are capable of giving1 to the above argument4 ,i say then1 that ,i myself1 and ,i say the same of all others1 who are in my present situation and circumstances1 have experimental ,evidence that ,i am now awake3 because the state of wakefulness1 which consists1 in the intimate and ultimate disposition of the faculties to exercise themselves in proper operations1 is an object1 which presents itself to my mind1 with such clearness1 that if ,i was never so desirous of doing it1 ,i cannot entertain a doubt of my being at present in that state2 nor can any other reason be required of me1 nor can ,i give any other1 for assenting to this truth2 neither can ,i for my assent to a first principle1 give any other than the beforementioned1 nor alledge any other1 to explain the existence of any reflection1 which my soul is at present intent upon4 ,,xxiv4 ,i will not however dissemble1 that after this answer is given1 there still remains a serious difficulty to surmount1 which may be stated in the following manner4 ,the experimental evidence1 from whence we deduce this persuasion1 is fallacious2 because when we sleep and dream1 we are under the same persuasion that we are awake1 and our senses then represent to us1 that we are engaged in actual exercises in such a manner1 that if it was at that time to occur to us1 to make reflection upon what we were doing1 we should conceive1 that we had experimental evidence of our speaking1 seeing1 hearing1 c4 ,therefore the idea that ,i now entertain upon reflection1 that ,i have at present experimental evidence of my being at this instant awake1 and engaged in study and writing1 affords me no absolute certainty that ,i am not asleep1 or that ,i am actually so employed4 ,,xxv4 ,this is the utmost extent to which the matter of doubting can be carried4 ,but by way of answer to it1 ,i shall reply1 that the persuasion we have of being awake when we are dreaming1 differs greatly from that we have of being awake1 when we actually are so4 ,this last is a clear1 firm1 determined1 invincible persuasion1 and such a one1 as is required to constitute experimental evidence of the certainty of the fact2 which it does in such a manner1 that notwithstanding all the reflections we can make1 and all the doubts and difficulties we can suggest1 our assent to1 and persuasion of the truth of it1 remains firm and unshaken4 ,on the contrary1 when we are dreaming1 our reflection is obscure1 and the persuasion produced in consequence of it1 feeble and wavering2 which will evidently appear to be the case1 if in the course of our dreaming1 it should occur to us to make a doubtful reflection1 whether what our imagination represents to us is reality1 or only a dream2 and the result to a man who was to do this would be1 a faint and doubtful determination of whether he actually dreams1 or only believes he is dreaming1 and he would remain in a state of doubt1 whether what his fancy represents to him be real or not4 ,i say in all these cases1 his decision of the matter1 would not be resolute and firm1 but wavering and languid4 ,this doubt of whether ,i am asleep or not1 often occurs to me in dreams1 which never fails to produce one of the two following effects1 either to certify to me that ,i am dreaming1 or to make me suspend my assent to the fact4 ,and ,i will venture to assure any one1 who shall persist for a few moments1 in proposing these doubts to himself when he is dreaming1 that he will find the same thing happen to him4 ,,xxvi4 ,we may make use of the same reasoning1 if the argument is applied to the deliriums of maniacs4 ,every man1 who after having been deprived of his reason1 comes to be restored to his senses1 finds a great difference with respect to the persuasions he feels1 and the clearness of the opinions he forms in a state of sanity1 and those he entertained when he was mad4 ,mad people seldom make any reflections1 either on the state of their mind1 or the subject of their madness2 and when they do happen to make them1 are generally more or less blinded by their apprehensions2 of which ,i myself have known some instances2 and it has fallen in my way1 by the force of lively representations1 first to prevail on some mad people to doubt of the truth of their apprehensions1 and afterwards to reason them out of them2 among whom there was a nun1 who had been exceedingly mad for some years1 and whose life was thought to be in danger1 although in reality it was not so2 and ,i being called to administer the sacraments to her1 was so happy as to reduce her mind to a state of calmness1 that rendered her capable of receiving them as a penitent4 ,this ,i accomplished1 by using various reasonings and arguments1 tending to undeceive her1 and at last was so fortunate as to hit upon one1 adapted to the nature of her disease1 and the state of her mind1 which had its effect3 but in doing this1 great attention should be had to the tone of the voice1 and the energy and vivacity of the looks1 and care should be taken1 that every action should be such1 as is likely to give efficacy and force to the arguments you use1 in order that they should make an impression on their minds2 great caution should also be used not to irritate them2 and by these means1 they are often brought to intervals of sense2 and although it is true1 that they seldom last long1 still the gaining an hour of calm reason1 is a matter of great importance1 as it was in the case of the nun we have just mentioned4 ,,xxvii4 ,the delicacy and curiosity of this subject1 has caused me to dwell on it longer than was necessary2 for ,i am so far from apprehending1 that the arguments which are used in support of universal scepticism1 will prevail with1 or have any weight on the world in general1 that ,i do not believe there ever yet was a man1 who in reality was convinced by them4 ,,sect4 ,,vi4 ,,xxviii4 ,the limitations with which rigid scepticism may be mitigated1 are innumerable2 consequently1 scepticism will appear more or less absurd1 according to the various exceptions with which it is corrected2 but this is a matter of such extent1 that to reason upon it with any degree of precision would fill a large volume4 ,i shall therefore proceed to treat of scepticism1 as confined within the line of physics1 which is the point1 to which ,i proposed at first to restrain my arguments on this subject4 ,,sect4 ,,vii4 ,,xxix4 ,i have always wondered1 and do not yet cease to wonder1 at seeing modern philosophers attack scepticism as a physical error1 and am much astonished1 to find them condemn it in that sense as an error1 dangerous to the dogmas of faith4 ,nor can ,i comprehend1 how such a charge can arise1 otherwise1 than from gross ignorance or malicious spite2 unless it is applied to some sceptic1 who from explaining himself loosely1 may have given occasion for such an imputation4 ,,xxx4 ,the system of physical scepticism1 asserts1 that physical and natural things1 do not admit of demonstration or scientific certainty1 but that they are all matter of opinion2 and consequently1 that we should not call natural philosophy a science1 because strictly speaking it is not one1 but rather a habit1 or acquired facility1 of reasoning with probability upon natural things4 ,we shall understand science in this place1 in the sense which ,aristotle and the schoolmen understand it1 who define it1 to be an evident knowledge of the effect by the cause4 ,but in our definitions1 we shall not exclude experimental certainty1 or certain knowledge1 acquired by the experience we have had1 and the observations we have made1 of physical matters2 but we shall rather maintain it1 as the only method by which we can arrive at attaining truth2 although ,i doubt whether we shall ever attain by it1 a discovery of the internal1 or intimate nature of things4 ,,xxxi4 ,neither will we deny1 that with respect to physical objects1 many propositions may be advanced or supported1 which are deducible with infallible certainty from metaphysical principles3 as for example from this1 the whole is greater than its part1 is evidently inferred1 that a man is bigger than his head2 and from this1 being is the effect of operation1 is inferred1 that my father existed when he begot me4 ,but these1 and other innumerable demonstrations of this sort1 afford no physical knowledge whatever2 because they do not manifest in any degree1 either great or small1 the nature of the very entities which are the objects of them4 ,why do ,i say manifest the nature of the entities8 ,they do not even display to the understanding1 a single truth1 which may not be comprehended without their help1 by the most rustic man upon earth4 ,so that the syllogistical conclusions upon infallible truths1 which the school philosophers so much boast of1 do nothing more1 than explain by circumlocution and in terms of art1 the very things1 which may be immediately comprehended1 and naturally explained1 by any rational man who never studied4 ,further1 how can they call by the name of demonstrations1 things which demonstrate nothing8 that is1 they manifest nothing1 but what was manifest without their assistance4 ,a logician will say1 thinking he says something to the purpose1 that he knows by means of the art of demonstration1 that which he could not know artificially without this aid4 ,but ,i answer1 that this artificial knowledge is totally useless1 because it neither manifests to me any one truth of which ,i was before ignorant1 nor does it illustrate to me with greater clearness1 the things ,i was before acquainted with2 it being certain1 that it is as evident and clear to the rustic1 and that he assents with as much firmness1 that the whole tree is bigger than one of its branches1 without the help of artificial logic1 as ,i do1 assisted with my whole armory of syllogisms4 ,if a learned person1 should undertake to instruct a man who walks well1 and with a good grace1 by explaining to him all the laws of motion1 to step scientifically2 and also1 by explaining to him the number and use of the muscles1 should teach him the application of those laws to every member of his body concerned in that exercise2 should not we be apt to say1 that besides his taking a very tedious one1 he had also taken a very needless trouble1 it being certain1 that his pupil1 after all this pains1 would not walk a jot better1 if so well as he did before2 the cases are similar4 ,,sect4 ,,viii4 ,,xxxii4 ,the thing then being understood1 in the sense we have explained it1 the conclusion ,i draw from the premises is1 that science1 or scientific certainty is not to be found in physics4 ,doctor ,martinez1 in the second volume of his ,medicina ,sceptica1 7,convers4 #bg47 proves this conclusion abundantly1 both by the authority of scripture1 and by the sentences of many fathers2 though as the works of this author are easily to be met with1 ,i shall not here insert the authorities he quotes1 but shall content myself with adding to them two very remarkable ones that he has omitted4 ,the first is1 that of my father ,st4 ,bernard 7in ,cant4 ,cantic4 ,serm4 ,,xxxiii471 who when he is speaking of philosophers1 says1 ,vagi sunt1 nulla stabiles certitudine veritatis1 semper discentes1 et nunquam ad scientiam veritatis pervenientes4 ,and it is somewhat remarkable1 that the ,saint says further1 philosophers never arrive at attaining a certain knowledge of the very truths they themselves are in search of1 and are desirous of teaching to other people3 semper discentes2 and lest some should conclude he spoke of supernatural truths1 ,i thought it necessary to hint here1 that these are not the objects of philosophical inquiries4 ,neither should we suppose1 that he spoke of the moral philosophers1 because many of these1 even including the ,gentiles1 investigated many truths1 that came within the compass of their plan1 with intire certainty2 and it is evident1 that if ,aristotle1 had written with as much precision upon physics1 as he did upon ethics1 we needed not to have wished for any thing better4 ,,xxxiii4 ,the second authority1 is that of ,lactantius ,firmianus1 an illustrious person1 and a venerable member of the church2 this great man 7,lib4 ,,iii4 ,divin4 ,instit4 ,cap4 iv4 v4 and vi47 treats largely of the scepticism of ,archesilaus1 of whom we have spoken before1 and after combating and confronting this philosopher effectually on the subject of universal doubt1 admits without reserve1 that he would have been right1 if he had limited his scepticism to matters of physics1 because there is not1 nor ever can be any science1 which will teach mankind1 the causes and reasons of natural things3 ,quanto faceret sapientius1 ac verius1 si exceptione facta diceret causas1 rationesque duntaxat rerum clestium1 seu naturalium1 quia sunt abdit1 nec sciri posse1 quia nullus doceat1 nec quri opportere1 quia inveniri qurendo non possunt4 ,,xxxiv4 ,some of the sceptics themselves prove our conclusion1 for they say1 that the things appertaining to physics are singular1 and that from singular things you cannot derive a science4 ,but this reason does not satisfy me4 ,in the first place1 notwithstanding physical things are for the most part singular1 they in some instances may cease to be singular4 ,thus1 although every real entity is singular1 it may1 contemplated metaphysically1 depart from its singularity4 ,in fact1 the schoolmen together with ,st4 ,thomas say1 that physics may depart or be separated from their singular1 but not from their sensible nature2 and that mathematical things1 may depart or be separated from their singular and sensible1 but not from their intelligible nature2 also1 that metaphysical ones1 may depart or be separated from their singular1 sensible1 and intelligible4 ,in the next place1 the axiom that from singular things you can derive no science1 should be understood with some grains of allowance2 that is1 of such singular things as are particularly necessary to the individual1 and are accidental to the species2 but from those which appertain or belong to the species1 science may be deduced1 even when they are connected with the individual4 ,for example4 ,if ,i know scientifically2 that man according to the general received opinion respecting him1 is risible1 ,i also know scientifically that ,peter is risible1 for in the following syllogism2 every man is risible2 ,peter is a man2 and therefore ,peter is risible1 is implied the truth of the premises1 and the consequence deducible from it is1 that it is scientifically evident4 ,further1 if ever a philosopher should arise1 who should know with certainty1 the specific nature of all material entities1 and from that knowledge1 should be able to demonstrate all their properties1 and the respective operations appertaining to each species1 and in virtue of this extraordinary penetration1 should be capable of giving reasons priori for all the phenomena of nature1 we should not be able to deny1 that such a philosopher possessed physical science1 notwithstanding the object of his science1 related only to the species1 unconnected with individuals4 ,what then remains to be proved1 is1 that in physics there is to be found no sort of science1 or evident knowledge of the matters appertaining merely to physics1 abstracted from all other considerations2 and truly the dogmatic naturalists1 would be very happy1 could they be permitted to possess a knowledge that amounts to as much as this2 nor would it disturb them1 to have it dinned in their ears1 that the knowledge of common conceptions is metaphysical1 and not physical2 for they would tell you1 that both physics1 and metaphysics1 may depart or be separated from their singularity1 and that the principal distinction between them is1 that the last regards its object with a greater degree of abstraction2 that is1 as exempt from all matter1 and considers only those reasons1 which may subsist abstracted from matter1 such for example as spiritual entities2 on the contrary1 physics only contemplate material and corporeal entities2 the most sublime of which conceptions1 is that which regards the reason of the body1 and the lowest1 that which is attached to the corporeal part of it4 ,but call this knowledge by what sort of name you will1 either physical or metaphysical1 the way to bring the matter to a short issue is1 to shew that there is not in reality1 any such knowledge4 ,,xxxv4 ,and what is more easy to be proved than this8 ,i reason thus2 physics contemplate the nature of an entity that has motion1 or circulation2 this may be considered1 either according to the specific1 or generative nature of the thing2 and ,i assert1 that nothing is known with certainty of the nature of any entity that has motion or circulation1 either in one or the other of the before named senses4 ,,xxxvi4 ,and to begin with the specific1 who can deny that in this sense1 we know nothing of any one entity8 ,i defy all the philosophers to tell me what is the constituent or component physical substance1 of any one of the material entities that is to be found in the universe1 and will give them leave to chuse that which they have most examined4 ,st4 ,basil has some words 7,epist4 #afh4 ad ,eunomium7 that are admirably applicable to this purpose1 and which ,i shall here insert3 ,itaque qui se existentium scientiam assequutum esse gloriatur1 exponat nobis quomodo1 quod minimum esse eorum1 qu in lucem prodierunt1 natura habeat4 ,let the presumptuous philosopher1 who boasts of his physical knowledge1 explain to us the nature of the least entity which ,god has created4 ,let him1 adds the same ,father1 who is ostentatiously vain of having penetrated into the secrets of nature1 tell us what is the nature of an ant3 ,dicat formicarum nobis naturam1 qui eorum1 qu in natura sunt scientiam cum fastu se prdicat assequutum4 ,but why should we waste time8 ,there is not1 nor ever was to this day1 any one1 who by means of acquired science1 could penetrate the constituent or component physical substance of any living or inanimate entity2 the reach of our capacities not permitting us to go further1 than to distinguish by some very extrinsic accidents1 one thing from another2 and this mode of distinguishing1 is confined principally to those we call naturalists1 and rarely extends to those in the schools1 who acquire the appellation of philosophers1 and who generally content themselves with distinguishing some few1 which they commonly do in the unhappy manner we shall proceed to point out2 but when school philosophers descend to treat of specific conceptions1 their philosophy is so miserable and confined1 that they only attempt to give the colour of a definition to a few species of brutes1 whose voice they describe by some particular name1 and then explain their conception of them1 by some term derived from that name2 thus they call the lion a roaring animal2 the dog a barking one1 and the horse a neighing one2 but the fish1 because they are very numerous1 and are for the most part mute1 cannot well be comprehended within this rule1 and therefore are obliged to go without a definition4 ,,xxxvii4 ,the school philosophers cannot be ignorant1 that these are not definitions1 but should rather be termed mere shadows of definitions1 which they make use of for want of true ones1 to express logically1 what definition is1 what species1 what gender1 what difference1 and other things appertaining to logical dialect2 but is it not clear1 that defining a horse by calling him a neighing animal1 can give us no better conception of the creature1 than may be conveyed to us by the most stupid clown1 who would explain the thing more simply1 and without school jargon1 by telling us that a horse is an animal that neighs1 or is capable of neighing8 ,oh6 what a penetrating philosophical description is this of the nature of a horse6 ,,xxxviii4 ,if any one1 notwithstanding what has been said1 should chuse to reply1 that nature1 as the root of all operations1 should be explained according to the order1 or habit of those operations2 and thus1 that a horse is well and physically defined1 by the radical order of the act of neighing2 if any one1 ,i say1 should reply to me in this manner2 ,i apprise him in the first place1 that all substantial nature has its absolute being1 which is understood to be antecedent to the order of operations1 for the first1 is supposed to be the cause or reason of the other2 that is to say1 because such a thing has such a being in nature1 from thence is derived the habit or aptness for such operations4 ,i apprise him secondly1 that if we should permit nature to be well defined by the precise or characteristic order of operation1 this should not be extended to every sort of operation1 but should be confined to the primary operation1 which marks the foundation of the species2 but alas1 we are ignorant of what that is4 ,for example1 if a man1 as is generally thought1 is well defined by his rational faculty1 or radical power of reasoning2 because the being able to reason or reflect1 is the principal1 or primary operation of man2 a horse then should be defined by his radical habit to that act of perception1 instinct1 or knowledge1 which is proper to his species1 and distinct from that of all other animals4 ,but who has penetrated what this is8 ,or who has ever known the innate difference1 that there is between the instinct of a horse and a dog8 ,and thus1 as it would be ridiculous and absurd to define a man by the radical order of elocution1 by saying1 that he is an animal who can talk and discourse2 because this absurdity would be incurred1 on account of the act of elocution being posterior1 or secondary to that of reason or reflexion2 and it would be much more ridiculous1 to define him by the order of his voice1 which you describe by some particular name1 and to define him in the manner you define a horse1 which you call a neighing animal2 nor is it less absurd to define a horse by the radical order of his neighing4 ,i apprise him thirdly1 that if such definitions are admitted as good and legitimate1 it is the most easy thing in the world1 to define every substantial entity whatever1 because in order to do it1 you have only to observe its operations1 give the most remarkable one a name1 and define it by that name4 ,by the help of this instruction only1 you may make every peasant a consummate philosopher1 and enable him to define the nature of all the entities in the universe4 ,,sect4 ,,ix4 ,,xxxix4 ,these reflexions answer no other purpose1 than that of confronting here and there a superficial and bastard schoolman1 for all capable people know and confess1 that we are unable to give a definition of any one substantial entity1 except man4 ,to what straight limits then is our philosophy confined6 ,,xl4 ,but the misfortune is1 that we have no certainty1 that the general received definition of a man1 to wit1 that he is a rational animal1 is a good and unexceptionable one2 for we are clear it would not be a good one1 if this faculty appertains to other animals as well as him1 and it is matter of doubt whether it does or not2 but ,i will not1 nor cannot1 in support of this doubt1 avail myself of the authority of ,porphyrus1 who in his ,treatise on ,predicables1 supposes ,god to be a rational animal2 and in order to distinguish between ,god and man1 defines man to be a mortal rational animal1 because he thought that without the addition of the word mortal1 the definition would be applicable to ,god as well as man4 ,neither will ,i avail myself of the authority of ,aristotle1 from whose second book1 ,de ,sect4 ,pythagora1 ,jamblicus cites these words3 ,animalis rationalis aliud quidem est ,deus1 aliud autem homo4 ,but ,i may for this purpose1 avail myself of the authority of some ,fathers1 among whom is ,st4 ,austin1 who all affirm1 that the angels are corporeal1 or at least have doubted of their incorporeality2 to which doubt1 appertains that1 of whether angels are rational animals1 for in order to suppose them so1 there wants nothing but their being corporeal1 and consequently it is doubtful1 whether the definition of rational animal1 appertains solely to man4 ,,xli4 ,i may be told1 that the corporeality of ,angels has been condemned1 and their incorporeality defined1 in the second ,council of ,nice1 and the fourth ,lateran one4 ,but in the first place1 is it certain1 that these ,councils declared the incorporeality of angels to be undeniable1 and that they declared affirming the contrary is erroneous2 for it is somewhat doubtful1 whether the incorporeality was defined in them or not2 because1 although mention was made in these ,councils of this matter1 it was not done with an express design to discuss the point1 but was only touched upon1 as we may say by incidence2 which is an exception that all eminent theologians admit1 to our being bound to observe things that are canvassed in that way even in ,councils2 as we are not obliged to suppose any matters defined in them1 that are not debated and settled with an express intention4 ,for which reason1 the most learned ,cano 7lib4 #e4 de ,considerat47 took the liberty of saying1 that the opinion that angels were corporeal1 although it might be false1 was not heretical2 and long before him1 ,st4 ,thomas in his book de ,malo1 7qust4 #af4 art4 #a47 had said1 that this question was no part of the ,catholic ,dogmas4 ,my father ,saint ,bernard 7lib4 #e4 de ,considerat47 goes further2 for he seems to think1 the opinion which denies the corporeality of angels1 to be void of probability2 and it will not be improper to remark here1 that he was much posterior to the second ,council of ,nice1 and ,saint ,thomas1 not only to the second ,council of ,nice1 but to the fourth ,lateran one also4 ,this may likewise be alledged as an answer1 to the objections that are made in consequence of some texts of ,scripture1 which give the epithet of spirits to the angels2 for it is certain1 that the fathers who considered it as defensible to maintain the corporeality of angels1 were not ignorant of those texts2 the exposition of which1 in truth is not difficult1 for we may fairly conclude1 the ,scripture calls them by this name1 on account of their being airy or light bodies1 and we may also suppose1 that it is for this reason1 that in various places it gives the name of spirit to the air4 ,spiritus procellarum4 ,advenientis spiritus vehementis1 c4 ,,xlii4 ,the second reply ,i shall make1 is1 that supposing it to be determined that the angels are incorporeal1 this truth is not established by philosophy1 but by faith2 and as upon the knowledge of this truth1 depends the certainty1 that the definition of a rational animal does not belong to an angel2 it follows1 that by the help of philosophy alone1 we should never have hit upon giving a definition of a man2 and with respect to defining other things besides a man1 its insufficiency is admitted4 ,what sort of philosophy is this8 ,it ought rather to be called a total want of philosophy4 ,,xliii4 ,not only with regard to the angels1 but on the part of brutes also1 we find motives for doubting1 whether the definition of rational animal1 may not be applied to them as well as to man4 ,if rational animal signifies an animal capable of reflexion1 the brutes are rational animals in the opinion of all those1 who suppose them to be endowed with reason and reflexion3 and as this sentiment may be supported by strong arguments1 it remains somewhat doubtful1 whether rationality is not diffused in different proportions to other animals as well as men1 or whether it is confined to them only4 ,it is true1 that if this opinion should be admitted1 we should grant1 that the reason of man is distinct from1 and of a superior nature to that of brutes2 but if in the definition1 we do not point out the character which distinguishes them1 we are reduced to assign as the difference1 a generical idea4 ,,sect4 ,x4 ,,xliv4 ,as we ascend the predicamental tree1 and advance from the species1 to the genuses or kinds2 we perceive1 that philosophy does not discern these more clearly1 than it did the others2 for we find in both cases1 equal ignorance1 and equal uncertainty4 ,if we ought to have scientific certainty of any one genus in preference to another1 it should be of that under which we ourselves are comprehended1 which is the animal kind1 for that is the thing which most immediately relates to us1 and because also1 we employ more consideration and attention upon that1 than we do upon the others4 ,we call the order animal1 which comprehends man1 and every other species of terrestrial and aquatic brutes1 as likewise every kind of fish or fowl4 ,and what do we know of animals according to this general description8 ,why that they are sensitive living beings2 for that is the definition we give of them4 ,but do we know this with any degree of certainty8 ,by no means2 for it has been doubted whether every animal is sensitive2 and it has also been doubted1 whether the sense of feeling does not belong to other entities as well as to animals4 ,,xv4 ,the first doubt is built upon the opposition and arguments of the ,cartesians1 who pretend1 that all brutes are inanimate machines1 and that there is no other sensible animal but man2 for which reason1 in their opinion1 a sensible being is not a generical entity1 but a specific one1 and proper to the human species in a quarter proportion4 ,i am thoroughly persuaded1 that this opinion of the ,cartesians is a false one2 but ,i have not yet seen any evident argument or demonstration to confront it2 nor has any person hitherto1 hit upon one that evinces the falsity of it2 for their principal foundation is not so weak1 but that it has puzzled the most able ,aristotelites to give an answer to it4 ,but ,i do not find1 that this is any obstacle to our giving our firm assent to the sensibility of brutes2 although we have no reason to glory in our proofs of this matter1 when the contrary opinion1 besides the arguments that are produced to support it1 finds so many partizans2 and among them some of excellent ingenuity4 ,nor have we any reason to suppose1 what ,i have known many people maintain1 that all the ,cartesians1 think differently from what they speak in this matter2 for some of them1 are as full of the caprice that brutes are insensible1 as we are of the persuasion that the contrary is the fact4 ,a few years ago1 certain ladies who were present at a bull-feast1 seemed to express great concern for the sufferings of one of the bulls1 which the people employed for that purpose1 worried excessively4 ,a ,french lady1 who was a ,cartesian philosopher1 that sat near them1 begged they would not grieve1 for says the good ,cartesian with great gravity1 ,i believe as firmly as ,i do in ,god and this cross1 that the bull feels no more pain than the bench ,i sit on4 ,i do not know whether the other ladies believed her1 but ,i am persuaded1 that many are stedfastly of the same opinion with the ,french lady4 ,,xlvi4 ,the second doubt1 whether other entities besides animals are not sensible1 is patronized by ,campanela1 who labours by a variety of arguments1 to prove in divers parts of his ,works1 that all elemental things are sensible4 ,this doubt is also supported1 and with more colour of reason1 by those philosophers1 who allow feeling to plants4 ,and that this opinion may not appear extravagant2 for the information of those who adopt the common sentiment1 it will not be amiss to let them know1 that ,aristotle did not look upon this thing in that light1 for he rather inclines to patronize the doubt2 for in his first book de ,plantis1 he says1 there is no certainty whether plants are1 or are not1 endued with feeling1 appetite1 and knowledge3 ,nec enim constat1 habeant ne plant animam1 appetendique facultatem1 doloris item1 voluptatis1 rerum discretionis4 ,in the third place1 the naturalists1 who build upon experimental observations1 attribute feeling to some determined species of plants1 which on that account1 they call sensitive plants4 ,,sect4 ,,xi4 ,,xlvii4 ,if of our own proper genus1 we know nothing with certainty1 what must our knowledge be of others8 ,the genus most immediately next to our own1 is that of plants1 and in this1 notwithstanding our proximity1 we can discern nothing but our ignorance2 for we cannot venture even by conjectures1 to point out the constitutive difference between them4 ,this is not only invisible to the eyes of evidence1 but impalpable to the essays of opinion4 ,we commonly define the genus of a plant1 by the term insensible living entity4 ,but the word insensible1 which we use to describe the difference1 only signifies want of sensibility2 and a positive entity1 such as a plant is1 cannot be ascertained by a negative4 ,besides this1 as we observed before1 it is somewhat doubtful1 whether plants are1 or are not sensible4 ,we call them also living vegetables4 ,but by this idea1 we do not assign to the plant a different nature from the animal1 for that this also is a living vegetable4 ,if ,i am told1 that the difference consists1 in that the life of the animal is vegetative and sensitive1 and that that of the plant is purely vegetative1 ,i reply1 that the adverb purely in this place1 signifies nothing but the want of sensitive life1 which is meant to be expressed in the extreme1 and a want1 cannot be made use of as a descriptive term1 to point out the constitutive difference between positive entities4 ,nor will it be of any use to answer1 that the term want1 means a want or defect in the mode of explanation1 and does not apply to the thing signified2 for till it can be ascertained what the thing signified is1 we must remain totally in the dark2 and it is also false1 that this term want1 is not applicable to the thing signified2 for negative expressions are positive with respect to the thing signified1 when they are used to deny any imperfection in the object they relate to2 for the want of an imperfection1 is the want of a want1 it being certain1 that all imperfection consists in the want of positive perfection2 for which reasons these words1 infinity1 immensity1 indivisibility1 although negative with respect to the mode of expression1 are positive with respect to the thing signified2 but the term insensible1 or insensibility1 applied to a plant1 signifies want of perfection1 and thus is negative with respect to the thing signified4 ,,xlviii4 ,besides this1 some express a doubt1 whether plants are vegetable or not2 and some are also doubtful1 whether the property of vegetation does not likewise belong to stones and metals4 ,if we consult the ,cartesians upon this point1 they will tell us1 that all we call vegetation or nutrition of plants1 is pure mechanism1 and that the attraction of the nutritious juice which we attribute to them1 is a solemn chimera4 ,if we forsake the ,cartesians1 and apply to the experimental philosophers1 we shall find many of them1 who will tell us1 that metals and stones grow by means of vegetation2 which is an opinion1 that not long ago1 was illustrated by ,joseph ,pitton de ,tournfort1 a celebrated naturalist of the ,academy ,royal of ,sciences at ,paris1 and more especially1 by the celebrated observations he made upon marble in the wonderful cave of ,antiparos2 and with respect to metals1 we1 to the authority of others1 shall add that of ,aristotle1 who in his book de ,mirabilibus ,auscultationibus1 says1 that in a territory of the island of ,cyprus1 they were used to sow iron1 and that it grew and vegetated like other plants4 ,,xlix4 ,and now we are speaking of ,aristotle1 we will not omit mentioning an authority of his1 which is very applicable to our present subject1 because it is totally opposite to a received opinion in the schools1 to wit1 that plants and animals are of two different genuses1 and that the distinction between them is1 that the animal is a living sensible entity1 and the plant a living insensible one4 ,aristotle in his book de ,plantis says1 that oysters and other shell-fish1 are both plants and animals3 scimus autem1 quod conchyla animalia sunt cognitione carentia3 quapropter plant sunt1 animalia4 ,i ask now1 how one species can be classed under two diametrically opposite genuses8 and how an oyster can be both sensible and insensible8 for as an animal1 it ought to be a living sensible entity1 and as a plant1 a living insensible one4 ,nor can it be said1 that ,aristotle1 when he called an oyster a plant1 spoke in a metaphorical sense1 for this mode of speaking is not allowed to philosophers1 but is only permitted to poets and orators4 ,besides1 the cause he assigns1 shews1 that he spoke in a rigorous philosophical sense2 although1 to speak the truth1 ,i do not comprehend who could reveal to ,aristotle1 that oysters and other shell-fish are destitute of that sort of knowledge1 which is proper and natural to the most stupid brutes4 ,,sect4 ,,xii4 ,l4 ,from the lowest species1 we proceed to the next above1 and enquire1 what is the nature of a living entity2 what we are to understand by the term living1 and what is life8 ,to this1 we shall be answered from the schools1 that life is motion ab intrinsico1 and that living1 means that which moves ab intrinsico2 that is1 its motion is produced by some intrinsic faculty1 or virtue1 which it has within itself4 ,,li4 ,this definition is incumbered with greater difficulties than the antecedent ones4 ,all the modern philosophers oppose it1 although for distinct and contrary reasons4 ,gassendo1 father ,maignan1 and the other atomists1 attribute motion ab intrinsico to atoms1 from which dogma it will follow1 that motion ab intrinsico1 is not distinctly peculiar to living animals4 ,the ,cartesians are very positive in maintaining1 that nothing can give motion to itself1 but that all motion in the universe1 proceeds from that impulse1 which ,god in the beginning gave to matter1 which does1 and ever will subsist1 without being impaired or injured2 and that by virtue of that impulse1 motion is communicated from one part of matter to another2 so that all which was before at rest1 upon its beginning to move1 received its impulse from some other body which was in motion before1 and transferred its influence to that which was then at rest2 and either partly1 or in the whole1 gave it the power of beginning to move2 and they say further1 that man1 which is the only living corporeal entity they admit1 when he moves1 cannot be properly said to give motion to his members1 but only directs their motion by his will1 in virtue of the power antecedently impressed by the impulse of other bodies on the animal spirits4 ,,lii4 ,it cannot be denied1 that this doctrine is terribly fortified1 by the celebrated maxim of ,aristotle1 which says1 that every thing that moves1 is set in motion by something else3 and although the followers of the common opinion1 explain this maxim1 so as to render it not incompatible with the definition they give of living entities1 there results from this explanation1 the inconvenience1 that it weakens the principal force of the axiom which they avail themselves of to prove the existence of a first mover1 to stimulate a body at rest2 for if we suppose1 that a living entity has the power of moving itself1 we cannot maintain the necessity of a divine influence to produce this motion1 without admitting at the same time1 the existence of a first mover in other respects1 to be established4 ,thus it seems to me1 that the ,cartesians can with some colour of reason pretend1 that religion is interested in understanding the axiom in all the rigour1 which they profess to understand it themselves4 ,,liii4 ,but be it as it may1 with respect to this difficulty1 and all others1 which the moderns by virtue of their principles can oppose to the doctrine of ,aristotle2 it is certain1 that there may be very serious ones urged against their definition of living entities4 ,heavy bodies move ab intrinsico1 and are not living entities4 ,fire moves ab intrinsico1 and is not a living entity4 ,the fermentative motion also1 according to common physics1 is understood to be ab intrinsico4 ,and ,i have remarked and proved in another part of this work1 that what the ,aristotelites say of heavy bodies being moved by communicated impulse1 in the form this explanation is intelligible1 is also applicable to the motion of living entities4 ,,sect4 ,,xiii4 ,,liv4 ,there now only remains within the compass of the predicamental scale1 one other thing to consider1 which is the highest1 and most sublime within the reach of physics1 and that is1 the nature and composition of the body2 but where will this lead us to1 the point being equally doubtful with all the rest8 ,the composition of the body1 is divided into elemental and mixed2 but as this last is composed of the other1 unless we know what the elemental is1 it is impossible to know of what the mixture consists4 ,very well2 but who knows the nature and number of the elements8 ,to this question1 methinks ,i hear four answers1 from four sects of philosophers1 which are all different1 although each pretends to exclude the others from a competent knowledge of the matter4 ,the ,aristotelites say1 that they are air1 fire1 earth1 and water4 ,the chymists1 that they are salt1 sulphur1 mercury1 earth1 and water4 ,the ,cartesians insist1 that they are composed of the subtil1 the globulous1 and another matter which is more gross1 and which they call the third element2 and the atomists1 that they consist of the atoms4 ,these are the opinions1 which are at present the most prevailing1 although there are numbers of others which ,i shall omit to mention1 because they have but few votaries4 ,now which of these opinions is the true one8 ,perhaps neither4 ,at least there is but one sect out of the four that admits either of them to be true1 and whichever that sect adheres to1 the other three assert to be false2 which amounts to the same1 as saying that one witness deposes to the truth of the matter in question1 and that three give testimony against it4 ,thus no judge to whom the decision is confided1 can give sentence in favour of either of the parties2 it being out of his power to affirm1 that any one of their systems is right and true4 ,,lv4 ,as the audience before whom ,i propound this reflection1 is composed chiefly of the followers of ,aristotle1 methinks ,i hear them exclaim1 that if we were to collect the suffrages of the academic professors1 we should find most votes in favour of his opinion4 ,to this1 ,i reply in the first place1 that although a plurality of sectaries1 gives greater extrinsic probability to an opinion1 still it does not afford certainty1 nor intrinsic probability2 and the question here1 is not whether ,aristotle's opinion is the most probable1 but whether it is certain4 ,i reply secondly1 that it is doubtful1 if we were to include the professors who teach physics in all nations1 whether we should in reality find a majority of votes in favour of ,aristotle2 and unless we could prove by some authentic instrument1 that ,god has limited the knowledge of philosophy to our nation only1 and has excluded all others from inheriting the science1 ,i do not know upon what pretension we can ground a right1 of admitting none but ,spaniards to vote in the question4 ,some of our antient professors say1 that we should not regard the opinions of strangers1 because they are novelists2 but at the same time1 strangers reply1 that we should take no account of what the ,spaniards assert1 because they are obstinate and wrong-headed1 and that there is no proof1 be it ever so clear1 that will make them depart from their old opinions2 to which they add1 that in ,spain1 they do not follow ,aristotle from choice1 but from necessity2 for that it requires an heroic spirit1 to contradict any thing that has been advanced by ,aristotle in that kingdom1 where whoever dares venture to oppose him1 is instantly assailed by tempests of injuries1 which fall on his head like violent hail storms4 ,nor is even an heroic spirit1 sufficient to enable a man to support such an opposition1 because the duty of obedience1 obliges people not to depart from the line of their school2 and this is also frequently the case1 in other countries2 and from hence1 some ,anti-,aristotelites have insisted1 that the plurality of votes in favour of ,aristotle should not prevail1 because they cannot be supposed to be free4 ,,lvi4 ,but abstracted from the quantum of extrinsic probability1 contained in the doctrine of ,aristotle respecting the elements2 ,i assert1 that upon a strict examination1 you will not find more truth contained in his sentiments1 than in those of his adversaries4 ,this opinion1 ,i deduce from the position1 that his first qualities consist of four1 to wit1 heat1 cold1 wet1 and dry1 from which in exact proportion1 he attributes one to be impregnated in the highest degree with each element1 and another near to the highest4 ,this proof1 goes lame in innumerable particulars4 ,first1 the giving to these qualities the title of first1 is conferring a mere voluntary dignity on them1 and especially1 when we know the invincible difficulty1 that attends establishing1 that all the others result from them4 ,secondly1 it is very doubtful1 whether all the four beforementioned1 can properly be called qualities2 for many ,aristotelites1 and with great colour of reason1 deny humidity and dryness to be such4 ,that which is humid1 is not so from any quality it possesses in itself1 but because it has imbibed into its pores some foreign liquid substance1 and let that be evaporated1 and it will remain dry2 from which we may conclude1 that humidity is a substance1 and that dryness consists in the want of that substance4 ,thirdly1 the appropriating these as two of the four elements1 is done without any foundation or reason4 ,in the next place1 how can they prove that water is cold in the highest degree8 ,if this was true it would kill us2 neither can they prove it so1 in a more moderate1 or secondary degree1 for we are taught by experience1 it is indifferent to both cold and heat1 according to the agent that is applied to it4 ,it is heated by the fire2 and remove it from the fire1 and it becomes cool again1 not because it has any propensity or natural disposition to be cold1 but because it is made so1 by the cool atmosphere which surrounds it4 ,there are many other very grave objections to be urged against this doctrine of the four qualities2 and therefore the foundation upon which it is built1 and the reasoning deduced from it to establish the quaternian system of the elements1 are both very slight and futil4 ,,lvii4 ,the second argument1 is built on the correspondence of the four humours of the body1 with the four ,aristotelic elements2 that is to say1 the blood with the air1 the choler with the fire1 the melancholy with the earth1 and the pituitous with the water4 ,but this puts us in a worse situation than we were before4 ,in the first place1 it is a doubt among the medical people1 whether the humours of our bodies consist precisely of four4 ,some say they are more1 and others that they are less4 ,some add to the four1 the lymph1 the pancreatic juice1 and the nervous fluid2 and some again will not admit1 that there is any other humour except the blood4 ,secondly1 if the four elements correspond only with the four humours1 we are left without an element to correspond with the solids1 which on account of the hardness of their substance1 might with more propriety be compared to the earth1 than to the melancholy humour1 which is beyond comparison less hard and solid than the other4 ,thirdly1 in the same voluntary manner1 with which they assign four elements to correspond with the four humours1 they may assign one element to correspond with the flesh1 another with the bones1 another with the marrow1 another with the fat1 or adipose substance1 another with the tendons1 and so on4 ,fourthly1 in order to reason justly upon the human body1 or animal species1 we should not seek for four substances that are analogous to the four humours1 but for four that enter into all the mixtures2 for the question1 relates to elements that partake of the composition of all mixtures in general1 and not precisely of the animal4 ,but what traces can we discern1 of four humours1 or four substances1 equivalent to these1 either in minerals1 or plants8 ,,lviii4 ,the third argument in support of this quaternian system1 is pretended to be derived from experience2 for it is alledged1 that when a piece of wood is burning1 we see it resolve itself into the four ,aristotelic elements4 ,at first it emits a small portion of water2 then it takes fire2 the fire is followed by smoke1 which we know to be of an aerial nature1 by its ascending to the airy region2 and last of all1 there remains a portion of earth in the ashes4 ,,lix4 ,although as ,etmuller says1 in matters of physics and medicine1 prstat unum experimentum centum rationibus1 still1 the experiment just alledged is so defective1 that it is not of more value than the arguments before urged4 ,in the first place1 dry wood1 may as properly be called a mixture as green wood1 notwithstanding which1 it emits no water upon being laid on the fire4 ,secondly1 as we are here treating of the elements in general which enter into1 and make a part of the composition of every species of mixture1 the fire should produce the same appearances1 and have the same effect upon them1 that it has upon the wood2 but this does not happen1 for minerals laid on the fire emit no water1 unless it is when they have imbibed some foreign moisture4 ,thirdly1 the chymists by means of fire differently applied1 extract from wood and other mixtures1 various substances1 which differ from those four that are produced from the wood in the ordinary way of burning it2 and it seems reasonable from hence1 that we should augment the number of the elements4 ,fourthly1 we do not know whether these substances pre-existed in the wood1 or whether they were produced de novo by the fire4 ,fifthly1 the ash is not earth1 nor an elemental or simple body as is supposed1 for there may be separated from it a large portion of salt1 which is a distinct substance from either of the four2 for it is neither earth1 air1 water1 or fire4 ,sixthly1 neither is the smoke air1 as is manifest from the soot which condenses in the chimney4 ,if ,i should be told1 that in the smoke is contained a variety of particles1 some of which compose the soot1 which remains in the chimney1 and others which mount higher1 and are impregnated with the atmosphere1 and become air2 ,i reply1 that in consequence of this1 they should admit of a fifth element of soot2 or to speak more properly1 of five or six additional elements2 for ,mr4 ,boyle informs us1 that the chymists can extract from soot1 five or six different substances4 ,finally1 all that becomes ashes1 existed before in the form of fire2 from whence it follows1 that the form of ashes is a new production1 for matter cannot exist under two substantial forms at one and the same time2 and consequently1 the elemental form of earth which the ,aristotelites ascribe to the ashes1 could not pre-exist in the mixture1 but must be a new production4 ,this objection militates principally against the ,aristotelic principles2 but others might be formed in different shapes1 against every system whatever4 ,,lx4 ,i have combated only the ,aristotelic opinion of the elements1 not because the others are not incumbered with equal difficulties1 and exposed to equal objections1 but because in ,spain1 we suppose the others to be perplexing1 and even improbable1 and conclude that of the four elements1 to be just and right2 ,i therefore chose to attack this system1 to let my countrymen see1 that we know nothing with certainty respecting the elements4 ,,sect4 ,,xiv4 ,,lxi4 ,i have remarked before1 that if we are ignorant of what the elemental bodies consist1 we cannot possibly know the nature of the mixtures4 ,but even if we could ascertain what the elements are1 we should still remain in profound philosophical ignorance with respect to the component parts1 of both them and the mixtures2 for admitting the four following1 air1 fire1 water1 and earth1 to be elements of all the mixtures2 who has yet ascertained the nature of those four bodies8 ,aristotle only reasoned upon their qualities1 and this he did with so little precision1 that all he said may be looked upon as doubtful1 for he had no solid principle1 from whence he inferred1 that they possessed the properties which he attributed to them2 but drew all his conclusions1 from an ideal proportion which struck his own imagination2 and respecting which1 it has since been proved1 that he was mistaken4 ,he says that air is hot1 and fire dry in the highest degree2 but in our essay on physical paradoxes1 we have proved that the air is not hot2 and according to ,aristotle's definition of humidity1 we may infer1 that a flame is humid1 for it cannot be contained within its own bounds1 but pervades other regions4 ,we also proved in our essay on physical paradoxes1 that elemental fire is not hot in the highest degree2 and to what ,i said there1 ,i will add in this place1 that experience shews us1 one fire is hotter than another1 and has greater power to heat or melt substances1 either in consequence of its greater bulk1 or on account of the matter with which it is made1 or the manner the place is disposed and contrived1 in which it is lighted2 from all which it may be inferred1 that fire in its nature is not hot in the highest degree1 for if it was1 as in every fire the nature of fire is preserved1 every fire would be hot in the highest degree1 and of course1 could not be exceeded in heat by another fire4 ,,lxii4 ,aristotle however1 did no more than assign false or uncertain qualities to his four elements1 and left untouched1 substantial nature which is the root of them2 and those who succeeded him in all after-ages1 if they aimed at more1 attained no more4 ,the sectaries of ,aristotle content themselves with saying of the elements1 what they say of all other natural compositions2 that is1 that they are constituted of matter in physical forms1 are real incompleat entities1 and evidently distinct from each other4 ,by all which1 admitting this description to be right1 they teach us nothing1 till they explain to us1 of what the physical form consists1 and what is the specific nature of the physical form1 in every natural composition4 ,but their system explained in the general way1 in which they themselves define it1 is strongly combated by the modern philosophers1 who find an insurmountable difficulty in the generation of the material forms1 not being able to comprehend1 how their production can be any thing else but a new creation2 for the arguments the ,aristotelites fly to1 of deducing them from the power of the matter1 contain nothing but words1 void of all real signification2 and truly ,aristotle himself having said1 that the form is one of the principles of a natural entity1 and that the principles are those things1 which are neither made from their own substance1 nor from that of any other entity whatever1 shew them to be words which have no fixed meaning3 ,qu nec ex se1 nec ex aliis1 sed ex quibus omnia fiunt2 how then can we reconcile this doctrine1 with the form being made of the matter8 ,,sect4 ,,xv4 ,,lxiii4 ,but have the moderns who exclaim so much against ,aristotle1 hit upon the truth8 ,by no means4 ,they have reasoned more boldly1 but not with better success4 ,they tell us1 that the texture1 collocation1 figure1 and motion of the particles1 produce all the operations of nature1 without the necessity of having recourse for this purpose1 to accidental or substantial forms2 but by saying this1 they expose themselves to the same fault which they reprehend in the ,aristotelites1 which is that of speaking too generally2 for as these last1 do not explain or define1 of what the substantial form consists which distinguishes one entity from another1 neither do the others determine1 the texture1 co-ordination1 and figure of the particles which appertain1 and are proper to each composition2 in consequence of which1 they all involve themselves in innumerable difficulties1 which they reciprocally object against each other4 ,the ,cartesian system appears chimerical to the ,gassendists1 and the ,maignanists2 and these two last parties1 although they agree in assigning the ,atoms as the principles1 and elements of all material things1 oppose one another in various particulars1 it being a principle with the ,maignanists1 that the ,atoms are different in species1 and with the ,gassendists1 that they differ only in figure2 all of which systems1 are exposed to be combated by arguments that are terribly strong4 ,,sect4 ,,xvi4 ,,lxiv4 ,from all that has been said1 it may be evidently concluded1 that we know nothing of the nature of that principal object of physics1 an ens mobile1 either taken as confined to individuals1 or considered with respect to the species1 or contemplated in an abstracted sense1 as relating to the gradations1 of lowest1 inferior1 or supreme4 ,what one sect affirms1 another denies1 and the worst is1 that1 attend to the reasoning of which of them you will1 you will find the arguments against the system of each1 stronger than the proofs in favour of it4 ,on this account1 ,lactantius said wisely1 that philosophers have swords1 but no shields3 ,gladium habent1 scutum non habent4 ,they produce penetrating arguments wherewith to assail the opinions of their opponents1 but not solid solutions1 wherewith to defend their own4 ,what can we do then in such a case8 ,why nothing but suspend our judgment1 till some angel shall decide the contest4 ,,lxv4 ,perhaps some one will remark to me1 that the substantial nature of things is at a great distance from our view1 and that therefore it is not wonderful1 that we have not yet penetrated into the inmost recesses of philosophy2 for that without advancing so far1 we may find sufficient matter whereon to exercise our speculations1 in contemplating the ordinary phenomena of nature1 and by endeavouring to discover their proximate causes2 which attempt1 may possibly be crowned with success1 by observing and reasoning upon every species of movement which is performed by an entity1 that has motion or circulation1 according to the nature of such an entity4 ,,lxvi4 ,i will acknowledge1 that philosophy helps us to reason upon natural phenomena1 and to enquire into their more immediate causes2 but in doing this1 we frequently wander in the dark1 and are much exposed to be interrupted by impediments1 produced by ignorance and doubts2 except it is in the case of a few truths1 the discovery of which1 we owe to the light of experience2 and this fact is evinced1 with respect to the very instance of motion which has been just alledged4 ,,lxvii4 ,with regard to the movements of generation1 corruption1 alteration1 augmentation1 and the rest1 which are considered as distinct from local motion1 you can find nothing that is not questionable1 both in the schools of the ,aristotelites1 and in those of the modern philosophers4 ,the very definition of motion in general1 which was given by ,aristotle1 some reject as obscure1 others as perplexed1 and others as nugatory4 ,the movements we are now treating of1 in the opinion of ,aristotle1 are acquisitions of new forms1 either substantial1 or accidental2 but the ,moderns1 who deny the existence of all material forms1 object to this definition of those movements4 ,even among the ,aristotelites themselves1 it is not agreed1 whether motion is not influenced by passion2 nor whether the first1 is not obedient as a passive agent to the last4 ,and thus in every thing else1 it is all question1 and all dispute4 ,,sect4 ,,xvii4 ,,lxviii4 ,and why should we be surprized that with respect to these movements1 which as we may say1 nature executes behind the curtain1 human understanding has made so little1 or next to no advances8 what we ought more to wonder at1 is1 that it happens the same with respect to all local motion1 which lies so plain and open to our observation4 ,,lxix4 ,the motion with which heavy bodies descend1 is the most frequent and common to our view4 ,and what do we know of this8 ,of its properties very little2 of its causes nothing4 ,we know it acquires some degree of acceleration in its passage1 because we see it2 but what is the proportion of the increased acceleration1 is matter of great debate1 both among the philosophers1 and mathematicians4 ,we know that it is a motion of descent1 but we do not know whether its course is directed to the centre1 or the axis of the earth4 ,the cause of this motion remains so hidden1 that the philosophers to this day1 have given no opinion concerning it1 that ,i will not venture to pronounce an absurd one4 ,the ,aristotelites1 by saying the cause of this motion proceeds from an innate disposition to move in every thing1 say nothing1 unless they point out the particular virtue or faculty1 which excites motion in heavy bodies1 for what we have just mentioned1 is the reason they generally assign for all species of movements4 ,they should not be allowed to dispute or controvert what they themselves have advanced2 and if they should attempt to give a more rigorous definition of their opinion1 they would fall into a still greater absurdity2 which made the learned ,father ,saguens say1 ,quis non palpat crassitiem hujus chimeric opinionis8 ,the ,cartesians to account for this phenomenon1 recur to the vertical motion of the subtil matter1 which separating itself from the earth1 and pursuing the angle or direction of tangents to the circle1 impels heavy bodies to descend4 ,but this reasoning has been confuted by most efficacious mathematical arguments4 ,gassendo invented an effluvia composed of terraqueous corpuscles1 which mount into the air1 and penetrate the pores of heavy bodies1 which they generally encounter1 and after turning their first course into a descending one1 impel them downwards4 ,nothing has so much convinced me of the great difficulty of this question1 as seeing a man of the subtil ingenuity of ,gassendo1 recur for the solution of it1 to a fiction destitute of all probability2 and which is exposed to invincible objections4 ,father ,maignan1 and his followers also1 make use of the terraqueous effluvia for the solution of this difficulty2 they do not allow that they act by impulse1 but that by their sympathetic and magnetic virtue1 when they come in contact with heavy bodies1 they dispose them to descend4 ,,lxx4 ,it is very probable1 and perhaps more than probable1 that the ascent of light bodies1 is caused by the descent of heavy ones2 because the heavy body has power1 in consequence of the impetus of its descent1 to occupy the lower station1 where meeting with the light body1 it obliges him to leave that situation1 and to mount upwards2 for many argue with great colour of reason1 that there is no such thing as absolute lightness to be conceived in any body whatever1 nor is such a quality necessary1 a respective or comparative lightness1 being sufficient to answer every purpose4 ,thus we say a body is light1 not because it is void of gravity1 but because it is less heavy than the one with which we compare it4 ,in the same manner we say the air is light1 not because it is not ponderous1 but because it is less so1 than earth1 water1 and all the other bodies that surround us2 and that no other levity but the respective1 is necessary to cause bodies which we call light to ascend1 may be clearly seen in the case of oil1 which notwithstanding that it is heavy1 if you pour a quantity of water into the vessel where it is1 the water on account of its superior gravity1 will occupy the inferior station1 and oblige the oil which was at the bottom to ascend4 ,the same thing happens with regard to air4 ,if you dig a ditch to any depth in dry ground1 the air will descend and occupy the whole of it2 and there is no other way to dispossess the air from the bottom1 and to make it rise upwards1 but conveying water into the ditch1 or by throwing into it some body that is heavier than the air4 ,,lxxi4 ,it is not owing to the principles of physics1 but to experience1 that we understand the little we know of this matter2 and with respect to this little1 there still remains great difficulties for philosophers to contemplate2 and the greatest of all1 is ascertaining the cause of the ascent of vapours to the region of the air4 ,it is certain1 that vapours are nothing else but water1 resolved into exceedingly minute particles4 ,the water however being heavier than air1 how can the water arise to the height occupied by the clouds8 ,every particle of water notwithstanding it weighs very little1 is much heavier than a particle of air of equal size1 and the greater or less gravity of liquids1 for the purpose of their impelling one another1 is computed in the gross1 and not according to the proportion of globules of equal size2 and we know that a pound of water1 will cause a quarter of an hundred of oil to rise in a vessel4 ,,lxxii4 ,some philosophers1 who were aware of this serious difficulty1 upon reflexion1 conjectured that some portion of ethereal matter or pure air1 might adhere to each particle of vapour2 and in consequence of this conjunction of the two1 the whole might become lighter than an equal quantity of the inferior gross air of our atmosphere2 and on this account1 might mount on the top of it2 for although iron is much heavier than water1 if we fasten a small portion of iron to a bit of deal board1 it will swim1 because the quantity of iron and board together1 is lighter than an equal bulk of water4 ,francis ,bayle1 adopts this opinion of a portion of the ethereal matter adhering to the vapour2 and on the other hand1 ,father ,pardies a ,french jesuit supposes1 that a particle of extended vapour1 in the form of an air bubble1 contains in its cavity the ethereal matter4 ,all this is far from certain2 but ,i shall not detain myself in controverting1 either the one or the other of these modes of reasoning4 ,others again imagine1 that various igneous particles1 which arise from the earth1 after separating from the water or some other liquid those small particles which we call vapour1 with their continual impulse and agitation1 force them upwards4 ,but neither does this system appear to me very defensible1 any more1 than that of the vulgar philosophers1 who say1 the sun by its activity attracts the vapours2 for if this was so1 the vapours would not stop till they reached the sun1 or at least till they were obstructed in the heaven of the moon1 by the moon itself1 or some other solid body2 for the attractive power is stronger1 the nearer the thing attracted advances to that which attracts it2 and the first would never cease to move towards the other1 till it came in contact with it1 if it was not interrupted in its course by some obstruction2 and besides1 the attractive virtue is a certain something1 which nobody can comprehend1 and is therefore in a manner wholly banished from philosophy4 ,,lxxiii4 ,who would not be surprised1 that physics should not have helped us to attain a knowledge of so common a phenomenon1 as that of the ascent of vapours8 but so far has it been from attaining it to any degree that comes near to truth or certainty1 that hitherto1 we have not been able to discover any thing upon the point1 that is satisfactory to the understanding4 ,and with respect to all other species of motion1 we are in the same predicament4 ,,sect4 ,,xviii4 ,,lxxiv4 ,have we attained a knowledge of the cause of the elastic motion1 which is the property that makes a wand or a sword-blade which is forcibly bent1 recover of itself1 the straight form it had before1 or if it was naturally bent or crooked1 and was opened and made straight by force1 makes it return to its original crooked shape8 ,descartes1 for the explanation of this phenomenon1 recurs to his common asylum1 the impulse of the subtil matter1 which not being able to penetrate the pores of the wand or sword-blade on the hollow side1 where the pores are closed by the inflexion1 by its great efforts to open and penetrate them1 causes the wand or sword-blade to recover its former figure4 ,but who does not perceive1 that for this purpose1 it will be necessary to suppose the subtil matter should be for ever moving in opposite directions1 from west to east1 and upwards and downwards1 c4 for the wand or sword-blade1 to whatever aspect you turn the hollow side1 recovers its natural figure equally the same8 ,besides1 ,descartes supposes the subtil matter to be infinitely fluid1 from whence it follows1 that it will be impossible to shut the pores in such a manner1 as that they will become impenetrable to it4 ,,lxxv4 ,others say1 that the same impulse which is impressed on a wand or bow by him that bends it1 is the thing which opens it afterwards4 ,but against this opinion1 it may be urged in the first place1 that he who bends it1 does it gradually and by slow degrees2 and the impetus with which it opens1 is violent and quick4 ,secondly1 the archer who bends a bow1 is not possessed of a force equal to that1 with which it reverts to its former figure1 for that is so great when the arrow is drawn near the head1 that it is capable of giving it an impetus1 that will pierce a substantial thick body through and through2 and how can any one communicate a force or impulse1 which is greater than that he possesses8 ,,lxxvi4 ,the ,aristotelites1 who are great adepts at the easy invention of giving the name of quality1 virtue1 or faculty1 to express the cause they are enquiring after1 and by the addition of an adjective to that name1 which is a denomination taken from the effect1 say1 that the cause of the elastic motion1 is an elastic virtue which is inherent in the wand or sword-blade4 ,this is in reality1 having found out a master key1 to unlock all the mysteries of nature2 for there is nothing so obscure1 that with this invention may not be made manifest4 ,if you ask1 what is the cause of the marvellous properties of the load-stone1 the answer is1 the magnetic virtue2 if you ask1 what are the causes that perform in us the operations1 of the concoction of aliments1 the expulsion of excrements1 and that of nutrition1 c4 the answer is1 that they are performed by a concoctive virtue1 an expulsive virtue1 and a nutritive one2 and according to the same mode of reasoning1 the cause of the winds1 is a ventilating virtue1 that of lightning a fulminating one1 and that of the flux and reflux of the sea1 is owing to two opposite virtues1 the one fluxive1 and the other refluxive4 ,by this cheap mode of philosophizing1 every thing is demonstrated at a glance4 ,but to speak seriously1 what is this1 but answering in the very language of the question8 ,saying that the cause of the elastic motion1 is the elastic virtue1 is in effect the same as saying1 the cause of the elastic motion1 is the cause of the elastic motion2 and saying the magnetic virtue1 is that which causes the load-stone to attract the iron1 is answering in the stile of pleasantry1 which some children have studied1 and are very ready at2 who when a person asks one of them1 ,my lad1 whose son are you8 the boy answers my father's4 ,,sect4 ,,xix4 ,,lxxvii4 ,the cause of the progressive motion1 is also very difficult to be accounted for4 ,it is hard to comprehend1 how the motion of a stone thrown from the hand subsists1 after the action of throwing it ceases4 ,who moves the stone after the hand is still8 ,what many of the ,aristotelites say1 is1 that the action of the hand produces a quality in the stone1 which they call impetus1 and that this quality causes the stone to move after it is thrown from the hand4 ,but this solution1 is destitute of all appearance of truth4 ,if every violent motion1 as the ,aristotelites maintain1 proceeds from an extrinsic cause1 how can the motion of the stone thrown in a mounting direction1 which is a violent one1 proceed from an intrinsic quality communicated to the said stone8 ,if all generation1 or accumulation1 according to the doctrine of the same school1 supposes corruption1 what quality or accidental form in the stone was corrupted1 to prepare it for engendering that new quality1 which they call impetus8 ,what dispositions preceded this generation8 ,or what time is there for their preceding it1 when a globe of great bulk1 with its motion impels a little one8 ,it being certain1 that the contact of the two1 does not continue longer than an instant1 what property then has that quality1 to occasion so quick a corruption8 ,is it perchance1 the gravity of the stone itself8 ,this however1 as it subsisted at the time of receiving the impulse1 if it is a property opposite to that quality1 would at the instant1 have prevented its generation1 as it is afterwards said to impede its conservation4 ,we might make many other reflexions1 to prove1 that that quality is chimerical4 ,others recur to the air1 for the means by which the motion is continued1 which they say1 being violently divided by the fore part of the stone1 takes a sudden turn to the hinder part1 and impels the stone forward4 ,but omitting many other objections1 which would render this mode of philosophizing totally improbable1 ,i shall just remark1 that it would follow from hence1 that a stone could not move through a void space1 give it what impulse you will1 which is what ,i imagine nobody can believe4 ,descartes1 reconciles this difficulty1 with his maxim respecting the general law of the communication of motion1 established by the ,author of nature at the creation1 which we shall not combat minutely1 in order not to waste time2 but shall content ourselves with observing1 that that maxim applied to the present matter1 and throughly investigated and explained1 would signify1 that the stone thrown from the hand1 moves because ,god has ordained that it should move2 but to solve difficulties in this way1 it is not necessary to study philosophy4 ,,sect4 ,,xx4 ,,lxxviii4 ,finally1 there is no motion whatever1 about the cause of which1 the philosophers do not altercate4 ,what contests have there been among them1 to explain how the movements of rarefaction1 and condensation are performed8 ,some fancy1 that rarefaction consists1 in the same quantity of matter occupying a larger space2 which explanation1 others looking upon as unintelligible1 assert1 it consists in the opening of the pores1 and the extension in consequence of that opening1 of various parts of the body1 by the introduction of a subtil liquid substance1 in the same manner that water enters a spunge1 or as rarefied air enters water1 or the therial matter insinuates itself into the air4 ,this is the doctrine of the ,cartesians2 but in the opinion of the ,maignanists1 and ,gassendists1 such reasoning is nothing to the purpose2 for these1 as they admit in nature1 not only of the possibility1 but of the necessity of a vacuum1 or many voids distributed in small interstices1 find no inconvenience in supposing1 that in bodies1 there are small empty spaces1 unpossessed by any matter whatever4 ,,lxxix4 ,fermentation1 this solemn instrument of nature for the performance of an infinite number of her works2 consists in nothing1 but an intestine motion of the insensible particles of the mixtures1 by which is solicited1 a new combination of their elements4 ,but from whence does this motion proceed8 ,the ,moderns1 since the discovery of the acid and the alkali by ,otho ,takenius1 attribute all the fermentations1 to the meeting of these two substances4 ,but this is only pointing out the matter1 on which this motion has its effect1 and we do not enquire here for the material cause1 but for the efficient one4 ,who1 or what1 impels the acid and the alkali to this conflict8 ,the juice newly expressed from the grape1 will quiet this combustion for some little time2 but after that1 the tumult begins again4 ,what new agent can we discover here1 to excite the second fermentation8 ,this is a secret1 which only the ,cartesians have presumed to unravel1 by recurring to their invisible fairy1 the subtil matter2 whom they make the author of all this domestic sedition4 ,it is with some propriety that ,i call it a fairy2 for as the vulgar attribute to the fairies1 all the nocturnal noises and commotions1 whose causes they are ignorant of2 so the ,cartesians impute all those motions1 which on account of the darkness that obscures their causes1 may be truly termed nocturnal1 to the impulse of the subtil matter4 ,,lxxx4 ,i am so far from believing1 that the subtil matter is the primum mobile1 or first mover of every thing1 that ,i am inclined to think1 it moves nothing4 ,my reason for this opinion1 is as follows4 ,the more fluid a matter is1 so much the less impulse it makes on any body it encounters4 ,thus we see1 that water gives a much less violent shock to a wall1 than any other solid body of equal size1 that may be forcibly driven against it2 and air1 a much less than water4 ,no building could stand against1 or resist a moderate gale of wind1 if the air was as solid as water4 ,the subtil matter then1 according to the doctrine of the ,cartesians1 being infinitely fluid1 can have but little impulse1 or be able to impress but little agitation or motion1 on the bodies it encounters4 ,this consequence to me1 is clear and plain2 because1 if in proportion to the augmentation of its fluidity1 the impulse of a body is lessened1 when the fluidity comes to be infinite1 the impulse will cease totally4 ,from hence it would follow1 that there is no body whatever1 which could be moved by the impulse of the subtil matter4 ,,lxxxi4 ,but admitting that it has power1 as the ,cartesians pretend1 to move the insensible particles of the mixtures2 it will not follow from thence1 that it furnishes us with an explanation of the present phenomenon4 ,for in the first place1 the subtil matter1 if it has any impulse1 exercises it on the particles of the juice the instant that it is pressed from the grape2 and even perhaps did it before1 while the liquor was contained within the outside skin or covering4 ,how then does it happen1 that it did not sooner excite that tumult1 which is the symptom and property of fermentation8 ,secondly1 how can the acids and alkalies be said to produce this effect8 for1 according to the doctrine of the ,cartesians1 of whatever particles the mixtures consist1 the subtil matter would set them in motion1 for that there is no mixture whatever1 impenetrable to its extreme subtilty4 ,thirdly1 how can those exceeding slow fermentations1 which are years before they manifest themselves1 as in the instance of treacle1 be attributed to the rapid and swift motion of the subtil matter8 ,,sect4 ,,xxi4 ,,lxxxii4 ,saint ,austin says wisely1 that what is most surprizing1 does not seem to strike us1 although it is the object of our daily experience2 which is a maxim1 the saint applies to the wonders of nature1 and falls in exceedingly propos to suit with our present discussion4 ,all the philosophers he observes1 admire as portentous things1 the flight of the iron to the load-stone1 the pointing of this last to the poles1 and the flux and reflux of the ocean4 ,if we ask them why they consider these motions as wonderful1 they will answer1 it is because they cannot ascertain their causes4 ,but we cannot help remarking1 that this answer amounts to a virtual acknowledgment1 that all the movements of nature are equally wonderful1 with those of the iron1 the load-stone1 and the ocean1 for their causes are equally disputed1 because we are equally ignorant of them4 ,the only difference between them is1 that these motions are confined to particular or determined entities1 and the others are common1 or nearly common to all4 ,,lxxxiii4 ,i confess for my own part1 that on whatever side ,i view nature1 ,i equally wonder1 because ,i find myself equally ignorant of it4 ,the same ,saint ,austin1 whom we have just quoted 7,tract4 #bd4 in ,johan471 observes1 that the ordinary multiplication of grain1 which is obtained at harvest1 by means of the fertility of the earth1 is equally a prodigy1 with that extraordinary multiplication of loaves and fishes1 which was effected by the majesty of ,christ in the desert4 ,let now the vain philosopher boast1 that he is able to decipher that great mystery1 only because he is possessed of a compleat apparatus of faculty phrases2 such as seminal virtue1 previous dispositions1 the corruption of one form1 and the introduction of another1 attraction of the nutritious juice1 the conversion of it into the proper substance1 vegetation1 nutrition1 c4 ,was ,saint ,austin peradventure ignorant of those phrases1 or of others equivalent to them8 ,yet notwithstanding this1 he looked upon that natural multiplication of grain1 as an impenetrable mystery4 ,these phrases1 only express or describe those operations which are familiar and open to our experience2 but do not reveal to us1 their causes1 or the manner in which they are performed4 ,the rustics1 are acquainted with many more terms than we1 expressive of the various operations with which nature in succession1 proceeds to perfect that work4 ,are they peradventure on this account great philosophers8 what do ,i explain1 by calling vegetation or nutrition1 that progression1 by which a plant acquires its increase in bulk8 does this afford me any philosophical knowledge1 respecting the manner in which that operation is performed8 ,there are two principal things to be considered in vegetation2 the first is1 the ascent of the nutritious juice by the fibres of the plant2 the second is1 the conversion of this juice into the vegetable substance2 and we perceive in those two things1 two great mysteries4 ,if we ask the school philosophers1 how the nutritious juice which is ponderous1 rises spontaneously to the very uppermost leaves of the highest trees1 they will tell us that it rises by attraction4 ,and what is this1 but placing us in the same state of doubt and difficulty1 with respect to the most common work of vegetation1 that we remain in1 with respect to the motion of the iron to the load-stone8 ,both the one and the other are called attraction1 but we are equally ignorant1 why1 or how1 the highest leaves of a tree attract the juice which rises from the bowels of the earth1 as we are1 why or how the load-stone attracts the iron4 ,,lxxxiv4 ,let us proceed to the second mystery4 ,who can explain to me1 the manner in which a juice that is so exceedingly fluid1 subtil1 and fine1 as to be able to circulate through the smallest channels of the fibres1 is afterwards converted into the solidity of wood or grain2 and this difficulty will increase1 if we cast our eyes on the other mixtures1 and reflect1 that from another juice1 or rather most fluid vapour1 is generated copper and marble4 ,aristotle had certainly some reason for saying1 that nature was the very devil3 ,natura dmonia est1 non divina 7,lib4 de ,prsens4 per somnum72 for by observing her works with attention1 it seems as if she did every thing by enchantment4 ,,sect4 ,,xxii4 ,,lxxxv4 ,it would be even some consolation to us under our ignorance1 if only the manner1 in which nature works in the interior part of her operations1 was hidden from our eyes2 but the most humiliating circumstance is1 that it is the same1 with respect to every thing that immediately presents itself to our senses4 ,bodies are familiar to our touch2 but hitherto1 we have not been able to discover1 whether they are composed of indivisible points1 or of parts infinitely divisible2 nor to what it is owing1 that one body is hard1 and another soft1 one solid1 another fluid1 one opake1 and another diaphanous4 ,we are continually viewing colours2 but we do not yet know1 what sort of things colours are2 whether they are mere reflexions of the light1 or whether they are intrinsic accidents appertaining to the object4 ,the light illuminates1 and assists us to see2 but we find our understandings greatly obscured1 when we consider the nature of light4 ,whether we conceive it to be substance1 accident1 body1 or spirit1 none of them are applicable to its nature1 and still they all seem to be so4 ,and with how many impenetrable doubts and difficulties are we surrounded1 when we consider the species which we call visible8 ,if there is any one difficulty superior to1 or any one inequality more striking than another in the mysteries of physics1 ,i will venture to pronounce this is it4 ,how the visible species of a star in the firmament1 can in an instant1 be translated from the same star to our eyes1 when it must travel in that instant many thousands of miles1 is beyond conception2 as is likewise1 how this species can exist at one and the same time1 in the whole immense space between this and the firmament2 it being certain1 that in all this space1 there is not a point1 from which1 by taking the view1 you will not see the star4 ,how also1 contrary to the maxim of ,aristotle1 can many material species1 differing only in number1 exist or be seen1 from the same point of space2 it being certain1 that you may from such an identical point1 see distinctly1 many stars at the same time8 ,i shall omit many other objections1 that are not inferior or less forcible to these ,i have urged1 against the common opinion1 that might be also urged1 against the mode of reasoning of the modern philosophers4 ,,sect4 ,,xxiii4 ,,lxxxvi4 ,so that we see1 our philosophy1 from what we call first principles1 down to our ultimate conclusions1 is nothing but a fabrication1 or weaving together of fallible conjectures2 and that even these conjectures1 terminate in nothing more than certain general notions2 for the nature of all the specific things1 and the greatest part of the causes respecting the lowest species1 are so far removed from our penetration1 that we can hardly arrive at attaining a doubtful idea of them4 ,if we hit upon a truth1 we owe the knowledge of it to experience1 and this cannot be called scientific knowledge2 for it is derived from self-evident principles1 which may be comprehended by the most stupid of mankind2 between whose manner of explaining the matter1 if they attempt doing it1 and ours1 there is only this difference1 that we define it in terms of art1 and they in ordinary and common ones1 which are better than the others1 because they are more intelligible4 ,this made the learned ,jesuit ,claudius ,franciscus ,dechales say1 that our physics consisted of nothing but a particular idiom1 which conveyed no certain knowledge of any thing4 7,tom4 ,i4 tract4 de ,progressu ,matheseos74 ,,lxxxvii4 ,it is much to be lamented1 that those who are called professors in the schools1 do not know more of the nature of things than the vulgar4 ,but what would you think1 if ,i was to say now1 they know even less8 ,it would seem1 as if ,i was advancing an extravagant paradox2 but notwithstanding this1 ,i assert that the proposition is a most true one1 and may be easily proved2 for as experience is the only channel1 through which a knowledge of nature can be conveyed2 they must have the best experimental knowledge of natural things1 who in various mechanical occupations1 work up various natural entities2 and not those who amuse themselves with speculations1 and live retired in schools4 ,a fisherman1 knows something of the properties of fish2 a pilot1 of the winds and the tides2 a sportsman1 of birds and wild animals2 and a husbandman1 of the generation and increase of plants4 ,but what does the philosopher know8 why1 he knows how to raise doubts about every thing1 and that is all4 ,thus the school of physics is a theatre1 where people are taught to doubt without end4 ,i say without end1 because it is scarce possible the period should ever arrive1 when they will be able to pass from doubt to certainty4 ,this may be clearly inferred1 by their disputing at this day with the same obstinacy1 the same questions they disputed two hundred years ago4 ,if any elucidation1 or certain knowledge1 has been acquired with respect to here and there a physical theorem1 we are not indebted for it to the schools1 but owe it to the benefit of experience1 which comes from the world at large4 ,we may thank the experiments of ,torriceli1 ,monsieur ,pascal1 ,otho ,guerricus1 and ,boyle1 for our knowledge that the air is ponderous4 ,if we are certain1 that the blood circulates from the heart through the arteries1 and is returned by the veins1 we owe the discovery to the anatomical observations of ,peter ,paul ,sarpi and ,william ,harvey4 ,if we are clear1 that the chyle is not conveyed to the liver1 but to the heart2 what ascertained this truth1 but the diligent and practical scrutinies of ,john ,paqueto1 ,thomas ,bartolino1 and the ,englishman ,lowther8 ,experience has been the only arbitrator1 which has settled some disputes1 and banished certain errors from the schools2 and wherever matters have been left to speculation and reasoning1 the suit still remains depending and undetermined4 ,one age and another passes away1 and the world during the whole time1 has been accustomed to hear the same vociferations1 the same arguments1 and the same distinctions2 and has seen the obstinacy of the contending parties1 transferred1 as if it were by hereditary succession1 from professor to professor1 without the least prospect1 either of victory or reconciliation4 ,,sect4 ,,xxiv4 ,,lxxxviii4 ,from this known ignorance of ours1 we may deduce a very useful reflexion1 which is1 to be firm and steady in observing a due subjection to the sacred dogmas of faith4 ,the inordinate confidence we place in our own reason1 is a great enemy to religion4 ,he who estimates his own understanding at an excessive high rate1 rests his faith on the edge of a precipice2 for this vanity has shewn itself very glaringly1 in all the heresies we ever knew4 ,in their pursuits of other vices1 mankind have taken different turns1 but in this they have been all uniform2 for although they have neither been all lascivious1 nor all covetous1 nor all ambitious2 still in this instance1 they have all presumed much on their own understanding4 ,and what can be a more efficacious antidote against this mad presumption1 than reflecting upon the little or nothing1 we have been able to discover in matters of philosophy8 how can he1 who knows he cannot penetrate the misteries of nature1 dare attempt fathoming those of grace8 ,if he reflects1 there will result from that reflexion1 a distrust of his own reason1 and he will submit himself obediently to authority4 ,the philosopher ,anaxagoras1 whom on account of the extraordinary subtilty of his ingenuity1 they by way of eminence1 called the soul or spirit of antiquity1 after having laboured with infinite industry in philosophy1 said1 that nature was all surrounded with clouds and darkness4 ,anaxagoras pronuntiat circumfussa esse tenebris omnia4 7,lactant4 lib4 iii4 ,divin4 ,instit4 cap4 #bh47 ,and ,i must observe1 that this philosopher1 who knew nature was impenetrable to his understanding1 was the first of all the philosophers1 if we believe ,aristotle1 ,laertius1 and ,plutarch1 who declared himself convinced of the indispensable necessity of a supreme intelligence1 who must be the author and director of the whole4 ,on the other hand1 those who boasted1 and flattered themselves that they had discovered all the mysteries and profundities of nature1 for the most part1 denied either the existence1 or the providence of a deity4 ,,lxxxix4 ,i can with truth say of myself1 that next to the divine grace1 a conviction of my own ignorance with regard to natural things1 is the most powerful weapon ,i could ever discover1 wherewith to overcome all those difficulties or objections1 which natural reason suggests1 against the mysteries of faith4 ,i often say to myself1 good ,god6 how can ,i understand those wonders1 which by using his extraordinary power1 are wrought by the omnipotent hand1 if ,i cannot comprehend1 the common effects of his ordinary power8 ,it is true1 ,i am ignorant how1 or by what means1 a divine person can unite himself to human nature2 but ,i am also ignorant1 how a spiritual soul can be united to a material body4 ,notwithstanding which1 this is a matter of fact1 and happens within myself4 ,neither do ,i perceive1 how the same water which falls from heaven1 should be converted1 not only into here and there a particular body1 but into all the animal and vegetable substances upon earth4 ,in the most plausible part of theological controversy1 ,i find myself exceedingly embarrassed2 for if ,i take the side of providence1 ,i am assailed with the forcible arguments in favour of liberty2 and if ,i put myself on the side of liberty1 they wage powerful war against me with the arguments in favour of providence4 ,but do not ,i see the same arguments1 urged with greater vehemence1 in the vulgar philosophical controversy respecting the composition and unity of universal space1 in which1 whatever sentiment is maintained1 they instead of answering their opponents arguments1 perplex the dispute with a multiplicity of words8 ,if ,i defend1 with ,aristotle1 the infinite divisibility of universal space1 although to avoid being concluded1 ,i don't do it with my mouth1 ,i cannot in my mind1 help acknowledging the unity of a great number of its parts2 and if with ,zeno ,i acquiesce in the indivisibility1 the mathematical arguments derived from the diagonal of a square1 two concentric wheels united1 and many other principles1 not only leave me without an answer1 but in a manner strike me dumb4 ,,xc4 ,i say again1 if in those natural things that are open to our view1 and which we touch with our hands every day1 there occur a thousand difficulties1 that are insuperable to1 and beyond the reach of our understandings1 have we not the greatest reason to suppose1 that the same thing happens with respect to supernatural matters1 they being totally superior to the sphere of our senses8 ,if1 maugre all my prying1 ,i can't perceive how ,god does an infinite number of things1 which ,i see him do every day1 would it not be madness in me1 to deny or to doubt the existence of revealed things1 only because ,i can't descry how ,god executes those things8 ,if there was a man so short-sighted1 that he could not see objects that were very near him1 and should pretend that he saw those which were at the distance of a hundred miles from his eyes1 or else should take it into his head to insist1 that such objects1 although they are well known to be in esse1 do not exist1 only because he can't see them1 would not all the world pronounce him a lunatic8 ,this is exactly the same sort of madness as that of those who deny there are divine mysteries1 only because they can't comprehend or pry into them4 ,little vain stupid man1 if the fabric of those material compositions which are ever before your eyes1 and are at all times familiar to your touch1 is totally impenetrable to your short and limited capacity1 how can you expect to comprehend the ineffable manner1 in which ,omnipotence performs those supernatural wonders8 ,you will tell me1 that you can find no solution of the arguments1 which the ,gentile urges to you against the mystery of the ,trinity1 or against that of the ,incarnation2 and ,i answer1 that neither can you find any1 to those the philosopher urges against the composition of universal space1 take which side of the question you will1 and suppose it to be made up1 of either divisible1 or indivisible matter2 but would you conclude from thence1 that it is not composed of either one or the other8 you certainly would not2 and it would be equal1 if not greater delirium1 to deny the truth of those mysteries1 only because you can't answer1 and remove the objections that are made to them4 ,is it fit1 that an ,infinite ,power should proportion his works1 to the limited measure of your understanding8 or is it reasonable to suppose that ,god can do nothing1 which you can't comprehend8 ,,xci4 ,no north wind1 so quickly disperses the clouds which interrupt the rays of the sun1 as these reflexions clear up the doubts1 which natural reason opposes to the mysteries of faith4 ,leave then the presumptuous dogmatists to chew their scepticism1 and to make the most of the objections it furnishes against religion4 ,but the sort of scepticism1 which is precisely limited and confined to physics1 is so far from prejudicing faith1 that it serves to confirm and rivet it2 by removing the obstacles1 which the presumption of natural reason throws in the way1 to interrupt the effect of that humble docility1 which is so necessary1 to preserve the understanding in a due state of subjection to the authority of revelation4 ,,xcii4 ,those men do great injury1 not only to philosophy1 but to the church also1 who rashly endeavour1 to interest the doctrine of revelation in the defence of their particular philosophical opinions4 ,this the heretics lay hold of1 to calumniate us with converting philosophical sentiments1 into articles of faith2 and by this artifice1 they persuade their followers1 that our belief is arduous1 and unnecessarily complicated4 ,upon this presumption1 some strangers found their assertions1 when they accuse us of countenancing idiotism1 and mixing it with religion4 ,it is but a little while ago1 that one of them declared in his writings1 that the opinions of men in ,spain were not more free1 than their persons were in ,turkey4 ,in order to preserve a due respect for sacred things1 it is necessary1 not to confound them with profane ones2 whoever should begin to erect habitations in temples1 would be the author of temples losing that respectful reverence that ought to be preserved in them4 ,there are judges appertaining to the church1 whose province it is1 to determine what doctrines are useful1 what pernicious1 and what indifferent4 ,let us then leave the decision of those matters to them1 and don't let those who sincerely seek the truth1 be terrified and disturbed by those scare-crows that are set up by partiality and faction1 and sometimes by the pride of those1 who have given their names to particular schools1 or by the envy of others1 who could not arrive at doing so much4 ,,sect4 ,,xxv4 ,,xciii4 ,we having shewn now1 that we possess no physical science or demonstrative knowledge of natural things1 we may entertain a reasonable doubt whether we shall ever be able to attain any such4 ,the most learned ,valles1 is clear that we shall not2 because physical knowledge is confined to singular things1 and alledges that from singular things1 you can't derive a science4 ,but as we have observed before1 this argument is ill founded1 and insufficient4 ,,xciv4 ,we might lay more stress upon two authorities the sceptics alledge in their favour1 which are taken from the ,ecclesiastes4 ,the first is from ,chap4 ,,iii4 in these words4 ,cuncta fecit bona in tempore suo1 et mundum tradidit disputationi eorum1 ut non inveniat homo opus1 quod operatus est ,deus ab initio usque ad finem4 ,the second is more formal and precise1 and taken from ,chap4 ,,viii4 ,et intellexi1 quod omnium operum ,dei nullam possit homo invenire rationem eorum1 qu sunt sub sole3 et quant plus laboraverit ad qurendum1 tant minus inveniat1 etiamsi dixerit sapiens se nosse1 non poterit reperire4 ,but in truth1 these texts1 when they affirm the impossibility of discovering the causes and reason of natural effects1 may be understood to allude to the providential1 and not to the natural or physical ones4 ,in fact1 this is the sense in which some fathers and expositors understand them4 ,,xcv4 ,others again argue1 that the desire of knowing the causes of natural effects1 is natural to1 and implanted in man by nature itself2 and as a natural desire can't prompt a man to an impossible inquiry1 it follows1 that attaining the science we are speaking of1 is within the compass of possibility4 ,to this argument1 ,valles replies1 it is absolutely possible2 and although not in this life1 it is in that to come1 at which period1 the blessed will see with ,god all things most clearly4 ,this solution is attended with the following difficulty1 that a natural desire can't be directed to an impossible object2 neither can it terminate in a supernatural one2 and the knowledge the blessed will have of supernatural things1 must be entitively supernatural1 because it will depend immediately on the light of glory4 ,upon the whole1 we may suppose1 that there may belong to the soul in a state of separation from the body1 abstracted from the supernatural blessing of the light of glory1 a certain knowledge of all material things1 in consequence of the species1 infused in the course and order of nature2 which is the sentiment of ,egidius ,romanus1 ,father ,saurez1 and others2 and this knowledge being natural1 may possibly be the effect of the thirst we possess for acquiring it in this mortal life4 ,,xcvi4 ,but we can't help remarking1 that the foregoing argument does not stand in need of this solution1 because it proceeds upon a false supposition not adverted to by ,valles2 which is1 that the desire of knowing things philosophically1 is a principle implanted in man by nature4 ,if this was so1 all men would be impressed with this desire1 which is not the case2 for the greatest part of them seem to have no passion at all for physics2 and many despise philosophical speculations1 as useless1 vain1 and by no means entertaining4 ,it is true1 that all men are desirous of knowledge1 but this desire is not directed in all of them to the same object1 or to the same species of objects4 ,generous souls are naturally lovers of truth2 but the majority1 are only anxious to understand those things1 the knowledge of which1 may contribute to the gratification of their passions4 ,,xcvii4 ,we have seen the little force of the arguments urged on both sides1 with respect to the doubts we have been canvassing4 ,on which account1 ,i won't venture to give sentence in the question4 ,nor do ,i1 nor can any one else without the assistance of ,revelation1 know the just limits of the human understanding with regard to natural things4 ,and although the various philosophical systems which have hitherto been invented1 are exposed to great doubts1 or are impeachable of containing manifest nullities in them1 who knows but that1 in future some one may be discovered so compleat1 and so well founded1 that the understanding may be convinced of the truth of it4 ,my opinion is1 that if this is ever to be accomplished1 it must be done by pursuing the plan and method prescribed by my ,lord ,bacon4 ,it is true1 that this is so laborious and prolix1 that the execution of it may be apprehended to be morally impossible2 for although the monarchs of two very powerful kingdoms1 ,france and ,england1 for the space of more than a hundred years1 have caused four hundred able men1 at a great expence1 and under proper regulations1 to be employed in making innumerable experiments1 and in reasoning upon1 and explaining them1 the work is not yet far advanced2 when then may we expect to see it accomplished8 ,the ,academy of ,sciences at ,paris1 and the ,royal ,society of ,london1 don't amount to more than a shred of my ,lord ,bacon's extensive project4 ,on the ,shew or ,affectation of ,learning and ,knowledge4 ,,sect4 ,i4 ,i4 ,science1 like ,virtue1 has its imitators and its hypocrites2 and the vulgar are as much imposed upon by the one as the other4 ,the numbers of unlearned people who pass for men of literature1 is considerable2 and the false appearances they put on1 becomes a copious source of errors1 both particular and common4 ,in this earthly region which we inhabit1 apparent learning is as much reverenced1 and often-times as much respected1 as true4 ,there are those1 who are very expert at putting on the semblance of learned men1 and of imposing themselves as such upon the world1 although the portion of literature they possess is but very small2 however1 if they have the address to make their copied imitation of it appear an original painting1 the copy will often make the same impression on mens minds1 as if it actually was an original4 ,when ,zeuxis with his pencil imitated grapes1 the birds flew with as much eagerness to eat the painted1 as if they had been real and natural grapes4 ,,ii4 ,in the eleventh century1 ,arnoldus ,brixiens1 who was a man of but little literature1 did great mischief with his errors1 both in his own country1 and even in ,rome itself2 for as ,gunterus ,ligurinus observes1 that besides being an elegant reasoner1 he had the address of giving himself the air and appearance of a man of learning2 ,assumpta sapientis fronte1 disserto fallebat sermone rudes2 or as ,otho ,frinsingens remarks1 a copious verbosity passed in him for knowledge and erudition2 ,vir quidem natur non hebetis2 plus tamen verborum profluvio1 quam sententiarum pondere copiosus4 ,thus ,vigilantius1 although he was an ignorant man1 by his art in gaining over to him booksellers and publishers1 who were the proclaimers of his fame1 so far acquired the reputation of a person of literature1 that he had the assurance to write against ,saint ,jerom1 and to accuse him of being an ,origenist4 ,,iii4 ,the vulgar1 who are incompetent judges of men of letters1 are apt1 although it is against their own interest1 to countenance and give credit to unlearned persons1 whose deceptions in consequence of this encouragement become formidable4 ,the delusion of popular ignorance is apt to magnify a very small light1 into the blaze of a flaming torch2 and to fancy it is as luminous1 as the lanthorn placed on the top of the tower of ,pharos1 which ,pliny says1 at a great distance off1 appears like a star to those who navigate the sea of ,alexandria4 ,,iv4 ,it may not be improperly remarked1 that in order for a man to be esteemed a person of learning with the populace1 it is not so necessary that he should really be one1 as that he should put on the pompous appearance of such a person4 ,arrogance and verbosity1 if they are accompanied with a small degree of discernment1 that helps a man to judge1 when are the proper times to talk1 and when to hold his tongue1 and what are the subjects he should discourse1 and what be silent upon3 ,i say1 if he has a little discretion to know how to conduct himself in these particulars1 such management will have a notable effect4 ,a confident magisterial air in his decisions1 and an artificial gesture1 which when he sprinkles about the little he understands of the subject he is talking upon1 and which seems to indicate that he has an infinitely greater stock of knowledge of the matter treasured up in his inside2 such affected appearances1 ,i say1 will have great weight and efficacy to fascinate the ignorant vulgar4 ,,sect4 ,,ii4 ,v4 ,on the other hand1 men of true learning1 are modest and candid2 but these two virtues1 are enemies1 and also great obstacles to the advancement of their fame4 ,he who knows most1 is sensible1 that what he really knows1 falls greatly short of what he is ignorant of4 ,his discretion teaches him this1 and his sincerity induces him to confess it2 but his acting in this manner1 greatly obstructs his gaining the applause of the world2 for these confessions have the same effect1 that the evidence of those have1 who bear witness against themselves2 that is1 they are readily believed2 and although it is impossible for any man to know every thing1 the vulgar are very unwilling to esteem him learned1 who owns himself ignorant of the least matter in his own profession4 ,,vi4 ,men of learning1 are also most commonly timid1 because they are apt to be diffident of themselves2 so that although all they say should be divine1 if it is pronounced with a tremulous tongue1 and a faltering voice1 it makes no impression on those who listen to them4 ,a man would gain more credit with the world in general1 by talking loud1 and making extravagant bold assertions1 than by reasoning diffidently1 and as if he was not quite clear2 for the estimation due to discreet doubts has always been suppressed1 and in consequence of this suppression1 has contributed to countenance errors1 and beget false conclusions4 ,how has a presumptuous ignorant fellow1 frequently availed himself of his imposing gesture1 and the loudness of his voice8 and how much by the strength of his lungs has he often concealed the weakness of his argument8 ,but in truth1 the noise made by a vociferous person1 ought to render his solidity suspected2 because men1 like other sonorous machines1 are loudest the more hollow and empty they are4 ,,vii4 ,if to these imposing appearances1 there happens to be joined a moderate portion of literature1 it has a most powerful effect to captivate the vulgar1 and to gain popular applause4 ,in the instance of ,luther1 who although he might truly and properly be stiled a man of learning1 still the forcible manner in which he delivered himself1 added to his address1 may be supposed to have contributed more to the success of his preaching1 than his literature4 ,,sect4 ,,iii4 ,,viii4 ,there are qualities also1 which give people the reputation of able and learned men1 when in reality they are quite the reverse4 ,gravity and circumspection1 whether they are natural or artificial1 contribute much to produce this effect4 ,gravity1 says ,magdalen ,scuderi in one of her moral conversations1 is a bodily mystery1 invented to conceal the defects of the mind2 and if it is carried to excess1 elevates the person who wears this appearance1 to the rank of an oracle4 ,but ,i can see no reason why a person on this account1 should be esteemed more than a man1 because that the nearer he resembles a statue1 he in reality is by so much less than a man2 nor why risibility1 being the distinguished mark of rationality1 he should be esteemed the most rational1 who is the least addicted to laughter4 ,the ingenious ,french author ,montaigne1 says pleasantly1 that among the whole brute creation1 there is no animal so grave as an ass4 ,,ix4 ,aristotle considered melancholy as a token of ingenuity4 ,but ,i can't tell why he did this2 for every day's experience convinces us1 that there are melancholy people who are very dull and stupid4 ,if we were to judge of things as they appear to us at first sight1 we might be easily induced to confound the stupid with the thoughtful1 and to mistake the one for the other4 ,people of dark and gloomy geniuses1 have in some measure1 the air and appearance of profound thinkers2 but if we reflect1 we shall be convinced1 that insociability is not a characteristic quality appertaining to a rational being4 ,in those who look as if they were always absorbed in thought1 the negotiation or operation of the interior part of the soul seems to be inverted4 ,instead of the understanding surveying and contemplating the species1 the species seem to seize upon1 and take possession of the understanding2 and instead of the mind being master of the object1 the object appears as if it was master of the mind2 and the species that appear to seize upon it seem as if they bound it down1 and kept it confined4 ,a person in this state should not be said to be contemplative1 but ought more properly to be compared to a man that is stunned2 the immobility of whose thoughts1 keeps his reason in a state of suspence4 ,i observe1 that there is no brute of a more festive and sociable disposition than a dog2 and that there is no one which is endued with a more noble instinct2 yet1 maugre this experience1 ,i look upon the opposite extreme to excessive gravity to be the worst symptom of the two2 for men who are always giggling and bantering1 are generally very superficial4 ,x4 ,but both the silent and the loquacious have their partizans4 ,some consider men of few words to be the most sagacious1 and others give the preference to those who are rather prodigal in their use of them4 ,the talking but little1 is occasioned either by excessive caution1 or by fear1 or else is the effect of modesty1 and the want of a ready flow of words2 but not1 as is commonly thought1 does this indicate a want of knowledge4 ,there is no man1 who if he was to speak all he thinks1 or that occurs to him1 would not talk a great deal4 ,,xi4 ,there are some1 who observe an artificial medium between talking and holding their tongues1 which is very well adapted to attract the veneration of the vulgar2 that is1 they speak with confidence upon such things as they understand1 and take care to be silent upon such as they are ignorant of2 but this they do1 in a manner as if their silence proceeded from reserve1 and an unwillingness to enter upon the subject4 ,by these artifices1 men of very moderate capacities1 and whose informations are very limited1 pass themselves upon the world for persons of deep penetration1 and a sort of walking libraries2 and although they are possessed of only a very minute or abstracted portion of whatever is the subject of conversation1 they engage in the argument in very general terms1 always taking care not to advance too far1 and to retreat in time2 which they do in a manner1 as if they were tired of talking further upon the question at present1 and therefore would be glad to postpone it1 to be discussed more at large another time4 ,in reality1 they have said all they know1 but behave in this manner1 in order to have it thought they have only given a small specimen of their knowledge of the thing2 although1 like the painter who undertook to paint the eleven thousand virgins1 but never finished more than five of them1 and declared that all the rest should be supposed coming behind in procession1 they would be glad1 that what they have already said should conclude the debate2 still1 if any one1 aware of their tricks1 should then press them to a further discussion of the point1 they either artfully turn the conversation1 or affect a scornful dislike to discussing so weighty a matter before so thin an audience2 or else get rid of the invitation made to them1 with a disdainful smile1 and treat both the proposal and the proposer1 as if they were beneath their notice4 ,these people are very ready at such sort of expedients1 because they study them much1 and have a great deal of practice in them4 ,,xii4 ,there are others again1 who have recourse to ambiguous and confused expressions2 which seem to say a great deal1 when in reality they say nothing2 and which1 like the answers of the oracles of old1 are applicable to all kinds of events4 ,in fact1 they may be termed the images of those oracles2 for although they are listened to with attention1 they are little better than mere stocks or stones4 ,the obscurity with which they talk is a dark shade1 that conceals what they are ignorant of2 and they make use of the stratagem of those who have no other but false money2 that is1 take care to pass it off under the cover of the night4 ,but notwithstanding all these glaring appearances1 there are not wanting weak people1 who esteem their embarrassment and confusion as marks of their learning1 and who think1 that men are like mountains1 which the more elevated and sublime they are1 the more liable to be covered with clouds1 and to cause dark shades which obstruct the fertility1 and obscure the chearful appearance of the vallies4 ,majoresque cadunt altis de montibus umbr4 ,,xiii4 ,this deception1 is commonly kept up and assisted by a persuasive carriage1 and by certain mysterious gestures and distortions of the features2 such as wrinkling the forehead1 knitting the eye-brows1 rolling the eyes1 swelling out the cheeks1 thrusting forth the under-lip1 and shaking the head2 all which affected tokens of wisdom and importance1 are displayed and accompanied1 with a kind of disdainful countenance4 ,these are a sort of men1 who have more than half the wisdom they seem to possess lodged in their features and muscles1 which serve them to exhibit and express these symptoms of profundity4 ,tully very justly ridiculed this artifice in ,pison in the following words3 ,respondes1 altero ad frontem sublato1 altero ad mentem depresso supercilio1 crudelitatem tibi non placere4 ,,sect4 ,,iv4 ,,xiv4 ,men1 by affecting to despise others who know more than themselves1 make use of the most vile and mean artifices imaginable2 but notwithstanding this1 it is the most sure method1 to make them pass for persons of great knowledge1 among people of groveling and plebeian minds4 ,there can be no greater injustice committed1 nor a vainer effort made1 than that1 of an envious man's attempting to transfer the merit which he has purloined from another person to himself4 ,it is true1 that a small cloud may obstruct the splendor of the sun2 but this obstruction does not prevent this luminary from being the illustrious torch of heaven1 nor can such a circumstance be of more consequence than a speck in the atmosphere2 nor does it require any science or learning1 to enable a man to cast a thousand reflections and blemishes upon other people's doctrines and writings4 ,when there is no reason to conclude that such behaviour proceeds from envy or malevolence1 we ought to suppose that it springs from pure ignorance4 ,i remember to have read in a ,treatise intitled ,the ,man of ,letters1 written by ,father ,daniel ,bartoli1 that an ass once happening to stumble over the ,iliad of ,homer1 he in a passion tore it to pieces with his teeth4 ,thus1 in order to outrage1 abuse1 and destroy a noble writing1 nothing is better qualified than a beast4 ,,xv4 ,being tenacious1 insolent1 and overbearing in argument1 is also another means1 which1 although it is equally base and bad with the beforementioned1 is sometimes very efficacious to gain a person the reputation of being a learned man4--,foolish people1 such as the ,megalopolitans1 of whom we have an account in ,pausanias1 pay greater veneration to ,boreas the god of the north-wind than to any other deity1 and are apt to adore tumultuous geniuses as beings of supreme intelligence2 and although it is absolutely irreconcileable and incompatible with it1 to look upon barefaced arrogance as the child of superior learning4 ,to this we may add another thing1 that may have an effect to make them pass for wise and able persons1 which is1 that those who are truly learned1 avoid as much as possible1 all controversy or dispute with people who are of this tenacious overbearing disposition2 and this prudent declining to contend with them1 is often construed into fear of engaging them2 as if it was necessary for men of learning1 in order to shew their spirit1 to encounter reptiles and venomous snakes4 ,cato's lamentation1 or repentance1 was just and generous1 when he regretted having led his troops into the burning deserts of ,africa1 where they had no other enemies to encounter but asps1 horned serpents1 vipers1 fiery serpents1 and basilisks4 ,the horrors of the civil war in the plains of ,pharsalia1 where they engaged the invincible troops of ,csar1 appeared to him less frightful1 than those they experienced among the burning sands of ,libya1 where the most vile and abominable reptiles fought on ,csar's side1 ,pro ,csare pugnant ,dipsades1 et peragunt civilia bella ,cerast4 ,,xvi4 ,he who can reconcile it to himself1 to be inflexible in argument1 and to dispute without end1 and with all his might1 never suffering himself to be convinced by reason1 has made a large stride towards being reputed an ,aristotle among the vulgar2 for they1 with respect to the wars of ,minerva1 as well as those of ,mars1 are apt to declare the victory1 in favour of him who remains longest in the field1 and1 in their opinion1 he never fails to come off conqueror1 who has the last word4 ,this is the way the vulgar judge2 but he who would be thought superior to that class of people1 must permit himself to be convinced by reason1 for1 if he does not1 instead of acquiring the reputation of a learned man by such conduct1 he lets himself down to the level of a brute4 ,the ingenious ,doctor ,luis ,rodriguez1 being asked what sort of a man a shallow physician was with whom he had been arguing1 answered pleasantly1 7although we must allow his wit favoured of the arrogance which is rather too common with the ,portuguese7 ,he is so great an ass1 that goad him ever so much1 it is impossible to make him get on1 or be the better for any reasoning that is bestowed on him4 ,,xvii4 ,it is also a very common artifice with those who know but little1 to bring the conversation to turn upon that little they are informed of4 ,this is very easy for people of power or authority to do4 ,i knew a person of this sort myself1 who1 whatever conversation happened to arise in company1 was used to train the subject of it insensibly1 to fall on the few points relative to it1 which he had been reading or studying that day1 or the day before1 by which piece of management1 he generally used to appear more learned than the rest of the company4 ,even in scholastic disputes1 this art is often practised4 ,i have more than twice in my life1 seen a good theologian foiled by a novice2 who1 by artfully sliding some chimerical proposition into the dispute1 has drawn the argument from its proper object1 and caused it to fall into a sumulistical labyrinth of amplifications1 restrictions1 alienations1 oppositions1 conversions1 and equipolations2 the rules of which were fresh in the young man's memory1 and which the old theologian had forgot4 ,this was adopting the craft of the rogue ,cacus1 who1 having artfully drawn ,hercules into his own cave1 rendered his arms and superior strength of no use to him1 by blinding him with the smoak he continued to eject out of his mouth4 ,,sect4 ,v4 ,,xviii4 ,besides the visionary wise people1 or those which are such in appearance only1 there are others who have credit given them for being men of profound knowledge1 merely from the mistakes and misapprehensions of others4 ,he who studies logic and metaphysics in the schools1 together with those other matters1 which under the denomination of philosophy are taught there1 notwithstanding the sounding names1 of these faculties1 and his being supposed to know every thing1 in reality1 knows but little more than nothing4 ,it is commonly said1 that such a man is a great philosopher1 when in truth he is no philosopher at all1 either great or little4 ,all the ten categorical principles1 together with the whole contents of the eight books on physics1 and their two adjuncts on generation and corruption1 put into a logical alembic1 would not produce a drop of true philosophical spirit1 that would assist us to explain the most vulgar phenomenon in the sensible world4 ,the ,aristotelic ideas1 have no more to do with physics1 than the ,platonic ones2 and the physics of the schools1 are pure metaphysics4 ,all that the ,peripatetics have hitherto written or disputed concerning motion1 has not determined1 what is the line of reflection1 by which a ball returns back that is struck against a wall1 or what is the degree of velocity1 with which a heavy body descends by an inclined plane4 ,he who by the ordinary metaphysical reasonings1 thinks to attain a true knowledge of nature1 is as mad1 as he who should fancy himself master of the world1 because he is possessed of a map of it4 ,,xix4 ,the great advantage of these philosophers in name1 if in the schools they manage with dexterity the rules of science1 consists in this1 that in virtue of the four species or rudiments of theology or medicine they acquire there1 they are enabled to dazzle the eyes of mankind1 and to pass in the world1 for great theologians and doctors of physic4 ,with respect to theology1 the mistake in this matter is not so great2 but with regard to medicine1 it cannot be greater4 ,by the rule1 ,ubi desinit physicus1 incipit medicus1 it seems as if it should follow of course1 that a good philosopher is easily made a good doctor of physic4 ,upon this supposition1 when people see a practising physician1 who has twenty syllogisms at his fingers ends1 ready to explain and demonstrate1 whether privation is a principle annexed to a natural entity1 or whether the united mass or the whole1 can be of a distinct or different texture from the parts1 they fancy he is possessed of all the requisites and recommendations1 that are necessary to establish and fix him as a most able1 or first rate man in his profession4 ,,xx4 ,that most learned commentator upon ,discorides1 ,andrew de ,laguna1 says1 that if it could conveniently be done1 it would be good policy to send those flaming young physicians1 who are just come from the university1 brimful of the bragadocio arrogance of ergo and probo1 to practise physic in those nations we are at war with1 for that it would be attended with a great saving1 both of men and money1 to our own country4 ,,xxi4 ,i can with confidence affirm1 that there is no art or faculty1 that can be less conducive to the acquisition of medicinal knowledge1 than the physics of the schools4 ,if all the philosophers that are1 or ever were in the world1 could be convened together1 and remain in consultation for a hundred years1 they would not in all that time1 by the mere help of philosophical speculations1 be able to instruct us how we should cure a chilblain2 nor from that tumultuous consultation1 should we obtain any maxim1 that ought not to be prohibited as contraband1 and refused admittance into the chamber of a sick person4 ,good sense joined to experience1 either acquired by a man's own1 or the practice of other reputable people1 are both the father and mother of medicinal knowledge2 nor has physics1 that is to say the physics of the schools1 the least share in the propagation of this species4 ,,xxii4 ,the reasoning of naturalists upon all kinds of mixtures1 consists1 in whether they are constituted of matter and substantial forms according to the doctrine of ,aristotle1 or of atoms according to that of ,epicurus1 or of salt1 sulphur1 and mercury1 according to that of the chymists1 or of the three elements1 according to that of the ,cartesians3 whether these are composed of undivisible points1 or of parts dividable in infinitum2 whether their action or operation is from their texture1 or the motion of their particles1 or from some accidental virtues which they call qualities2 whether these qualities are of the manifest or the occult kind2 and whether they are of the first1 second1 or third class or species4 ,now what has all this to do with medicine8 ,i will venture to pronounce no more1 or rather less1 than it has with geometry or jurisprudence4 ,when a physician goes about to cure a tertian ague1 all this farrago of questions applied to the operations or effect of the bark1 is of no sort of use to him4 ,the only thing that is of any importance for him to know1 is1 whether his experience has taught him1 that in the present state of the disorder1 it will be proper to administer this febrifuge2 but this he is to infer1 not from the maxims1 dici de omni1 dici de nullo2 but from conviction1 drawn from experiments he has made himself of its efficacy in the like cases1 and also from those1 which have been made by physicians of eminence who have wrote on the subject4 ,,xxiii4 ,in no art whatever1 is it of any use1 to have a physical knowledge of the implements1 with1 or by which1 a man does his business4 ,a man may be an excellent pilot1 without being able to explain the directive virtue of the load-stone to the pole2 and a great soldier1 although he is totally ignorant of the physical component parts of gunpowder1 and the metal with which military implements are made2 and he may be a great painter1 without knowing whether colours consist of intrinsic accidents1 or whether they are produced by the various reflections of light4 ,nor does the being able to argue well upon these points1 conduce in the least degree1 to make a man either a pilot1 a soldier1 or a painter4 ,but there is no necessity for my enlarging further1 in order to extirpate this common error from the world1 as the learned ,doctor ,martinez1 has fully and effectually exploded it in his two volumes1 intitled ,medicina ,sceptica4 ,,sect4 ,,vi4 ,,xxiv4 ,there is another common error respecting the subject-matter of this ,essay1 although the opinion built upon it1 is rather better founded than the one we have just been speaking of1 and that is1 looking upon every man as wise1 able1 and skilful1 who has studied a great deal4 ,the labour of study1 seldom makes any great improvements1 if it is not bestowed on a clear and penetrating natural understanding2 and may be compared to the toils and expences of cultivation1 that are employed upon a poor and nearly barren soil1 which seldom produce much fruit4 ,among mankind1 are to be found the turtles and the eagles of the human species4 ,the last1 with a speedy and easy flight1 ascend to the summit of ,olympus2 the first1 after several days labour1 shall not be able to reach to the top of a moderate hill4 ,,xxv4 ,much time employed in reading1 furnishes a man with a deal of matter2 but the being able to penetrate1 or rightly comprehend that matter1 is more a gift of nature1 than a production from toil4 ,there are some1 who may be termed learned from their memories1 but who are not so in virtue of their understandings1 and who may be compared to marble tablets with inscriptions engraved on them1 which display the letters1 but do not perceive them4 ,they are a kind of mental books1 that are filled with many texts1 which they no more comprehend1 or have a right idea of the meaning of1 than the leaves on which they are written4 ,if you observe the use or application they make of the species they have acquired1 you will perceive1 they deduce no proper conclusions from what they have read1 nor make any observations on the things they have been perusing1 that are pertinent or applicable to the subject-matter of those things4 ,thus we see1 that from the same species or set of ideas1 may be formed good reasoning and bad2 just as with the same sort of materials1 you may build elegant palaces1 and rustic habitations4 ,,xxvi4 ,thus it may also happen1 that a man shall know all the works of ,saint ,thomas by heart1 and be a very poor theologian2 and that he shall in the same manner1 know all the statutes of the civil and canon law1 and be a very bad lawyer4 ,and although it is commonly said1 that law-knowledge depends almost intirely upon memory1 or at least1 that it depends more upon memory than understanding1 yet ,i consider this as another common error4 ,with a great many law-cases and maxims at his fingers ends1 a man may draw a very bad plea2 in the same manner as one1 although his memory is stored with a vast variety of texts of scripture1 may make a very bad sermon4 ,the choice of the most fit to apply to the subject1 depends upon the understanding1 and not upon the memory4 ,if men were obliged to do law-business by surprize1 and without having time to consider and digest what they were about1 a happy memory1 in which were treasured up pertinent texts and citations1 would be a most essential ingredient1 and one1 that it is almost indispensably necessary they should be possessed of4 ,but as this1 in the regular course of practice1 is not the case2 he who has attended properly to the best books that have been written on the profession1 and has a good general idea of them1 will seldom be at a loss where to look for apt cases and authorities1 wherewith to support his arguments2 and as ,i observed before1 the choice of those which are the most conducive to this end1 is more the business of understanding1 than memory4 ,,xxvii4 ,i have observed1 that professional people in all faculties and sciences1 have a great propensity to complain of the want of memory1 and ,i have also observed1 that they are apt to set a much higher value upon the gift of memory1 than the power of reasoning2 so that it appears to me1 that if there were to be two shops opened1 in one of which was sold memory1 and in the other understanding1 the man who kept the first would soon make a fortune1 and he who kept the second1 would not take as much money as would buy him salt to his porridge4 ,but my opinion1 was always quite different from this common notion1 and ,i can say for myself1 that ,i set more value upon a drachm of understanding1 than upon an ounce of memory4 ,i have been told1 that ,i do not estimate memory at a high rate1 because ,i have no occasion for it2 but it is possible that those who told me this1 may judge of me by themselves1 who are not anxious about an increase of talents or ingenuity1 because they fancy they are abundantly provided with all they stand in need of4 ,i would not pretend to be endowed with a great share of memory1 but ,i however think1 ,i am rather better furnished in that respect1 than ,i am in point of understanding2 but ,i do not set a greater value on the last of these faculties on that account1 nor does it proceed from my being anxious of an increase of it to myself1 that ,i set a higher value upon understanding1 than ,i do upon memory2 but ,i give this preference from a persuasion1 that in all the ordinary occurrences of life1 understanding will afford a man more assistance1 and be of infinitely greater use to him than memory4 ,,sect4 ,,vii4 ,,xxviii4 ,we have not as yet1 said any thing of authors or writers2 but this semblance of learning1 is the easiest to put on of all others4 ,there is no more difficulty in writing ill1 than there is in talking ill2 and provided a man writes in the bon ton1 and can flourish with the king's licence in the front of his work1 the book will go off1 and the author will pass with the ideots of the world1 for a learned1 and an able man4 ,,xxix4 ,but a person may make sure of gaining applause as an author with the generality of mankind1 and this may be done in two ways1 either by filling his writing with common-place observations1 and just taking care to diversify and scatter them about2 or else by stealing from other authors2 and where there are great numbers of books to have recourse to1 the danger of being detected in the plagiary is not very considerable2 for there are very few who read many books1 and nobody can read all that are published2 so that all the hazard a person runs of being found out1 is1 that here and there one out of many thousands of readers1 may discover from whence he made the theft2 and among all the rest1 he would pass for an original author1 and they would acknowledge and respect him as such4 ,,xxx4 ,the writing from alphabetical compilations is also extremely easy4 ,there is the ,theatre of human life1 the ,polyantheas1 and many other books1 where erudition is arranged under the initial letters of the several branches of learning1 and these books1 by having copious indexes annexed to them1 become a kind of public fountains1 where all the animals of the world may drink1 both men and beasts4 ,whatever subject a man undertakes to write upon1 be it politics1 morality1 humanity1 or history1 he has only to turn to the index1 which will point out to him1 where he may be furnished with a copious assortment of texts1 and citations1 that are amassed together in these books for the use of all the world1 and where he may collect whatever he has occasion for4 ,by this management1 the new author may gain himself the reputation of a man of great erudition and reading2 for there are very few who can distinguish by the connection and regular series of a writing1 that kind of copious erudition1 which is well arranged and properly separated in the brain1 and which flows opportunely from thence to the pen2 from that1 which a man when he is hard put to it1 is obliged to collect from indexes and common-place books1 with which he swells his work1 and with which he heaps up in it1 gross and bulky trifles1 that consist of straw and chaff1 collected from common-place ,latin citations and numbers4 ,,moral ,,and ,,political ,,paradoxes4 ,,paradox ,i4 ,the ,invention of ,gun-powder has been of great ,use1 and also very beneficial to ,mankind4 ,i4 ,if in the account which ,virgil gives of the descent of neas into hell1 he points out1 as one of the most tormented and afflicted he saw there1 ,salmoneus that king of ,elide1 who in order to acquire to himself divine honours1 attempted to imitate1 although it was but in a very poor way1 the thunder and lightning of ,jupiter2 ,vidi1 crudeles dantem ,salmonea pnas1 ,dum flammas ,jovis1 sonitus imitatur ,olympi4 ,i say1 if this was the case of ,salmoneus1 ,i believe ,i may venture to pronounce1 that the bulk of mankind1 would judge the man deserving a much more severe punishment1 who invented gun-powder1 and contrived cannon1 and would think1 that he had imitated much better than the king of ,elide1 the noise1 the flash1 and the havoc made by those fiery flying meteors4 ,in truth1 the world contemplate the ,author of that invention with such horror and indignation1 that they detest his name4 ,and ,quevedo speaks the sentiment of them all1 or they nearly all assent to the opinion he expressed of him1 in the following lines3 ,he was of iron race and heart1 ,in concave metal vast machine1 ,who first combustible with art ,did shut2 ,and then to raise a horrid scene1 ,by violence produc'd a flame1 ,destructive as his savage mind1 ,and thus transferr'd his odious name ,as infamous to all mankind4 ,,ii4 ,this abomination of the inventor1 arises from the world's considering the invention of gun-powder1 as a most pernicious thing to the human race1 as in consequence of it1 the number of violent deaths has been greatly increased2 but this is an error1 which in the discussion of this ,paradox ,i propose to banish from the world2 and do not doubt1 that by the help of a little reasoning and reflexion1 ,i shall be able so to explain the matter1 as to cause the mistake to vanish4 ,,iii4 ,so far is the common conjecture1 that the invention of gun-powder has increased the mortality of mankind1 from being true1 that on the contrary1 it has lessened it4 ,it is a notorious fact1 established upon the faith of all antient and modern histories1 that when they only used what are commonly called white arms in war1 the battles were much more bloody than they are at present4 ,it was very rare then1 that the dispute was decided1 when the contest lay between troops that were nearly equal in valour and discipline1 till one of the parties were almost half destroyed2 but at present1 instead of that1 the death of a tenth part1 is generally sufficient to determine the victory in favour of the conquering side4 ,i confess1 that this in some measure may be owing to the superior perfection the art of war is arrived at now1 compared with what it was formerly4 ,i say in some measure1 because ,i apprehend the greatest difference1 should be imputed to the different way of fighting4 ,in former days1 when they fought principally with swords1 or cutting and thrusting weapons1 the troops could not engage1 without being intimately mixed one with another4 ,this mixing1 conduced to irritate men's minds1 and caused a greater difficulty in discerning the advantages one army had gained1 and the disadvantages the other laboured under3 it also created great confusion1 and made it difficult for them to attend to or obey orders2 and likewise made it very hard to withdraw the vanquished out of the reach of the conquerors2 all which causes1 concurred to make battles very obstinate and bloody4 ,now-a-days1 it is sometimes sufficient to decide the contest1 if one of the parties before their coming very near each other1 is greatly disordered by the fire of their adversaries2 in which case1 if the general upon weighing the circumstances1 concludes he cannot repair the mischief1 he orders a retreat4 ,,iv4 ,in the sieges of fortified towns1 this difference of bloodshed is still greater2 for the reduction of places1 is become much more easy by the invention of gun-powder1 and the slaughter attending reducing them greatly less1 than it was before the use of it4 ,the siege of ,troy1 which we are told lasted ten years1 would probably not have continued two months1 if they had then known the use of cannon and mortars2 by so much the more havoc these implements make of the stone walls1 by so much the less1 is the havoc made of men's lives4 ,bombs and cannon balls1 are more terrifying than destructive4 ,all hear their noise1 and but few perish by their flash4 ,frequently1 the surprize and panic they occasion1 redeem people from the mischief of them1 because the garrison1 by being intimidated before they are considerably wasted1 entertain thoughts of surrendering2 by which means1 an infinite number of deaths1 both on the part of the besieged1 and the besiegers1 are prevented4 ,v4 ,it has not only been observed1 that there has been a saving of men and time in sieges1 since they have introduced carrying them on by artillery2 but it has also been remarked1 that in proportion as the fire of them has been augmented1 the destruction of the human race has been lessened4 ,upon this experience1 and with a view of preventing the effusion of blood1 ,louis the fourteenth during his reign1 either from his own feelings1 or by the advice of his best officers1 directed1 that they should increase the expence of gun-powder in sieges4 ,and ,spain once imitated this practice very happily1 and with great success2 for having observed that the siege of the town of ,namur in #afie1 on account of the smallness of their fire1 cost them much time1 and a great number of men1 before they could reduce the place2 therefore when they came to besiege the citadel1 they for the space of seven days1 kept an incessant fire against it1 with a hundred and forty cannon1 and a hundred mortars and royals2 by which means1 they obliged it to surrender in much less time than they spent in besieging the town1 and when the garrison consisted of eight thousand good troops able to do duty1 exclusive of sick and wounded4 ,it is a fact1 that this good purpose was attained upon that occasion1 and would no doubt be attained upon others of the same sort1 not only on account of the terror1 which such a fire impresses the besieged with1 but because also1 the continual fatigue it exposes them to1 exhausts their spirits1 and does not permit them1 either to eat or sleep in safety1 and obliges them to exert an almost continual bodily labour1 in repairing the breaches1 and clearing the ditches of the rubbish that is beat down into them1 and also in transporting materials to make breastworks at the places attacked1 together with ammunition and other things4 ,where the garrison is not composed of veterans1 the terror occasioned by the noise of so many cannon and mortars1 joined to the tumbling of the edifices1 is sufficient to intimidate1 and frighten them into a surrender4 ,and the same thing will happen1 when there are a great number of inhabitants shut up in a place1 although the garrison should be a veteran one2 as we are informed by that great master in the art of war1 the ,marquis de ,santa ,cruz de ,mercenado1 in the fifth book of his ,military ,reflexions4 ,,vi4 ,it being then certain1 that gun-powder has prevented the loss of a great many lives in war1 the mischief that has happened from it is very light1 compared to this great advantage1 nor is the evil of its affording people the means of putting one another to death1 to revenge private grudges1 to be compared with this benefit2 for such misfortunes do not amount to a thousandth part of the other advantages4 ,nor should all the deaths that happen in that way1 be charged to the account of gun-powder2 for the steel in most of these cases1 is commonly the instrument of vengeance1 and there are many of those instruments contrived very artfully1 for the purpose of giving desperate wounds to people when they are off their guard4 ,to this we may add1 that rigorous laws against peoples carrying concealed pistols1 may in a great measure1 prevent these cruelties from being perpetrated by the means of gun-powder2 so that by making a general computation1 of all the good and bad resulting from gun-powder in these respects1 we shall find1 that for one man that is slain by it in consequence of private piques and quarrels1 the lives of a thousand are saved1 that would otherwise have been lost in the disputes between princes4 ,,vii4 ,if we consider powder with regard to the advantages we derive from it in other respects1 we shall find it to be very useful and beneficial to mankind1 for it assists us to kill game1 to extirpate wild beasts1 to smooth rugged surfaces1 to blow up lime-stone1 to open passages through craggy mountains1 to stop the progress of fires1 and is likewise useful in a thousand other instances4 ,,viii4 ,from all which it may be inferred1 that the inventor of gun-powder1 instead of meriting the execrations that are fulminated against him1 is deserving of the thanks and applause of the world4 ,who this inventor was1 agreeable to the general opinion1 may be seen in the twelfth ,discourse of the fourth volume of the ,theatrico-,critico#a4 ,,paradox ,,ii4 ,what is commonly called ,clemency in ,princes and ,magistrates1 is pernicious to the ,public4 ,,ix4 ,clemency1 as it is explained by ,moralists and ,theologians1 is a virtue2 but as understood by the vulgar1 it is a vice4 ,this different acceptation of one and the same word1 may be easily accounted-for4 ,if we advert to the doctrine laid down by ,st4 ,thomas1 we shall there find1 ,clemency explained as not inconsistent with severity4 ,but ,i ask whether in the idea of the vulgar1 these two qualities are not very different8 ,they are clearly so2 because that which is termed severe1 they without the least hesitation deny can be clement4 ,therefore the signification which the vulgar give to the word ,clemency1 is different from that which is given to it by learned and wise men4 ,x4 ,severity then in the opinion of these last1 is an habitual inflexibility of the mind1 which will not relax in the punishment of crimes1 whenever the dictates of right reason require they should be punished4 ,clemency also1 as explained by them1 is an habitual disposition to lessen the punishment of crimes1 whenever the same right reason dictates that they should be lessened2 ,quando oportet1 et in quibus oportet1 says the angelic doctor1 and it is from his doctrine that this definition is taken4 ,it is clear1 there is no opposition1 but rather an agreeable harmony between these two qualities2 and it is also clear1 that the vulgar look upon that inflexibility of the mind in which severity consists1 as diametrically opposite to clemency2 and thus they call obdurate1 rigorous1 inexorable1 and austere1 all those1 who possess that inflexible habit4 ,,xi4 ,that prince or magistrate is clement in the opinion of the vulgar1 who is to be wrought upon by the intreaties of friends1 the tears of the guilty1 and the cries of his orphan family2 and who indulges the softness of his own disposition1 and is induced from these motives1 to mitigate the punishments1 which the law has allotted to crimes4 ,but in reality1 this is not ,clemency1 but injustice4 ,it is rather a vileness1 and a weakness of mind1 which is cloaked under the name of ,clemency4 ,he is a protector and an encourager of wickedness1 who from such considerations1 and without any other motives1 slackens his hand in the punishment of crimes4 ,he is an indirect tyrant of the state1 and becomes an abettor of all those evils1 which are occasioned by the daring rashness of delinquents2 and he is also a multiplier of them to an excessive number1 by his forbearing to deter bad men from committing them by proper examples2 and it is for this reason1 that we said in the title of this paradox1 that that which is called ,clemency in princes and magistrates1 is prejudicial to the public at large4 ,,xii4 ,who then should be deemed truly clement8 ,why he who after duly weighing and considering all the particulars and circumstances of a case1 is convinced by the dictates of right reason1 that he ought to lessen the punishment assigned to a crime by the common law1 and does lessen it in consequence of such a conviction4 ,this is all agreeable to the doctrine of ,st4 ,thomas before quoted2 and from hence it may be inferred1 that the exercise of clemency can never be arbitrary1 as is generally imagined4 ,i mean1 that the lessening a punishment which the law prescribes for a guilty person1 can never be supposed to depend upon the mere will of a prince or magistrate4 ,he ought only to lessen it1 when he finds after maturely weighing the circumstances1 that it should be lessened1 for if they would not justify his doing it1 he should not lessen it at all4 ,there is no middle way4 ,clemency is a moderating virtue1 which if exercised with excessive zeal may become vicious4 ,i am very well aware1 this is giving much less extension to the virtue of clemency than the general opinion allows to it4 ,but that is nothing to the purpose1 for this is the true and sound doctrine respecting it4 ,,xiii4 ,the just motives for lessening punishments in various cases1 are many2 for example1 the antecedent merits of the convicted person1 the use he may be of to the public1 his known ignorance of the consequence of what he did1 or his having committed the crime inadvertently2 any serious inconvenience that might result to the public from his punishment2 or any convenience that might be derived to the state from moderating it1 c4 ,,xiv4 ,that great ,asturian hero1 ,pedro ,menendez de ,aviles governour of ,florida1 acted on various occasions1 and in matters of the utmost importance1 contrary to the orders that had been given him by the king4 ,for each of these transgressions1 according to the strict letter of the law1 he deserved to be punished capitally4 ,the king1 and a king who was so zealous of his authority as ,philip the second1 pardoned them all2 but not totally1 for we may estimate as a partial punishment1 his delaying so long to confer on him the rewards due to his signal merits1 during which interval1 that eminent man experienced not a few pinchings and inconveniences4 ,the king acted clemently by proceeding in this manner2 for it would have been unjust1 cruel1 and savage in many respects1 if he had adhered to the letter of the law in punishing him4 ,the state would have lost a most profitable subject1 some signal merits would have gone unrewarded1 and so ill judged a precedent1 would have been productive of great disadvantages to the public1 because other commanders1 who might afterwards find themselves in circumstances where strictly obeying their orders would be attended with pernicious consequences1 would obey them notwithstanding1 for fear of the punishment4 ,even without the assistance of so bad a precedent1 that dread1 occasioned the ruin of the grand ,armada1 fitted out by the same king ,philip for the chastisement of ,england4 ,,xv4 ,i suppose1 that ,peter ,menendez1 having always been successful when he acted contrary to his orders1 conduced much to excite1 if it was not the sole cause of the king's lenity and benevolence to him4 ,but even the plea of this merit1 was of no avail to that valiant youth the son of ,manlius ,torquatus1 who after returning home victorious and crowned with laurels1 was by order of his own father put to death1 for having contrary to his orders1 fought with1 and defeated his enemies4 ,this was acting with improper severity1 for although the offence by the strict letter of the law1 should have been punished capitally1 the putting him to death was savage1 cruel1 inhuman1 and barbarous4 ,the ardour and fire of his youth1 ought to have been admitted as a plea to mitigate his fault2 but there was much more room for shewing lenity to him on account of the zeal he manifested for the public good1 by taking the advantage of a favourable conjuncture1 which it was impossible for the ,consul to foresee when he gave him his orders1 and thereby1 doing so eminent a service to his country4 ,but the ferocious and sour virtue of the obdurate ,manlius1 neither weighed circumstances1 nor attended to1 or was influenced by the dictates of morality2 and thus1 he unjustly deprived his country of the life and services of a youth1 who gave the most promising hopes of his becoming one day a great commander4 ,,xvi4 ,when the circumstances of a case do not afford just motives for departing from the letter of the law1 there is no room for the exercise of clemency2 as the departing from it in such an instance1 would be injustice1 and it is impossible that the same action1 should be conformable to one virtue1 and contrary to another1 because at that rate1 it might be both good and bad at one and the same time4 ,thus in these cases1 there is no other course to take1 but that of applying the punishment the law prescribes1 without regarding the clamours of weak-minded people1 who are capable of censuring such conduct as over-severe or harsh2 for acting in this manner conduces to the public good4 ,,xvii4 ,annon1 the pious archbishop of ,cologne1 did1 in the eleventh century1 cause the eyes of several of his judges to be put out1 for having given an unjust judgment against a poor woman2 but he left one of the number with a single eye1 in order that he might be able to lead the others about4 ,i suppose that such an example1 could not fail to fill the whole city with horror2 but although many might exclaim against the cruelty of it1 it was still just and useful1 as the blinding of those few judges1 might contribute to open the eyes of an infinite number of others1 and cause them to look attentively1 how they pronounced sentences in future4 ,,xviii4 ,the case ,i am about to mention1 is more singular still3 when ,count ,evkembaldus the sovereign of ,burdan1 was in a very weak and infirm state1 a complaint was preferred to him against a nephew of his1 who had violated the chastity of a young lady1 and upon the charge being clearly proved against him1 he1 as he was a zealous lover and assertor of justice1 ordered him to be put to death2 but those who were directed to execute this sentence1 evading doing it1 upon a supposition that the ,count must soon die1 somebody informed him of the omission2 and as he saw clearly that in his present weak state1 although he should repeat his orders1 they would not be executed1 he artfully contrived1 by declaring that his indignation against the youth was appeased1 and that he was disposed to forgive him1 to get him brought into his sick room1 where coaxing him under some pretence to approach his bed1 he seized him by the collar with his left hand1 and with a poignard that he held concealed in his right1 stabbed him into the throat1 and killed him on the spot4 ,many seemed scandalized with this act2 but there is no reason to suppose1 that it was displeasing in the eyes of ,god4 ,,xix4 ,this inviolable integrity in the administration of justice1 is no indication of obdurateness1 but is rather compatible1 with the greatest tenderness and compassion the human heart is susceptible of2 although1 where effective clemency cannot be admitted1 there may be room for the introduction of the affective4 ,briante ,prieneus1 one of the seven wise men of ,greece1 was observed to weep very bitterly after condemning a guilty person to death2 upon which1 somebody present asked him why he lamented1 since it was in his own power to pardon the man2 to this he answered1 ,you mistake1 for it is by no means in my power1 and therefore ,i weep4 ,his life is a debt that is due to justice1 and this tenderness of mine1 one that ,i owe to nature4 ,it is said of ,vespasian1 that he frequently wept and lamented in tears1 the deaths of guilty persons1 whom he himself had justly condemned4 ,,xx4 ,to him who has a heart so delicate1 that the gentleness of his disposition is apt to degenerate into weakness and debility1 ,i will prescribe an admirable remedy1 which shall comfort and strengthen his heart1 and not lessen or abate its softness4 ,this consists1 in directing his attention to contemplate another object1 and in making that the object of his compassion4 ,let us figure to ourselves a judge1 at the crisis when he has just passed sentence of death on a notorious rogue1 who has been guilty of many cruelties and outrages1 and when he is assailed with the cries and intreaties of the convict to be merciful to him2 and let us also consider him1 when those intreaties are afterwards repeated with the enumeration of all those particulars1 that are most likely to excite tenderness and compassion1 such1 as imploring him to commiserate his distressed wife and children1 and to look with an eye of pity1 on the miserable and afflicted state of an unhappy man1 who is all contrition and repentance1 and whose ignominious death1 will bring disgrace and affliction on his innocent friends and relations4 ,upon hearing this1 he may be apt to say to himself1 taking away the life of a man is a terrible thing1 and may perhaps revolve in his mind1 all the horrors of a person leading to execution1 and also those he may feel1 when he is just on the point of suffering the punishment he has been condemned to by the law4 ,these reflections may possibly stagger his constancy1 and dispose him to pardon the offender4 ,,xxi4 ,but if he would turn the eyes of his understanding from contemplating this tragical picture1 and view another1 which is much more tragical1 and which is drawn and depicted from the circumstances that appeared in evidence at the trial2 he might there see representations of cruelty and outrage in a variety of shapes1 and distress and misery of various kinds1 which have been brought by the depredations of this savage fury1 on numbers of innocent people1 who are all then praying that justice may be done on this violator of the laws of ,god and man2 this enemy to the peace1 security1 and happiness of mankind4 ,when a judge contemplates such things1 ought he not to be more affected with the cries and lamentations of these sufferers1 than with the intreaties and affliction of a wretch1 who has been the author of so many evils1 and whose misery and distress has been brought upon himself1 by his own outrages and misdeeds8 ,,xxii4 ,it may be replied to this1 that these mischiefs can't be remedied by the execution of the man1 and that putting him to death1 will be only adding a new tragedy to those already exhibited2 but have patience4 ,although it is true1 that this will not remedy the mischiefs that are past1 it will deter others from committing the like offences for the future4 ,the pardoning crimes1 operates like a contagion2 and the impunity of a delinquent1 inspires others with boldness1 and infects them with the inclination of becoming delinquents also2 on the contrary1 by punishing such a man1 you strike terror into ill-intentioned people1 and prevent the distresses of thousands2 and although you can't remedy the misfortunes of the innocent persons who have already been injured1 you may prevent the like mischiefs from being done to an infinite number of others4 ,let a judge now weigh all these things1 and then determine1 whether advancing the public good1 and doing justice to these injured people1 ought not more to excite his compassion1 than that devil in human shape who awaits the execution of his sentence2 and finally1 ,i must observe to him1 that if he lets such a miscreant go unpunished1 those very innocent people whom he has injured1 will implore the justice of heaven against him for having pardoned so horrid a wretch4 ,,paradox ,,iii4 ,what is termed liberality in princes1 is for the most part injurious to their subjects4 ,,xxiii4 ,i consider liberality1 not only as a virtue1 but as a most noble one1 that is so much the more worthy to be treasured up in the breast of a man1 by so much the more his station of life is exalted4 ,it is certain1 that although all vices are vile and base1 and all virtues noble1 there are vices1 which in an especial manner deserve to be stigmatized with the epithet of sordid1 and that there are virtues1 which shine forth with a superior splendor and dignity4 ,among the first sort1 avarice should be classed1 and among the second1 liberality4 ,,xxiv4 ,from hence it may be inferred1 that avarice1 which is always a vile quality1 in princes1 is a superlatively vile one1 as this meanness of spirit1 is unworthy of the elevated dignity of a throne4 ,vespasian was a prince of admirable endowments1 he was a great warrior1 politician1 and magistrate1 and was besides temperate1 discreet1 and affable2 but his avarice was a dark shade1 which obscured all these perfections2 so that the most a person can do who reads his history1 is not to abhor him1 but he never can bring himself to esteem or love him4 ,he1 to increase his revenues and fill his coffers1 went to the extreme length1 of laying a tax on the excrements of the human body2 but the matter out of which the tax arose1 was not so noisome and stinking1 as the tax itself4 ,,xxv4 ,although1 it does not follow from hence1 that prodigality1 which is a vice diametrically opposite to avarice1 is not a great blemish in princes2 for in truth1 it is more blameable in them than in private people4 ,a private prodigal1 wastes his own substance2 a prince1 the substance of other men4 ,a private person by his extravagance1 hurts himself2 a sovereign1 by his1 injures a whole community2 so that1 although the two vices are unlike in themselves1 when centered in princes1 they produce with respect to the public1 the same effects4 ,the avaricious prince impoverishes his people to enrich himself2 and the prodigal one1 impoverishes himself to enrich others4 ,what the first heaps up1 is buried2 what the other amasses together1 is dissipated2 and by attending closely to this object1 you will find1 that prodigality is the most pernicious vice of the two2 because what a prodigal sovereign squanders in needless largesses to enrich particular people1 does not return1 or if ever it does1 it is very late1 or it is by some rare accident1 that it ever returns again to the public stock2 whereas what an avaricious prince hoards up1 may be serviceable in the days of his successor1 and may greatly contribute to lessen the burdens of his subjects4 ,,xxvi4 ,but how shall we define what should be termed prodigality in princes8 ,why by calling all that such1 which is commonly stiled liberality4 ,the vulgar1 and even those who are superior to the vulgar1 allow of a large extension1 to the arbitrary and voluntary expences of princes4 ,it is commonly understood1 that when a prince from caprice1 or from particular affections for a subject1 makes him a present1 that the donation should be proportioned to the power and grandeur of the person who bestows it2 but ,i consider the thing in quite a different light4 ,whatever considerable sum of the public money is expended1 which is not laid out1 directly or indirectly1 to advance the public benefit1 is injustice and profusion4 ,that which comes out of the pockets of the public1 should be expended in such things as are beneficial to the public4 ,would it not be most unjust providence1 to apply1 for the sake of indulging the caprice or ostentation of a sovereign1 that which is contributed by millions of people1 to enrich a particular person1 who by some chance accident1 in a matter that was of little importance to the community1 has done something that was agreeable to1 and that has gained him the favour of his prince8 ,,xxvii4 ,alexander ordered his treasurer to give to the philosopher ,anaxarchus1 any sum of money he should desire4 ,he requested a hundred talents2 and the treasurer informed ,alexander of the excessive demand of the philosopher2 to which ,alexander answered1 he has done very right1 for he well knows that he has a friend who is both able and willing to give him that sum2 and ordered the treasurer to pay him the money immediately4 ,is this liberality8 ,it is true1 that it is celebrated as such in an infinite number of books2 but ,i say1 that it was no such thing1 for that it should rather have been termed mad prodigality1 which is the legitimate child of vain-glory2 and that it was not only prodigality1 but cruelty and tyranny4 ,with those hundred talents1 he might have administered to many distresses2 and if a prince has superfluities1 he should lay them out for such purposes4 ,but refraining to administer to the hunger and necessities of numbers of poor people1 to satiate the gluttonous cravings of an avaricious philosopher1 was a glaring act of partiality1 which rendered it doubtful1 which of the two was the most unjust person1 ,anaxarchus for demanding such a sum1 or ,alexander for gratifying him in his demand4 ,,xxviii4 ,the same ,alexander1 being requested by his friend ,perilus to furnish him with a sum of money to portion out his daughters1 ordered fifty talents to be delivered to him4 ,to which ,perilus modestly replied1 that ten would be sufficient2 to this ,alexander answered1 that is not a matter for my consideration1 for although ten talents would be as much as would answer your purpose1 it would not be a present suitable to my grandeur4 ,i find this celebrated by many writers1 as a noble and magnanimous act1 and ,alexander's saying upon doing it1 as a commendable and a well-pointed one2 but in my opinion1 the act was an act of madness1 and that his saying upon doing it1 was a very weak and trifling one4 ,does the grandeur of a prince consist in extravagances and profusions8 ,does it display grandeur1 to take from many what is absolutely needful for them1 to furnish a few others with superfluities8 ,it does not1 but rather favours of injustice1 baseness1 and tyranny2 and they only can call such behaviour magnanimous1 who have lost the use of their understanding4 ,,xxix4 ,a thousand crowns in specie1 were one day presented to ,don ,alfonso1 the fifth king of ,arragon of that name1 and the first of ,naples4 ,a person who was standing by at the time1 said1 ,how happy it would make me1 if all that money was mine6 ,to which the king answered1 ,take it then1 for ,i am desirous of making you happy4 ,was this magnanimity8 ,i know that it has been cried up as such2 but ,i say1 it rather shewed weakness of mind1 and a want of proper resolution1 to resist an absurd impulse of vain-glory4 ,i suppose also1 that it was from the want of thinking or reflexion1 that the king was guilty of that profusion1 and that he was hurried into it by his vanity1 which suggested to him1 that making the man a present of the money would blazon his fame1 and manifest to the world1 that he had both the disposition and the power to make a man happy4 ,but ,i would ask him 7and this is a question that might be put to all the princes in the world7 whether1 if it is an act of greatness to make one man happy1 it is not a much superior one to make a great many so8 ,if it is glorious in a sovereign to make an individual happy1 is it not beyond comparison more glorious1 to make a whole nation so8 ,and there is no doubt but this might be done1 if a prince would avoid all profusion1 and regulate his conduct by a discreet conomy2 if he would curtail all superfluous expences1 be a check upon the avarice of his ministers1 or else deliver the administration of his affairs into the hands of none but men of integrity1 who are capable of proportioning the contributions to be paid by his subjects to their abilities1 and who should be careful1 not to over-burthen the husbandmen and manufacturers2 for these are the people1 who by their labours1 are the principal instruments of enriching a state1 and whenever they find the weight of the taxes1 squeeze out of them the greatest part of their earnings1 they will leave off work1 and betake themselves to an idle and vagabond life4 ,to sum up the whole1 a prince1 by conforming to the precepts that are dictated by justice1 religion1 and prudence1 and by not bestowing on any one in particular1 more than his necessities demand1 or than is due to his merits1 will become the common father of his people2 and by extending his paternal care1 and dispensing his generosity with an equal and impartial hand to them all alike1 will be able to make them all happy4 ,,xxx4 ,the royal treasury1 may be compared to the ocean4 ,it receives its pecuniary contributions from all the monies in the kingdom1 as the ocean does its stock of waters from all the rivulets1 fountains1 and streams in the whole world4 ,the royal treasury then1 should do by the kingdom1 as the ocean does by the world2 that is1 after permitting those waters to be exhaled in vapours1 return the same stock in refreshing rains1 to fertilize the earth4 ,it would argue a great defect in the sovereign providence1 as the stock of the ocean is supplied by all the waters of the world1 if he was only to permit a return of them1 to fertilize here and there a district1 in consequence of which1 all the rest would become barren4 ,just so1 would it be an intolerable absurdity in human government1 to apply the money of the public treasury1 to which the whole kingdom has contributed1 in prodigal donations to enrich a few individuals1 and by with-holding it from all the rest1 leaving them in distress and misery4 ,,xxxi4 ,the reigning emperor of ,china at the beginning of this century1 was with respect to the matter we are treating of1 one of the greatest examples1 that ever has1 or perhaps ever will be exhibited to the world4 ,i rely on the authority of ,father ,contanein for the truth of this assertion1 and on the account he gives of this emperor in his letters1 which are dated at ,canton the latter end of the year #agbe1 and which are copied into the #ahth volume of edifying and curious letters of foreign missionaries2 but ,i only at present1 have before me an extract from them1 which is inserted in the second volume of the ,memoirs of ,trevoux of the year #agbh4 ,,xxxii4 ,that prince1 laboured incessantly to promote the good of his subjects4 ,the object absorbed all his thoughts1 and occupied his whole attention4 ,every day of the year1 and all hours of the day1 were days and hours of giving audience and expediting business2 and he scarce devoted any to amusement or recreation4 ,to provide for the conveniences of his own person1 he used the riches of his treasury with great moderation2 but he expended them with a truly royal magnificence1 when he administered to the necessities of his people4 ,he procured punctual information1 of the state and condition of all his provinces1 and took care to know1 which of them was opulent1 and which indigent2 this he did1 to the end1 that he might succour with the greater ease1 such of them as were in distress4 ,if any town had been desolated1 either by an earthquake or a conflagration1 if any province had suffered by an inundation1 or by any adverse accidents1 had been prevented from yielding their usual produce1 or if by any other chain of accidents1 a province happened to be impoverished1 he immediately remitted large sums1 to repair their buildings1 and to relieve their poor4 ,all his subjects experienced to flow from his bowels1 a balsam of tenderness1 compassion1 and paternal love1 which healed all their calamities1 and relieved all their distresses4 ,,xxxiii4 ,in the same year1 #agbe1 some provinces suffered greatly from excessive rains1 and the emperor took measures to relieve the distresses that had been occasioned by them1 which1 in order to do more effectually1 he sent instructions written in his own hand1 to the principal men and mandarines of all his empire1 which began thus2 ,this summer1 extraordinary and uncommon quantities of rain have fallen1 and the provinces of ,pekin1 ,chantong1 and ,honan1 have been inundated by them4 ,i feel much for the distresses of my people who inhabit those provinces2 and have it much at heart to relieve them4 ,their afflictions are continually present to my imagination both night and day1 nor can ,i enjoy sound sleep1 or tranquillity of mind1 while ,i know that my subjects suffer2 and as it is absolutely necessary to send immediate relief to those vast numbers of poor distressed people1 ,i command you great men and magistrates of my empire1 to choose some trusty and able persons1 such as are capable of executing my instructions1 and who prefer the public good to their own private interests2 and dispatch them to the three before-named provinces1 to distribute to the afflicted inhabitants of them1 the tokens of my benevolence and compassion4 ,let them scrutinize the most obscure and remote corners1 to find out all the poor and distressed1 to the end1 that no one may remain without proper succour and relief4 ,i know that it has sometimes happened1 that in the making these sort of distributions1 acts of injustice and partiality have been committed2 but ,i will take care that the conduct of those you send shall be watched1 and do you look to it also4 ,,xxxiv4 ,there is another testimony in the before recited letter1 which does honour1 not only to the generosity and benevolence of this prince1 but to his heroic disinterestedness also4 ,it having been customary with him for a great many years1 to release a certain province from paying a part of their annual tribute2 which he did because he thought it was just and necessary4 ,the inhabitants1 to express their gratitude for this kindness and generosity to them1 meditated erecting some monuments to his honour1 and had actually begun the work1 which the governor of the province informed him of4 ,to which information of the governor's1 the emperor gave the following answer3 ,what you acquaint me with1 is totally disagreeable to me1 and what ,i by no means approve4 ,when ,i conceded this grace to the inhabitants of the province you preside over1 ,i had no other motive or view in doing it1 than that of acting justly by1 and making all my subjects happy alike2 but had no intention of procuring to myself a vain honour4 ,such expences are superfluous and unnecessary1 and can never be of any use or benefit to me2 and as ,i have sent proclamations through all my empire1 exhorting my people to practise frugality and conomy1 ,i wonder how they could presume to think of running into these needless and mad expences1 or how you could permit them to do it3 it is also to be apprehended1 that the inferior officers who are generally the collectors of money for these purposes1 may be tempted to put part of it into their own pockets4 ,prohibit therefore immediately1 the proceeding any further in this matter1 and with respect to the edifice and monument of stone1 ,i forbid the erecting of it2 and ,i repeat again1 that when ,i do these acts of grace and favour1 it is not with a view of acquiring a vain reputation1 but because ,i think it just and necessary2 and to the end1 that every one may be enabled to do his duty in society1 and that the tranquillity and happiness of my subjects in general may be established on a solid foundation4 ,,xxxv4 ,all the conduct of this prince was of the same tenor4 ,he with a most sagacious penetration1 attended to the proceedings and conduct of all the mandarines2 and gave them instructions1 that they should apprize him of all that occurred to them1 which might conduce to promote good government4 ,he made many regulations1 that were just and wise2 he established premiums for the husbandmen1 who had distinguished themselves by their industry1 and the improvements they had made in agriculture2 and for the manufacturers and mechanics1 who had signalized themselves by their diligence and ingenuity2 he made provision for the widows of virtuous citizens1 and settled rewards that were to be paid to such children1 as distinguished themselves by their filial care of1 and tenderness to their aged parents1 c4 and is this ,prince who was so perfect in his morals1 and so great a pattern of policy1 the same man1 who proscribed ,christianity throughout all his dominions8 ,i fear we must be obliged to answer in the affirmative1 and to contemplate with astonishment1 the inscrutable secrets of the divine ,providence2 and to exclaim1 ,oh6 how incomprehensible are ,god's judgments1 and how untraceable are his ways6 ,but the blindness of this emperor in matters of religion1 should not preclude our recommending him as a signal pattern1 of that sort of conomy and liberality which should be practised by princes4 ,,xxxvi4 ,i have said of the conomy and liberality1 for both these virtues1 are found to be perfectly compatible with each other1 and to be admirably reconciled together in the practice of that prince4 ,the true and proper effect1 and essential operation of liberality1 according to the doctrine of ,st4 ,thomas1 consists1 in proportioning our affection for money in such a manner1 that our excessive love of it shall never obstruct our laying it out for such purposes1 as are just and laudable4 ,thus the epithet of liberal1 does not belong to him who expends it to indulge his whim or humour1 or from motives of ostentation1 or to gratify his affection for some particular people1 he is desirous of enriching2 for all this is prodigality3 but he deserves to be called liberal1 who applies money to promote and accomplish virtuous ends1 and who is always ready to part with it1 when it may be made conducive to promote such purposes4 ,there is field enough within these limits1 for the exercise of the virtue of liberality4 ,he is liberal1 who succours the poor1 rewards the deserving1 supports by generous donations men of ability1 and who constructs useful public edifices1 and1 in general1 all money that is laid out for the benefit of the public1 may be said to be expended on objects of liberality1 which liberality1 if judiciously extended1 may be deserving of the epithet of magnificence4 ,these two last virtues are distinguishable from each other1 by the first being limited not to exceed the bounds of moderation3 and the other being permitted to extend to the expending vast sums1 provided the money is laid out from laudable motives1 and on objects1 that are really conducive to the public utility4 ,thus ,louis the ,fourteenth did an act of magnificence1 in building the ,hospital of ,invalids at ,paris1 and did a much superior one1 by constructing the canal1 that makes a navigable communication between ,languedoc and ,bourdeaux2 because the great expences that attended executing these works1 were incurred to promote the public good1 and actually were great advantages to the public at large2 but the palaces that were built by ,nero and ,caligula1 which occupied as much ground as two large towns might have stood on1 do not deserve to be called works of magnificence2 because the vast sums that were laid out in constructing them1 were by no means expended to promote the public good1 but only to gratify the ostentatious vanity of two profuse men4 ,the emperor ,adrian was magnificent1 by forgiving at once1 the payment of all that was owing to him for the sixteen preceding years1 by ,rome1 ,italy1 and all the imperial provinces2 but ,alfonso the ,twelfth of ,castile was prodigal 7provided the story that is told of him1 and circulated in so many books respecting this matter is true7 in expending a vast sum of money1 for the redemption of ,baldwin1 emperor of ,constantinople2 as the first case concerned the whole ,roman empire2 and ,spain was not at all interested in the last4 ,,xxxvii4 ,finally1 ,a prince may exercise not only his liberality1 but his magnificence also1 by bestowing great donations1 upon here and there an individual of signal and superior merit1 7but ,i would be understood to mean such merit as has been beneficial to the state7 because in doing this1 his attention may be supposed1 as not confined to rewarding the virtue of a single man2 but to the exciting the emulation of many4 ,and considered in this light1 what ,spain gave to ,colon1 did not exceed the bounds of justice and moderation2 what she gave to ,cortez was little2 and what she gave to the great ,captain next to nothing4 ,when a prince or nation should exercise magnificence1 if the donation they bestow is not equal to the merit of the person it is conferred on1 or the dignity of the party who confers it1 it can never deserve to be termed liberality1 for there is no middle way in these cases1 and if the gift does not amount high enough to be deserving of the epithet of magnificence1 it declines to the other extreme1 and sinks into parsimony4 ,,paradox ,,iv4 ,there is more ,objection made to promoting ,people to important ,employments on account of their ,youth1 than there ought to be4 ,,xxxviii4 ,as in the use of their potential or intellectual faculties1 some give early tokens of dulness or perverseness1 and others display bright tokens of commendable and useful talents2 which render it probable1 that the state would prevent great mischiefs by the early chastisements of the first1 and that it would reap great benefits by the timely favouring and encouraging the virtuous bodings of the second2 as there are young men1 who in prudence and understanding excell those who are much further advanced in years4 ,if such1 in the prime of their lives1 were promoted to fill posts of importance1 the state would for a long time1 reap the benefit of their good administration3 whereas1 by deferring their advancement till they grow old1 this benefit is but of short duration4 ,the most learned and penetrating society of ,jesuits1 at the age of thirty-eight1 raised to the high post of ,prepositor-general of their ,order1 ,father ,claudius ,acquaviva4 ,who can entertain a doubt1 but that in so extensive a society1 there were many men further advanced in life1 possessed of all the requisites for the well-discharging the duties of such an office8 ,but notwithstanding this1 ,father ,acquaviva1 at this age1 was preferred to all the others1 to fill this important station2 this was done1 either because he possessed the requisite qualities for discharging the duties of the office in a more eminent degree than the others1 or because1 although they might be equal to him in talents1 there was a probability of their enjoying the fruits of his excellent government for a much longer time1 than they were likely to enjoy the benefit of the services of those who were further advanced in life2 in which expectation it turned out afterwards that they were not disappointed4 ,the famous ,servita ,fray ,pablo ,sarpi was made ,provincial of his ,religion1 at the age of twenty-seven4 ,the portentous talents of that young man1 gave just reason for their electing him1 and their judgment in doing so1 was afterwards confirmed by the sentiments of the republic2 who appointed him1 contrary to their ordinary practice1 at about the same period his own society conferred this honour on him1 their ,counsellor4 ,it is true1 that this extraordinary favour of the republic1 was very injurious to the religious character of ,father ,sarpi1 for he engaged with such warmth in defence of the state1 against the pretensions of the ,apostolic ,see1 that only in his habit of a friar1 he preserved the appearance of being a ,catholic4 ,,xxxix4 ,he who at thirty1 has the discretion that people commonly have at fifty1 when he arrives at the age of forty1 will have a discretion1 much superior to that of the bulk of mankind4 ,and this exceeding will be greater still1 if from the age of thirty1 he begins to exercise his talents in public business1 as he will go on improving them more and more every day by his practice4 ,why then should not the state encourage the cultivation of a soil1 which is capable of producing so much for their service8 ,or why should they lose any part of the copious fruit1 that may be produced from such a stock8 ,,xl4 ,to this reasoning ,i shall add1 that when there is an equality of intellectual talents1 the middle age should be preferred to the more advanced1 for that is the time1 in which the faculties of both body and mind are in their full vigour1 which are things of great importance1 in the good administration or execution of public business4 ,what might be gained by the experience of a man who has had a great deal of practice2 if he happens only to begin to act at a time of life when his faculties are on the decline1 may be overbalanced by the loss that would be sustained by the languid execution of his designs4 ,i am persuaded that the miscarriages of ,cyrus1 ,pompey1 and other famous warriors in their advanced state of life1 who had always been conquerors in the days of their youth and vigour1 was owing to no other cause but this2 and am of opinion1 that they attributed to a falling-off of fortune1 what only resulted from a decadence of their robustness1 and the activity of their minds4 ,,xli4 ,it may perhaps be objected to what ,i have been advancing1 that it is in but here and there a rare instance1 that this doctrine of mine will apply1 for that it is very uncommon to meet in an early time of life1 with a man of equal ability1 to one who is more advanced in years2 and that if ,i only mean to recommend1 that in these rare instances1 they shall have the preference given them1 ,i have been beating my brains to little purpose2 for that this is already an established practice2 and there is no man who has observed the world with any attention1 who is not convinced1 that we have had here and there an instance1 of a young man being preferred to one more advanced in years8 ,,xlii4 ,but to this1 ,i reply in the first place1 that admitting1 in these particular cases1 what is just and proper has been done1 it does not follow from thence1 that the doctrine we have been laying down is useless2 for although our arguments on this head may be unnecessary as an instruction to those who have the dispensation of employments1 they may be of use by way of reproof or correction1 to grumblers and complainers4 ,a young man scarce ever attains any honour or preferment1 but a thousand old unprofitable ones murmur at it1 and not only a thousand old ones who are useless1 but the majority of the young ones also2 who by being of about the same standing in life1 are stimulated to shew resentment1 by the fire of emulation4 ,,xliii4 ,we shall answer secondly1 that a young man's excelling old ones in understanding and judgment1 is nothing near so uncommon as is generally imagined1 but is rather a thing which we experience very frequently4 ,there is scarce a community consisting of twenty or thirty individuals1 where we do not see a particular young man1 better informed1 and more capable than many of the old ones4 ,this proceeds1 from the temperaments of men having generally a greater effect on the faculties of their minds1 than their ages4 ,the exceeding that a man experiences in himself in this respect at fifty years of age1 and at thirty-five1 is seldom very considerable1 and will rarely be perceptible1 if he has not passed the last fifteen years1 from a life of much indolence1 to one of much application4 ,on the contrary1 the exceeding there is between some men and others on account of their different temperaments and geniuses1 is enormous4 ,we every day see those1 who from their aptness at acquiring every science and faculty1 will become adepts in them1 in a quarter part of the time1 that others are obliged to employ in hard study to attain them4 ,,xliv4 ,from this great difference in the temperaments and genius of individuals1 spring those prodigious advances of some young men in literary attainments1 which are frequently not equalled1 by those who have studied till eighty4 ,such for example as ,john ,pico de ,mirandola1 the ,scotch man ,jacob ,creighton1 the ,spaniard ,fernando de ,cordoba1 ,gaspar ,scioppius1 ,hugo ,grotius1 ,spanolito who is now the wonder of ,paris1 and others4 ,we might add to these examples many more1 which are not so well known1 but which are not less extraordinary2 but we shall content ourselves with pointing out two1 that are the most striking ones4 ,the first is ,gustavus de ,helmfeld1 the son of a ,swedish ,senator1 who at ten years of age1 could speak twelve ,languages1 the ,swedish1 the ,muscovite1 the ,polish1 the ,french1 the ,spanish1 the ,italian1 the ,german1 the ,flemish1 the ,english1 the ,latin1 the ,greek1 and the ,hebrew2 he besides had a knowledge of philosophy1 and a tincture of that of theology1 and also understood some parts of the mathematics4 ,,xlv4 ,but the prodigious child1 that was born at ,lubec in #agba1 and died in #agbe1 exceeded every thing we have hitherto heard of4 ,his name was ,christian ,henry ,heneiken4 ,the relation ,i shall give of him1 is taken from the first volume of the ,memoirs of ,trevoux of #agca1 into which it was copied1 from the accounts we have had of him from various authors of the same city and country1 all of whom were esteemed men of the greatest credit and veracity4 ,this surprizing child1 at ten months old begun to speak1 and at twelve1 understood the principal events contained in the ,pentateuch2 and at thirteen1 those of the history of the ,old ,testament2 at fourteen those of the ,new2 and at two years of age1 he answered pertinently to any questions that were asked him1 concerning antient or modern history1 and likewise1 with respect to geography4 ,he very soon after1 began to speak ,latin with ease1 and immediately upon that1 ,french also4 ,before he entered into his fourth year1 he knew the genealogies of the principal houses in ,europe1 and explained sensibly and judiciously1 many sentences and passages of holy scripture4 ,he soon after this1 learned to write1 at a time when he was scarce able to hold the pen4 ,he abhorred all other aliment except milk1 which must always be that of the nurse who first begun to suckle him2 so that he was not weaned till a few months before his death4 ,he was of a very delicate frame1 and frequently visited with sickness4 ,and at length1 on the #bgth of ,june1 #agbe1 he died2 filling with astonishment all those who knew him1 at the constancy and heroic resignation he shewed through the whole course of his sickness1 till the period1 that he surrendered his soul into the hands of his ,creator4 ,,xlvi4 ,i am very well aware1 that the circumstances of this history may have been exaggerated1 but ,i do not find any thing impossible in them4 ,who knows the ultimate bounds1 to which the ability of man may extend8 ,perhaps there may be none assigned to it1 but that it may continue to increase more and more1 and that the limits of its extension have never yet been fixed or assigned4 ,with respect to his essential perfection1 all philosophers and theologians agree1 that no creature was ever so perfect1 but that ,god may create another still more perfect4 ,why then with regard to accidental perfection in the same species1 do we not see the same thing8 ,our gross mode of reasoning1 is apt to confine possibility within the narrow limits of our experience4 ,that which we never saw1 we imagine can never happen2 as if in the little which ,god has been pleased to present to our view1 is displayed the utmost extent of the omnipotent power4 ,setting bounds to possibility1 is setting them to the operations of the all powerful4 ,,xlvii4 ,i agree1 that our assent to the existence of a thing1 should not be extended so far1 as not to be confined within less bounds1 than the immense space of possibility2 letting our belief be regulated by probability1 is much safer1 than letting it extend to possibilities2 possibility1 can only be measured by the extent of the divine power2 probability1 may be guided and limited by the force and credibility of testification4 ,thus he would act prudently1 who with respect to the history of the child of ,lubec1 should reject a good portion of the circumstances1 but still admit enough of them1 to render the story a most wonderful one1 the like of which1 had never been known in former ages2 as it is not probable1 that the authors who were the countrymen of the child1 should lie exorbitantly1 in a case where if they had deviated greatly from the truth1 it was in the power of thousands of living witnesses to have convicted them of the imposture4 ,,xlviii4 ,from the beforementioned examples1 and an infinite number of others that might be instanced1 may be inferred1 the enormous difference there is between some souls and others1 which difference1 is owing solely to a difference of temperament2 compared to which1 that produced by a disparity of age1 is very small1 even if we compute it from early manhood1 to the period of decadence4 ,the result of my own observation1 with the exception of here and there a rare instance1 is1 that those who at thirty years old are dull1 will always be dull2 that those who at that age are imprudent1 will always be imprudent2 and that those who at thirty1 in matters of argument or conversation1 do not talk pertinently1 or reason well1 will never reason well4 ,i do not however deny1 that cultivation will not improve both men and plants1 but it will never make thorns bear grapes1 or brambles figs4 ,,xlix4 ,i think there seems now to remain but one objection for me to answer out of all those that have been urged to what ,i have advanced2 and that is1 that although admitting some have a great natural superiority of talents compared to others2 still1 the impetuosity and fire which commonly prevails in the flower of a man's youth1 is apt to have a pernicious effect on his conduct4 ,granted4 ,but besides the exceptions to this rule being infinite1 as we every day see youths1 who are very sedate and discreet2 and to which we may add1 that there is another passion very predominant in old people that is productive of much more mischief in public affairs1 than the fire or impetuosity of youth2 ,i mean the vice of avarice1 in the operations of which1 there is not a moment's relaxation2 on the contrary1 the passion of anger1 is only apt to be excited by particular accidents1 and when the ebullitions of choler abate or subside1 they are succeeded by long intervals of calm and tranquillity4 ,anger is a transitory fury1 or a fever of short duration1 whose attacks are sudden1 and last but for a little while1 and which in a moderate space of time vanish and disappears2 but avarice is a harpy1 that has nested itself in the heart1 and is a dropsy of the soul1 which increases and grows worse every day4 ,the first1 now and then disturbs and irritates the moral temper of man2 the other1 vitiates all his actions1 because its venomous influence ever exists4 ,the first grows weaker every day1 and is enfeebled by its own exertions2 the other1 is incessantly gaining new strength1 and becoming more powerful1 vires acquirit eundo2 so that avarice contrary to the ordinary course of nature1 is by so much the more vigorous1 by so much the older it grows2 it is a passion1 that not only acts in cold blood1 but acts with so much the more activity1 the colder the blood grows2 and hence it is1 that its mischiefs are not only greater than those produced by anger2 but they are also much more incurable4 ,thus if the infirmities incident to youth1 are pernicious in those who occupy posts of importance in the public line1 those that are attendant on old age are much more so4 ,,paradox ,v4 ,all ,handicraft ,trades ,should be hereditary4 ,l4 ,in ,lacedemonia1 which was one of the best-governed states of antiquity1 it was an inviolable law1 as ,herodotus informs us1 that the son of a husbandman1 should be bred a husbandman1 and the son of a taylor1 a taylor1 and the same with respect to all other occupations where people earn their living by their labour4 ,the same practice prevailed in ,egypt1 and prevails among the idolatrous people of ,indostan at this day4 ,,li4 ,i know very well1 that to enforce the importance and propriety of this paradox1 the authority of these1 and other such examples that might be instanced1 is weak1 compared to the infinite number of opposite ones that might be produced against it4 ,therefore1 it will be absolutely necessary for us to have recourse to reason1 to supply this defect of authority4 ,,lii4 ,it appears to me1 that two advantages of great importance would be derived to the public by trades being hereditary2 the first of which is1 that it would contribute greatly to the perfectioning of arts4 ,when there is no other relation or connexion between the master and his pupil1 than the latter being the apprentice of the first1 the master is seldom very anxious about instructing his scholar2 and what is more1 he is not well disposed to communicate to him any particular secrets of his art1 which he has acquired by virtue of his own penetration and experience2 and generally1 contents himself with instructing him in what is commonly known and practised4 ,but there is no reserve of this sort1 when the instruction is conveyed from the father to his son1 for paternal love cannot assent to it2 and hence it is1 that where the skill of the master is equal1 he will be better taught who learns of his father1 than he who is instructed by a stranger4 ,,liii4 ,by this total translation of skill from father to son1 and by the same trade being continued in1 and handed down to their posterity1 there would without doubt result this benefit1 that the art of it would be improved1 and that it would continue advancing every age1 nearer and nearer to perfection4 ,it is very common1 for one artist to make some improvements on what he has learned from another2 and it is very common also1 for him who has made them1 to let them die and be buried with him2 on account of its being against his interest1 to communicate them to other people4 ,this impediment to making his improvements known1 seldom subsists between father and son2 because the father1 most commonly considers the interest of his son as his own2 and consequently1 communicates to his son all he knows4 ,if the son from his own ingenuity1 makes improvements on what he has been taught by his father1 and hands them down to the grandson2 and they all continue to do the same by their successors2 the arts by this means1 would proceed to approach nearer to perfection every generation4 ,,liv4 ,there are two other circumstances that are very worthy of being attended to1 which would contribute to recommend this political system for improving the arts2 the one is1 that children would begin to learn much sooner than they commonly do4 ,in the house of an artificer1 where the son is destined to follow the trade of his father1 he will scarce have done sucking the breast of his mother1 when he will begin to drink the milk of his father's instruction2 in consequence of which1 not only time would be gained1 but his application to the business would become more natural to him4 ,the other circumstance is1 that the state would avoid the loss of many good artificers1 which is occasioned by the inconstancy of the tempers and dispositions of youth4 ,those1 who by continuing to work at the trade they first began to learn1 would become excellent artificers1 by going on to change their occupations continually1 would never arrive at being more1 than mere novices1 or beginners2 and this mischief would be avoided1 by obliging the son of every handicraft person1 to follow the trade of his father4 ,,lv4 ,the second convenience that would result to the public by trades being hereditary1 is1 that it would ascertain the ranks and classes of people in a state2 it being no uncommon thing1 for disputes to arise between families1 about birth and precedence2 which inconvenience would be remedied by such a regulation1 as in such a case1 the rank of most people would be ascertained1 and the cause of these disputes in a great measure removed4 ,,paradox ,,vi4 ,torture is a very fallible means for discovering the truth in criminal ,cases4 ,,lvi4 ,i enter upon this essay1 begging permission of all tribunals of justice to speak my sentiments on this head4 ,i venerate the laws and the use of them2 but as ,i am treating here of such as are purely human1 ,i apprehend ,i may be permitted to reason on the tendency or propriety of them4 ,nor is the torture being admitted in the ecclesiastical courts1 as a mode of enquiry in the examination into crimes1 any objection to my doing this1 for as the learned ,canonist ,francis ,schomer observes1 this practice is not conformable to the antient discipline of the church2 and he quotes other authors in support of this opinion1 and says further1 that in a long course of time1 it by little and little1 came to be transferred from the secular tribunals to the ecclesiastical ones3 ,predetentim curiis scularibus ad ecclesiasticas pervenisse 7,schmier in ,supplem4 ad lib4 v4 ,decret72 so that doubting of the propriety of inquiring by torture in the ecclesiastical courts1 amounts to no more1 than disputing whether the antient or modern practice of those courts1 is the most consonant to reason4 ,,lvii4 ,besides1 this being a matter which in its own nature is open to controversy1 there are two notable circumstances in it1 which encourage me to enter upon the discussion of the point4 ,the first is1 that very many people think as ,i do on the subject1 and that among those very many1 there are more than a few of the very judges1 who practise ordering the torture1 in cases where that practice has been long established4 ,their sentiments in theory do not correspond with their conduct1 but notwithstanding this1 they act as they should do1 for they have no authority to dispense with the laws1 but are only ministerial under them4 ,the second is1 that the most learned father ,claudius ,lacroix1 has preceded me in publishing the same sentiments ,i entertain on this subject1 in his first volume of ,moral ,theology1 lib4 iv4 c4 ,,lviii4 ,countenanced and encouraged by so illustrious an author1 whose opinion in questions of morality is so much respected1 and so generally assented to by all ,christendom1 ,i shall enter upon the undertaking boldly1 and shall argue with spirit in support of his opinion and my own4 ,the extent of the question is but short1 and whenever reason sets its foot within its boundary1 it soon arrives at the end of it4 ,,lix4 ,it cannot be denied1 that the not confessing in the torture1 depends upon the spirit and fortitude of the person tortured1 to resist the rigour of that trial2 and ,i ask now1 is this spirit and fortitude produced by the innocence of such a person8 ,it clearly is not1 but rather by the robustness of mind or body which that person possesses4 ,the torture then1 can be of no use to ascertain the guilt or innocence of any one1 but it is the bodily strength or weakness of mind1 of whoever is unfortunate enough to experience its rigour1 that determines the point4 ,,lx4 ,nero having unjustly repudiated his wife ,octavia1 and married ,poppea1 she not content with having usurped the bridal bed1 and crown of ,octavia1 but in order to deprive her of life and honour also1 accused her of having had a criminal correspondence with a slave4 ,for the purpose of ascertaining the guilt of ,octavia1 six of her female servants were put to answer by the torture2 and what was the result of this8 why1 that some of them declared her guilty1 and others denied it4 ,did not they all know that the accusation was false8 and do not all authors agree that they did8 ,but what did this signify1 if1 in the torture1 their pain1 and not their veracity1 influenced them to confess she was guilty of the crime8 ,whoever has fortitude enough to endure the rigour of the cord1 will deny the fault he is tortured to confess1 although he was really guilty of it2 whoever has not1 will confess a crime he never committed4 ,the effects of the torture on the servants of ,octavia1 tended to prove the fortitude of some of then1 and the weakness of others2 but for ascertaining the truth were of no use4 ,,lxi4 ,it seems then1 that the innocent are exposed to equal danger from the torture with the guilty4 ,a terrible inconvenience this1 but the worst part of it is1 that the danger is not equal1 but greater on the side of innocence4 ,i may be told that ,i am advancing a new paradox1 and ,i confess that ,i am1 but if ,i am not greatly mistaken1 ,i shall make it appear1 that ,i have been advancing nothing that is not strictly true4 ,it is a known fact1 that those who are daring enough to commit great crimes1 are much more hardened1 robust1 and ferocious people1 than those who lead a quiet and regular life4 ,it should follow then from these premises1 that they are better calculated to endure the rigours of a torture1 than the tranquil and inoffensive part of mankind2 and it will also follow from thence1 that these last will be more likely to confess themselves guilty of a crime they are falsely accused of1 than the others will be1 to confess one they have really committed4 ,this is a remark made by father ,lacroix1 and the following are his words3 sequitur per torturas sp everti justitiam1 quia innocentes1 qui sp sunt impatientes dolorum1 coguntur se fateri nocentes2 e contra nocentes1 qui plerumque sunt ferociores1 tolerata tortura se probant innocentes4 ,,lxii4 ,on the contrary1 those of quiet and peaceable dispositions1 are generally people of more delicate feelings than the others1 and especially1 if their mode of living has corresponded with the native excellence of their tempers4 ,from whence it should follow1 that the probable result of putting one of these to the torture1 would be1 that he would sooner confess himself guilty of a crime he never committed1 than one of the others1 would own himself guilty of one he had actually perpetrated4 ,,lxiii4 ,i consider the sentiment of ,plato to be a true one1 who says1 that great vices1 no less than great virtues1 require great powers and fortitude to exercise them4 ,the serenity with which ,geronimus ,olgiatus1 ,balthasar ,gerardus1 and ,francis ,ravillac1 the first for the assassination of ,galeazus ,maria duke of ,milan1 the second for that of ,william prince of ,orange1 and the third for that of ,henry the ,fourth of ,france1 fully demonstrate1 that those who dare attempt great and dangerous things1 are capable of enduring great torments4 ,,lxiv4 ,i shall conclude this subject1 with the striking1 and most efficacious testimony of ,father ,frederic ,spe1 which throws all the light upon this matter that can be wished for1 or desired4 ,this learned ,german ,jesuit1 when he is treating of the little dependance there is to be placed on the confessions of people accused of witchcraft1 which confessions have been extorted from them by the rack2 quotes1 in support of what he advances1 the testimony of the ,baron de ,leibnitz1 and ,vincent ,placcius1 whom he supposes to be the author of the anonymous ,treatise1 intituled1 ,cautio criminalis in processu contra sagas4 ,,lxv4 ,father ,spe1 when he is speaking of the confessions that have been made by supposed witches and wizards1 when put to torture1 delivers himself thus2 the numbers of lyes they will tell1 both of themselves and others1 is incredible4 ,all which the judges are desirous they should say is true1 they confess to be true2 and they own every thing they would have them own of themselves1 compelled to it by the violence of the torture2 and they do not afterwards dare to retract what they have said1 for fear of being tortured again2 thus these miserable wretches1 go to their deaths attesting a falsehood4 ,father ,spe concludes in this manner1 ,i am certain that what ,i have said is just and right1 and ,i appeal for the truth of it1 to the judge of that supreme tribunal1 where all mankind1 both quick and dead1 will one day be sentenced to rewards and punishments1 proportioned to their merits and demerits4 ,,lxvi4 ,i declare that when ,i first read this account1 ,i found my whole frame pervaded by a deep melancholy sensation1 that resembled somewhat like horror mixed with pity4 ,he who gives the relation1 is a learned1 grave1 exemplary1 and sound divine1 instructed in this case1 not by conjectural reasoning1 but by certain informations1 acquired in the sacred confessional chair1 and taken from the mouths of those1 who were on the point of being led to execution as guilty people2 and this he declared from repeated experience he had had of those matters1 during a long course of years4 ,what can be objected that is deserving of any attention1 to so conclusive a testimony8 ,,lxvii4 ,the certainty ,father ,spe had1 of the almost invincible force of the torture1 to oblige innocent people to confess themselves guilty of crimes they never committed1 is very forcibly illustrated1 in a vehement declaration to the judges1 with which he concludes his ,essay4 ,he says to them1 why are you so solicitous in searching out1 and why do you take so much pains to discover1 people who are guilty of witchcraft8 ,there is no necessity for your giving yourselves all this trouble1 for if you want to discover more1 ,i can tell you how to furnish yourselves with them1 without labour or difficulty2 take the first ,capuchins1 the first ,jesuits1 and the first men of any other religious order1 that you shall meet by chance1 and put them to the torture2 and if you shall be desirous of making them do so1 you will find that there is scarce one of them1 who will not confess that he has been guilty of the crime of witchcraft4 ,if any of them should deny it1 repeat the torture two or three times1 and ,i will engage that you will bring them to4 ,pluck out their hair by the roots1 exorcise them1 and repeat to them the common-place cant that the devil has hardened them2 and as if you was convinced this suspicion was just1 behave to them1 with determined inflexibility1 and you will perceive1 that there is not one among them1 who will refuse to submit4 ,i have pointed out to you already how you may be supplied with an ample stock of sorcerers1 but if you want more still1 take the prelates of the churches1 and all the canons and doctors belonging to them2 and by the application of the same means1 you will be convinced1 that they may be all brought to confess themselves guilty of witchcraft2 for people who have been bred up in so delicate a way1 will hardly find themselves able to resist the rigours of a torture4 ,but if you are not satisfied with this supply1 and should want more still1 ,i would recommend to you1 to put one or two of yourselves to the torture1 and you will find that you will confess also in the same manner the others have done2 and if immediately after this1 you were to torture me1 you would be satisfied1 that ,i should do the same4 ,and by this mode of proceeding1 you may make witches1 wizards1 and magicians1 of all mankind4 ,,lxviii4 ,i am ready to admit1 that so vehement a declamation1 should not be made to all judges indifferently1 but that it should be addressed only to such as proceeded with the little caution those did whom ,father ,spe alludes to2 although it is certain1 that in accusations for witchcraft1 there is more danger of innocent people being brought to capital punishment by the torture1 than there is by charges of any other nature4 ,every man of discretion knows1 upon what ridiculous grounds1 the common people spread reports of folks being guilty of witchcraft1 and with what ease the world believe them1 and how ready they are to testify to the truth of such reports4 ,in consequence of which1 if the accused persons happen to be brought before judges1 who1 like the rustic vulgar1 are filled with the notion or belief1 that there are multitudes of witches and wizards1 they immediately have recourse to the torture1 and innocent people are tormented like delinquents4 ,from whence it follows1 that those who are falsely accused1 from their inability to resist the pain of the rack1 assent to the interrogatory1 and against their consciences own themselves guilty4 ,to this number1 we may add many others1 who own themselves guilty from delusion or infatuation4 ,this delusion is contagious1 and multiplies and spreads exceedingly1 whenever there prevails a rage for finding out witchcrafts2 for the numbers of these delinquents are increased1 in all places where there are officious inquisitors after sorcerers1 just as the numbers of possessed people are1 where there are plenty of persevering and absurd exorcists4 ,,lxix4 ,but notwithstanding that in such accusations1 on account of their being so frequently ill-founded1 the hazard of innocence being oppressed by the anguish of the torture becomes greater than in other cases2 still the same danger subsists1 though not in so great a degree1 with respect to all those who are falsely accused of any other serious crimes4 ,i mean1 that if any one from want of fortitude1 confesses in the torture the crime of witchcraft1 which he is quite innocent of1 he may in the same manner1 and by the same means1 be brought to confess himself guilty of a murder1 a sacrilege1 a robbery1 or any other great offence he never committed4 ,thus the experience of the learned ,jesuit1 with respect to the fallibility of the torture in the examination into the truth of witchcraft2 identifies and proves its fallibility1 in the inquiry into the certainty1 of whether any other person has been guilty of a crime he stands accused of4 ,,paradox ,,vii4 ,it should be the ,duty of ,magistrates1 to oblige every individual in a state to earn his own living4 ,,lxx4 ,this was one of the laws of the most prudent ,solon2 and it was so inviolably observed in ,athens1 that ,athenus tells us1 the two philosophers ,asclepiades and ,menedemus1 were convened before the ,areopagus1 to give an account how they got their living2 and they obviated the charge that had been brought against them1 of leading an idle life1 and having no visible means of subsistence2 by proving1 that they earned two drachmas every night1 by grinding in1 or turning a horse-mill2 and ,herodotus says1 that before the days of ,solon1 this same law had been established in ,egypt by ,king ,amasis4 ,,lxxi4 ,there is no doubt1 but the same establishment would be useful in all states4 ,why do ,i say useful8 ,it would be laudable also1 and of the utmost importance4 ,by a careful examination into1 and attention to this matter1 communities would be freed from the nuisance of great numbers of drones1 and poisonous reptiles4 ,there is scarce a populous town or city1 where you don't see great numbers of people1 who without any estate or income1 and without employing themselves in any honest or useful occupation1 live well in their houses1 and appear genteelly and handsomely dressed in the streets4 ,and what are the funds by which they support all this8 why some of them support themselves1 by thefts and robberies2 others by the vile practice1 of prostituting the beauty of their wives for hire2 others by money they borrow of a thousand people1 without any intention of ever paying it2 others by tricks and cheats of various kinds1 with which they impose upon innocent and unguarded people2 and indeed1 if the mask was to be taken off from all those who are said to live by their ingenuity1 it would be found1 that almost all of them1 live by foul practices and roguery2 and the mask would be taken off1 by adopting the before proposed examination and enquiry1 and by providing1 and rigorously executing punishments proportioned to such evils1 the body politic1 would be purged and cleansed from an infinite number of vicious humours4 ,,paradox ,,viii4 ,a great part of what is expended in ,alms1 is not only thrown away1 but does mischief4 ,,lxxii4 ,the following sentence of ,king ,david's is a remarkable one2 ,blessed is he who exercises his attention and his understanding1 for the relief of the poor and the needy4 ,beatus qui intelligit super egenum1 et pauperem4--,he does not say1 blessed is he who to succour the poor1 exercises his love1 his compassion1 or his charity1 but blessed is he who exercises his attention or understanding on this object4 ,there is doubtless the appearance of a mystery in this1 but the mystery is1 that alms1 unless distributed with understanding1 discretion1 and judgment1 do no good4 ,,lxxiii4 ,a hand that is precipitate in giving1 such a one for example1 as ,claudian represents that of ,probus to have been1 ,prceps illa manus fluvios superabat ,ibros ,aurea dona vomens-- who relieved many poor1 but at the same time supported many people in idleness2 and such conduct not only supports1 but it creates or breeds up many such1 for wherever alms are distributed copiously and without discretion1 there will be found many people1 who without this assistance would betake themselves to work to procure themselves a livelihood1 who at present live idly1 and omit their own industry1 which they are enabled to do1 at the expence1 and by the profusion of others4 ,the evils that result to a state from such imprudent dispensations1 are sufficiently serious2 it loses by this means1 the work of a great many useful hands1 and the numbers of the indolent1 vicious1 and profligate1 are greatly increased by it4 ,,lxxiv4 ,it is said of a man who distributes great quantities of alms1 that he gives with both hands2 but he should remember1 that according to the directions of our ,lord and ,saviour1 he should only give with one2 he says1 when you dispense alms1 don't let your left hand know what your right hand does3 te autem faciente eleemosynam1 nesciat sinistra tua quid faciat dextra tua4 ,this implies1 that it is with the right hand only that alms should be given4 ,if ,i am told that ,i dwell too much on the literal meaning of the word1 ,i answer it was never my intention to do so2 for ,i am inclined to think1 there is a profound implied sentiment couched under this description4 ,it is the constant stile of holy writ1 to use the expression right hand1 to symbolize or define good works1 and the expression left hand to signify the contrary2 and hence it is1 that in many parts of it1 when it speaks of the hand of ,god1 it never mentions it in an emphatical manner1 without the addition of the adverb right1 which is used to convey an idea1 that the operations of ,god are just and holy4 ,christ then requires1 that alms should be given with the right hand1 by which expression1 we may suppose he meant to signify1 that there are good and bad alms1 and that he approves the first1 and condemns the others2 and also to prohibit our giving with both hands1 for that this would be proceeding without choice or distinction1 and would also confound the good with the bad4 ,,lxxv4 ,i know some divines are of opinion1 that we should bellow our charity1 and that it is not incumbent on us to examine scrupulously into the necessities of those we bestow it on2 but this is no argument why a state should not take proper precautions1 to prevent those from receiving the benefit of charitable christian donations1 who ought to get their living by their labour1 and to exclude all such from being partakers of this benevolence1 who surrender themselves up to indolence1 and a voluntary and vicious state of poverty4 ,,paradox ,,ix4 ,death should not be dreaded1 on account of what there is simply in the thing itself1 or on account of what a person feels at that crisis4 ,,lxxvi4 ,there is a fear of death1 which is well founded and salutary2 another1 which is ill founded and pernicious2 and another1 which ought to be indifferent1 because it is natural1 and which only by being carried to too great an excess can become vicious4 ,he fears death reasonably and profitably1 who contemplates it as a transition from hence to eternity2 he fears it naturally1 who considers it as the termination of his life2 and he fears it unreasonably1 who viewing it simply with regard to what there is in the thing itself1 abstracted from all that has preceded1 and all that is to follow it1 supposes that it will be attended with excessive pain4 ,,lxxvii4 ,this apprehension1 although it is very common both among the ignorant and the learned1 ,i look upon to be chimerical and vain1 and to have no foundation in truth1 therefore1 ,i shall not scruple placing it in the catalogue of vulgar errors4 ,i don't mean to treat here1 of the pains incident to diseases which dispose or lead to death1 which without doubt are often very severe2 but ,i only mean to enquire or examine1 whether it is probable we feel any1 or any very sensible pain1 at that moment when the soul is separated from the body4 ,it is generally thought1 that at that instant1 a more intense pain is felt1 than can be produced by all the torments a man is capable of inventing4 ,authors exaggerate this pain in books1 orators in pulpits1 and all sorts of people in conversation1 and reason upon it in the following manner4 ,if1 say they1 tearing a nail from the finger1 or a finger from the hand1 produces a pain so acute1 that a man is scarce able to endure it1 what must he feel1 or how will he be able to bear that which tears the soul from the body8 ,here the strict union between these parts is described in the most feeling manner1 in order to enhance or aggravate the sensation that must be experienced at their separation2 and they compare it to the final parting of two fast or fond friends1 who have lived long and happily together2 or to two integrant parts of an animated body1 the division of which is the more painful1 the more firmly and intimately they are united together4 ,to heighten this description1 they add1 that this pain pervades all1 and every one of the parts of the human body1 both internal and external1 because the soul is torn equally from them all alike2 which is a universality1 that cannot exist in any other pain1 because he who is roasted alive1 or thrown into a great fire1 does not feel pain in his entrails1 at the time his external parts begin to scorch3 agreeable to this mode of reasoning1 they conclude1 that the pain which is felt at the moment of death1 is enormous1 beyond all imagination and description4 ,,lxxviii4 ,i see this matter in quite a different light1 and look upon all this aggravated degree of pain to be imaginary1 and consider the reasoning by which the existence of it is attempted to be proved1 as fallacious and delusive4 ,it is confounding our ideas of objects1 to suppose that the division of integral parts1 is analogous to the separation of the soul from the body4 ,the pain in the first instance1 consists in the forcibly breaking their connexions1 or in the first shocks of the violence1 which disposes to their disunion4 ,in the separation of the soul from the body1 there is no insertion of material fibres to be torn out by the roots1 nor any division to be made of connected substantial parts4 ,from whence then can bodily pain be derived8 ,,lxxix4 ,the using the same words promiscuously1 causes mankind to run into infinite errors1 and especially if the application of them is made to things that are fundamentally very different4 ,the expression tearing the soul from the body1 fascinates or misleads many people in the business we are now treating of2 the phrase should be understood in a figurative sense1 and we are apt to construe it in a strict or literal one4 ,in consequence of which1 as we know we can't tear from our bodies1 the most minute shred1 without feeling great pain1 or even extract any foreign substance1 that has been violently introduced into1 and sticks in any part of our frame1 without being liable to the same sensation2 led away then and betrayed by the sound of the expression1 we are apt to imagine1 that something similar happens in the separation of the soul from the body2 but the soul is a pure spirit1 that can neither adhere1 or be made to adhere to any body whatever1 nor can it be bound to it by ligatures1 nor united with it by fibres1 nor fixed to it by any kind of fastening1 nor intangled with it by any kind of roots or insertions2 and finally1 the mode of its union to the body1 is incomprehensible to all our philosophy or understanding2 and consequently1 a description of its disunion cannot be given in the words of any language4 ,there is no doubt1 but the term tearing from is metaphorical2 and that we might with less impropriety1 although we never can with propriety1 in describing the separation of the soul from the body1 say1 that it evaporated off1 it was dissipated1 or that it had been exhaled1 than that it had been torn away2 for its disunion from the body1 is performed by a movement that is supremely insensible1 because on the part of the corporeal substance1 there is not the least resistance made to its flying off4 ,vapours are continually exhaling from every part of our bodies1 without giving us the least pain4 ,and why is this8 ,why it is1 because that on account of their thinness and delicacy1 they find no opposition in their passage1 either from the solids1 or the pores of the skin4 ,what obstruction then can you suppose the soul meets with1 in its exit from the body1 which is infinitely more subtil and thin1 than the finest vapours8 ,,lxxx4 ,let us contemplate the thing in another point of view2 and admit that the soul at the time of its being snatched away from the body1 caused a violent shock1 like that of tearing to pieces all the entrails1 and inverting the whole interior organization4 ,i say that even supposing this1 the pain that it would occasion would be very slight1 or next to nothing2 and the reason is1 because that in those ultimate stages of life1 all the faculties are so extremely languid1 and the operations of nature so feeble and remiss1 as hardly to be perceived2 and the sensation of pain1 which is one of those faculties1 being in the same state with the others1 and the agent which is to stimulate them being equally feeble with the rest2 although in the time of vigour1 it was capable of exerting a force that had the power of producing great pain1 in the present state of things1 it is not capable of giving a shock that can excite any very acute sensation1 nor if it was1 is the subject it is exercised upon capable of perceiving1 or being violently affected by it4 ,,lxxxi4 ,i am inclined to think1 that a few moments before death1 there comes on a kind of half death1 or stupor1 that is something like a lethargy or swooning1 and that in this interval1 there remains no kind of recollection or reflexion2 and it is probable1 that the morning of our life1 and the evening of our death1 are preceded by a sort of crepuscules or twilight1 which brighten and grow clearer as the day of our life comes on1 and which darken and grow more obscure1 as the total night of our death draws near4 ,,lxxxii4 ,hitherto we have been treating of natural deaths2 but violent deaths1 which do not happen till three or four days after receiving the injury that occasions them1 may be considered to come under the description of natural ones2 as we may suppose those people die in the same way1 that those do who are carried off by an acute disease4 ,,lxxxiii4 ,sudden violent deaths1 which are so much dreaded1 are the least painful of all2 and indeed ,i was about to say1 that people in such cases1 hardly feel any pain at all1 or at most but an instantaneous one2 because the operation of the cause which induces them1 takes away in a moment1 all sense of feeling4 ,it is well known1 that those who have fallen from a great height1 and have lain a considerable time afterwards as if they were dead1 have1 when they came to themselves1 affirmed1 they did not feel the blow they received upon coming to the ground4 ,the great ,chancellor ,bacon1 tells a story of a gentleman who was very desirous of knowing what people felt who were hanged1 and in order to be satisfied about it1 determined to make an experiment of the thing on himself4 ,for this purpose1 he fastened a rope to the cieling of a room1 in which rope he made a noose1 and after adjusting it to a proper length1 he stood upon a stool1 and fixed the nooze round his neck1 in the expectation1 that after suffering himself to be suspended1 he should be able to recover the stool again2 but the good gentleman was a little out in his calculation2 for if it had not been for a friend who was present1 to whom he had communicated what he intended to do1 and who cut the rope in time1 the experimental philosopher had been as dead as if he had been executed by the hands of the hangman4 ,the account he gave of this matter was1 that from the moment his body became suspended by the rope1 he lost all sense and recollection2 that he had not the least remembrance of the stool1 or apprehension of the danger he was in1 nor even any sensation of pain1 arising from the suffocation that was brought on4 ,,lxxxiv4 ,this1 ,i firmly believe1 is what happens to all those who are executed by the hands of justice1 whether they are hanged1 strangled by the bow-string1 or beheaded2 and in general1 to all those who suffer violent deaths that are as sudden as these are2 for they can only feel a momentary or instantaneous pain1 and the instant they receive the fatal blow1 they are from that time1 to the separation of the soul from the body1 mere effigies of men1 and have no more sensation of pain1 than stocks or stones2 and notwithstanding1 that between the intermediate space of their receiving the blow1 or in case they are hanged1 of being turned off1 they are seen to make some convulsive motions1 these motions are merely mechanical1 and are by no means governed by the will1 or directed by reason4 ,,lxxxv4 ,we will not exempt1 as coming under this general rule1 even those who are burnt alive4 ,this is a sort of punishment1 which strikes all the world with extreme horror1 because they generally conceive1 that from the instant a person who is executed in this way1 is thrown into the fire1 to the time of his resigning his last breath1 he feels the excruciating torments of the fire4 ,but ,i am of opinion1 that he feels nothing after the first minute that he is committed to the flames2 nor can ,i conceive1 that his perception of pain can endure even so long as that4 ,,lxxxvi4 ,i think ,i have tolerably well proved1 what ,i at first asserted2 but as the reader may object1 that this paradox ought to have been classed among physical matters1 instead of among moral and political ones1 ,i will endeavour now1 to remove this objection2 which ,i hope ,i shall be able to do1 notwithstanding the decadence of the faculties1 and the want of sensation at the moment of death1 are properer objects for philosophical1 than moral speculations4 ,i shall begin with observing1 that we ought to distinguish between the matter of the proof1 and the essence of the subject we are handling4 ,the subject in the present case1 consists in a theoretical proposition1 that death with respect to what there is simply and merely in the thing itself1 ought not to be feared1 or that the fear of death1 considered in this manner1 is not reasonable or well-founded2 now thus considered1 the question is purely a moral one1 because it directly combats an inordinate passion of the soul4 ,the proofs of the truth of the proposition1 appertain to philosophy2 but this is what we see happen every day with regard to other moral questions4 ,when the question is1 whether a marriage should be dissolved on account of imbecility1 all the proofs in the trial are purely physical1 c4 ,,lxxxvii4 ,but the question more immediately appertains to morality1 on account of the end for which ,i proposed it1 than it does with respect to its own proper matter2 for this end is a point of morality of the most serious importance4 ,there is great necessity for banishing this panic terror1 and this dismal apprehension of the tormenting pains of death4 ,it is very common to see dying people 7and ,i speak of what ,i have known and experienced myself7 extremely distressed by this idea1 not so much on account of the dread of the exquisite pain itself1 as on account of the consequences that may result from it4 ,they figure to themselves1 that the pains which terminate this mortal life1 are so extremely intense1 that they will occasion them to lose all patience1 and prevent their submitting themselves to the will of ,providence with the christian resignation they ought2 and are also apprehensive1 that it would cause them to break out into furious acts of desperation4 ,this anxiety has such an effect on them1 that it prevents the operation of those christian dispositions1 that should accompany a man in his last moments1 and which are so necessary to promote his dying a good death2 and besides this1 they even put him in danger of distrusting the ,divine ,goodness at so critical a period4 ,i have seen many who were in their perfect senses1 and who had been people of good and exemplary lives1 who have been greatly distressed by this idea2 ,o genus attonitum gelid formidine mortis6 ,,lxxxviii4 ,i suppose that sentence of ,st4 ,paul's1 ,fidelis autem ,deus est1 qui non patietur vos tentari supra id quod potestis1 in ,english1 ,god is good and just1 and will not suffer you to be tried or tempted beyond your strength1 would be an excellent antidote for this malady4 ,the thinking otherwise of the ,deity1 would not be contemplating him1 as a most merciful father1 nor as a just ,god1 but considering him as a cruel tyrant1 who at the moment on which your eternal happiness depends1 should afflict you so severely1 as to cause you to commit acts of desperation4 ,what faith1 and the light of natural reason teaches us1 is1 that his goodness never permits the rigour of the trial1 to exceed the power of the soul to contend with and resist it2 and as ,i observed before1 this reflexion is an excellent antidote against the malady we have been speaking of2 but with all this1 if it is not assisted and enforced by the persuasive eloquence of an able friend1 or a good pastoral director1 it is apt to lose some of its efficacy1 and not to quiet the fluctuations of the mind so thoroughly as could be wished1 and especially if not attended to in time2 and ,i therefore think that it would be necessary1 whether sick or well1 for all people to remain in a firm persuasion1 that these excruciating pains in the article of death are imaginary4 ,appendix to the foregoing4 ,,lxxxix4 ,i have sometimes observed1 that those who attend on dying people have been much dejected upon finding them in their last moments1 make some very irregular and extraordinary motions1 and have been afraid and believed that those agitations1 had proceeded from some impatience that had seized them4 ,but let them not be uneasy on this account2 because it is most likely1 that these motions are merely mechanical2 and that in case they should not be so1 there is no mischief to be apprehended from them2 for in that proximate state to death1 if people are not deprived of their senses1 the use of their reason is so feeble1 or so confused1 that very little1 if any1 of that free will can be exercised by them which is necessary to constitute sin1 or at least any serious sin2 for no intoxicated man1 nor any one at the instant he awakes from a profound sleep1 can be in a more stunned or stupified state1 than a dying person at such a crisis4 ,,xc4 ,finally1 both with respect to the matter of this appendix1 as well as with regard to that of the subject of this ,essay1 ,i shall proceed to give a last1 and most efficacious consolation1 against the apprehension1 that the extreme pains of death are likely to endanger the loss of people's souls2 for admitting that those pains were real1 and as severe as they are represented to be1 is there any danger that the dying person who is oppressed by them1 should fall into the serious sin of impatience1 or that he should incur the guilt of any other mortal crime8 ,to this1 ,i resolutely answer that he could not2 for the same reasoning that states the pain to be so insufferably intense1 removes all the hazard of sinning1 because it must disturb the understanding to such a degree1 as to deprive a man of all free will4 ,this is a consequence resulting from all passions that are excessively violent1 as is agreed by all philosophers and theologians4 ,virgil1 who had great judgment and penetration in these matters1 represents ,chorbus1 who had been totally deprived of his senses by grief for the imprisonment of his beloved ,cassandra1 as divested of all free will or reflexion also1 in the following lines3 ,non tulit hanc speciem furiat mente ,chorbus1 ,et sese medium injecit moriturus in agmen4 ,,paradox ,x4 ,the desire of posthumous fame is vain and futile4 ,,xci4 ,there is no appetite or craving of man can be more irrational1 than that1 which is directed to an object he can never taste of or enjoy2 and such a one1 is the desire of having his name become famous in the world after his death4 ,when a man is dead1 every thing here that respects himself dies also2 and what advantage can it be of to him after his decease1 that all the world burst forth in acclamations and applauses of his great deeds and talents8 ,the smoke of all this incense vanishes in the air1 nor can the least particle of it1 touch or affect him to whom it is offered4 ,he feels no more of the praises of his virtues1 than a statue2 nor is he any more sensible of the celebrations of his grandeur1 than an edifice that is erected to perpetuate it4 ,if his works were pleasing in the eye of ,god1 and he is in the regions of rest1 he may feel the satisfaction of having left a good example to the world2 and all that passes out of that sphere1 let the celebrations of the world be what they will1 can be of no avail to him4 ,he will either despise1 or be totally ignorant of the eulogiums that are bestowed on him by mortals4 ,what convenience or what satisfaction1 do either ,alexander and ,csar now enjoy1 from being applauded through the globe for the two most illustrious warriors of the world8 ,homer and ,virgil1 from being celebrated as the two most elegant poets8 and ,cicero and ,demosthenes1 from being admired as the two most eloquent orators8 ,they are perhaps entirely ignorant of all that is said of them here2 and if they are permitted to know it1 it is most likely1 that such knowledge tends more to torment than please them4 ,empedocles was certainly a great mad-man1 if1 according to what some have said of him1 he precipitated himself into the flames of ,mount tna1 in order that the world upon not finding his body1 should imagine he had ascended up to heaven1 and would worship him as a deity4 ,this philosopher however1 as he was a follower of the ,pythagorean system1 and believed the transmigration of souls1 might expect1 that by his being placed successively in a variety of bodies1 he should hereafter view with great pleasure1 the worship and adoration that was paid to him in this world2 but what enjoyment of this sort can a man hope for1 who believes that when he leaves these regions1 he shall never return to them again8 ,and what can it be to such a man1 whether he is worshiped or forgotten8 ,thus the emperor ,adrian was much madder than ,empedocles1 who without believing in the doctrine of transmigration1 erected temples and altars1 and appointed priests1 making provision at the same time for maintaining them1 and providing victims to be sacrificed to his infamous little idol ,antinous4 ,of what service could all this be to that disgraced and unfortunate boy8 ,and we may make the same observation1 on the apotheosis and ridiculous deification of the ,roman ,emperors4 ,vespasian1 although he expected this farce after his death1 would be played over with respect to him1 treated the thing with the scorn it deserved1 by saying to those who surrounded him when he was near his end1 ,i feel as if ,i was going to be converted from a man into a deity4 ,,xcii4 ,that mankind should be desirous of seeing themselves applauded1 and their names honoured while living1 seems very natural1 because they may find a gratification in it2 but that they should be anxious for posthumous honours1 which they can neither taste or enjoy1 seems to bespeak a disordered imagination1 and a distempered brain4 ,ovid paints ,sappho1 as feeling great satisfaction1 at seeing her muse celebrated by all the world4 ,at mihi ,pegasides blandissima carmina dictant2 ,jam canitur toto nomen in orbe meum4 ,thus far he expressed himself very properly1 because he spoke in the name of ,sappho while she was living1 and might be supposed to be gratified by1 and pleased with the aromatic fumes of those acclamations4 ,but he reasoned very ill1 when speaking of ,hercules and ,theseus1 he reckoned as a balance for the loss of those heroes1 the applauses the world would bestow on their memories3 ,occidit et ,theseus1 et qui tumulavit ,orestem2 ,sed tamen in laudes vivit uterque suas4 ,,xciii4 ,the eulogiums of the dead1 can only be enjoyed by the living4 ,the relations1 the friends1 and the country of the deceased1 divide among themselves the whole fragrancy of this grateful gale1 nor can the least breath of it reach the region1 which is inhabited by those who depart hence4 ,there remains to the dead but one happy lot1 and that is derived from1 and depends on their having died well4 ,beati mortui1 qui in ,domino moriuntur4 ,,paradox ,,xi4 ,there is no man of a clear and good understanding who is not a good-intentioned one4 ,,xciv4 ,i believe that all the mortals in every quarter of the ,globe1 will be struck with surprize1 at hearing me broach this paradox1 and will look upon it as one of the greatest chimeras in ethics1 that ever entered the head of man2 for there is scarce any one of the least observation1 who cannot affirm and attest1 he has seen and known people of very good capacities1 who were very perverse and ill-disposed4 ,but ,i1 in opposition to all this1 assert that ,i never met with such a one2 and ,i not only make this declaration1 but declare further1 that ,i think it next to impossible that there should be such a man1 and that if by chance such a one should be found1 he ought to be considered as a monster4 ,,xcv4 ,but in order that we should not misunderstand or confound things1 ,i think it necessary for me to explain1 what ,i understand by an evil-intentioned man4 ,by an evil-intentioned man1 then1 ,i mean such a one in whom those vices reign1 which are most pernicious to society1 that is to say1 malignity of heart1 unforgivingness1 turbulence or restlessness1 and a desire of usurping other peoples property2 and in general1 all sly and crafty persons should be enumerated in the catalogue of evil-intentioned men1 such for example1 as are attentive to nothing but their own gratifications and emoluments1 and who have not the least concern for1 or who are totally indifferent about the good of their neighbour1 or the welfare of the public4 ,,xcvi4 ,the deformity1 the baseness1 and the dissonance from natural reason1 there is in a person's doing a voluntary injury to another1 is so strikingly represented to a man of a clear and a sound understanding1 that except in here and there an instance1 where some violent passion intervenes to disturb and disorder the reason1 it seems impossible1 that a person should voluntarily commit acts that are directly injurious and offensive to his neighbour4 ,and it may be from this principle1 that we have seen some who have been reputed as atheists1 who1 notwithstanding their erroneous belief that there is no such thing as future rewards and punishments1 and that they expect no recompence for their good actions1 or chastisement for their bad ones hereafter2 as members of human society1 have behaved well1 or at least have done no civil mischief to it2 ,i mean that they have conducted themselves like quiet peaceable people1 and have lived contentedly upon their own patrimonies1 or on what they have lawfully acquired1 and have shewn themselves averse to all violence and injustice4 ,such among the antients1 was ,pliny the elder2 and such among those of more modern date1 was the ,englishman ,thomas ,hobbes4 ,,xcvii4 ,the genuine and true reason of this is1 that the existence of a ,supreme ,being1 although it is most plain and clear1 is not with respect to the human understanding1 self-evident1 or1 as the ,theologians explain the thing1 is not per se nota quo ad nos2 but is made infallibly evident1 by deductions drawn from other principles2 and where a deduction of this sort is absolutely necessary1 a person may suspect1 that it is very possible now and then some fallacy may creep in4 ,but the deformity of such vicious actions as we have been speaking of1 is evident of itself2 and whenever such actions are represented to the understanding1 it clearly comprehends their baseness1 and the operation of them is odious and apparent in the eyes of every man1 unless as we observed before1 some circumstance intervenes to disturb his reason4 ,,xcviii4 ,to this it may be urged by way of objection1 in the first place1 that in order to perceive and be convinced of the turpitude of those actions1 there is no necessity for a man to be possessed of a bright understanding1 as a middling one1 or even one below the middle class1 would be sufficient for this purpose2 so that this reasoning will prove the turpitude to be plain to every understanding1 high1 middling1 and low1 or else that it is evident to neither of them4 ,,xcix4 ,to this ,i answer1 that although the thing may be known with intire certainty to every one of them1 there is a great difference between the knowledge and comprehension of one man1 and that of another4 ,two understandings that are unequal1 notwithstanding they may both know1 and be thoroughly persuaded of the same truth1 may be struck with it very differently2 and in proportion as one of these understandings is the most clear1 that one will know it more distinctly1 more strikingly1 and with a more refined degree of penetration2 and in proportion as the other is less clear1 that other will perceive it less distinctly1 and more confusedly4 ,in consequence of this inequality of understandings1 objects make a more strong or a more weak impression on the soul1 and have more or less influence to excite in it1 these1 or those affections4 ,the same infinite goodness of ,god which is known to the blessed1 is known with infallible certainty by the worldly also4 ,how then comes it to pass1 that the first love him necessarily and intensely1 and that we worldly mortals are so luke-warm in our love of him8 ,this is occasioned by no other cause than the following1 that although our knowledge of him is evident1 that of the blessed is the most clear1 and ours the most obscure2 and in proportion as the understanding knows a good or an evil with greater clearness1 the will is moved with a greater impetus1 to love the first1 and abhor the last4 ,c4 ,this may be very opportunely and aptly explained1 by the operation of any corporeal sense2 for he whose olfactory nerves are very quick1 will be more offended with an ill smell1 than one in whom that sensation is more languid and remiss2 and although this last may be able clearly to distinguish the ill smell1 he will be less disgusted at it2 nor will it appear so hateful to him2 and this happens from no other reason1 than that the olfactory perception of the first is very clear1 and that of the second rather obstructed or more dull2 and although not only the man who has a very quick and delicate ear1 but also he who has one that is more obtuse1 may evidently perceive the dissonance of three or four voices which are totally discordant2 the last will bear it without being much affected1 and the other will be almost distracted by it2 and this is all derived from the cause above-mentioned4 ,,ci4 ,and it happens just so with regard to intellectual perception4 ,the deformity of vicious actions1 which are self-evident1 is apparent and clear1 not only to men of perspicuous understandings1 but to those of the most inferior capacities1 provided they are not quite stupid2 but by the first perceiving them with a lively clearness1 and the others somewhat confusedly1 they produce a kind of horror in those who have that clearness of perception1 which does not permit their wills to embrace such objects2 while those to whom they do not appear so disgusting and unpleasant1 may be betrayed into grasping turpitudes1 under the disguise of delights and pleasures4 ,but ,i would not have it understood that ,i mean to insinuate by what ,i have said here1 that there ever is a suspension1 or obstruction of the operation1 of every1 or any man's free will4 ,,cii4 ,it may be objected in the second place1 that there are entire nations1 among whom it cannot be denied1 that there are to be found many men of excellent understandings1 who hold robbery1 deceit1 and even cruelty to be lawful1 and that consequently1 they cannot consider these things as turpitudes1 or have a just sense of their baseness4 ,to this ,i answer1 that our assertion with respect to a good understanding1 does not allude to one placed in such a situation4 ,the general error of a nation in any matter whatever1 is like a dark fog which bewilders people1 causes them to mistake their way1 and perplexes the clearest understandings4 ,if in early infancy1 when the rational faculties are weak1 children are familiarized to1 and brought up under the influence of deceitful prejudices2 and when they come to years of maturity1 they are accustomed to reverence a common error as irrefragable authority2 if it should happen afterwards1 that a ray of light breaks in upon them1 which discovers to them the truth1 they timidly fly from the elucidation1 distrust their own reason and reflexion1 and are apt to suspect such elucidation to be a delusion1 and to suppose that it would be criminal in them to regard it4 ,,ciii4 ,i answer secondly1 that it is not known with any degree of certainty1 that men of excellent understandings1 who are educated and brought up in those nations we call barbarous1 are infected with all the errors that prevail in those nations2 and with respect to myself1 ,i am fully persuaded they are not4 ,we know that various eminent men among the ,gentiles1 in matters of religion1 thought very differently from the populace4 ,it is true however1 that there were but few of them who had sufficient resolution to speak out1 as they for the most part disguised their opinions1 from motives of fear or policy4 ,we ought also to admit1 that among the barbarous nations of these times1 there are still to be found men of this character4 ,nor is there any necessity for limiting such an opinion within the bounds of mere conjecture2 for there are various historical relations1 which bear testimony to actions of heroic virtue1 that have been lately done by some of the individuals of those very nations1 where maxims of inhumanity are prevalent at this day2 of which if it was necessary1 a long catalogue might be adduced4 ,,civ4 ,in the third place1 it may be objected1 that experience teaches us1 there is scarce a country or populous city1 where you may not find some people of perspicuous understandings1 and who1 although they are of wayward dispositions and depraved inclinations1 are subtil and penetrating4 ,to this ,i answer resolutely and determinedly1 that ,i defy any man to produce such an instance4 ,i have known and conversed with many of those people1 who have been esteemed men of good understanding1 and perverse dispositions1 but have always found the common opinion of those persons to be extremely erroneous4 ,the vulgar frequently look upon persons of very superficial talents1 as men of great understanding2 and upon hearing them talk off hand1 although there is nothing solid in what they say1 and observing in them a readiness at expressing themselves1 and more especially if they deliver themselves with confidence1 and a magisterial air1 most people are apt to give them credit for being men of admirable understandings2 when in truth1 there is hardly one out of a hundred of them1 who can penetrate more than skin-deep into the objects he converses upon4 ,there is another very common deception in this matter1 and that is1 looking upon cunning people as men of depth or penetration1 when they are as palpably different from one another1 as light is from darkness4 ,i call those cunning people1 who are solely attentive to nothing but their own concerns1 and who by all sorts of under-hand ways and means1 and by all kinds of little arts and deceits1 are endeavouring to promote their own particular interest4 ,can these be called men of sublime understandings8 ,to do this1 requires but little depth or penetration1 as all that is necessary to accomplish such ends1 is low craft and roguery2 and there is hardly any capacity1 be it ever so mean1 which cannot comprehend and apply such trivial artifices3 every one may arrive at doing this2 but a noble understanding1 discerning the baseness of them1 abominates such practices2 although the vulgar1 to whose bastard dispositions they are better suited1 embrace them with eagerness4 ,dissimulation1 so far from requiring an exalted understanding to support and carry it on1 requires none at all1 for we see some irrational animals who exercise it with great address4 ,the foxes are very expert at it1 but that does not in any wise render their nature superior to that of brutes2 and ,i repeat again1 that ,i never knew an understanding that had any thing of the elevated or sublime in its composition1 that did not abhor all duplicity and fraud4 ,,cv4 ,if we see this matter in the other extreme point of view1 we shall find it liable to great equivocation4 ,it frequently happens1 that a man of very pure virtue1 who has somewhat of native dryness or bluntness in his composition1 appears to those of rude and uncultivated capacities1 as a person of a depraved disposition4 ,those who are zealous lovers of truth and justice1 are accustomed1 not always to accommodate themselves to those courteous condescensions2 by which people acquire popular acceptation2 as by attending to the substance of things1 they are apt to overlook forms and ceremonies4 ,words from their mouths1 signify what the sound and sense of them express3 they confider courteous dissimulation as a treacherous enemy of virtue2 and are ignorant of the art of painting vice in counterfeit colours1 for the sake of pleasing or flattering any man2 but on the contrary1 are always careful to describe it so1 as that it may appear in its true native shape1 and in all its deformity4 ,the more prevalent lying1 deceit1 and perfidy is1 the more they loath and nauseate it1 and are observed to be more strict and severe in their reprehensions of it2 and besides1 they never look smilingly1 but upon those in whom they perceive a clean mind4 ,this unpleasing integrity1 is regarded by the bulk of the world1 as a kind of misanthropy1 or malevolence towards the generality of mankind2 and the number of those1 who busy themselves in painting such men1 as impracticable1 perverse1 and ill-intentioned is infinite2 for they are pleasing but to very few1 as there are but few who are pleased with them2 so that either from the malice of their opponents1 or from the want of a proper knowledge of the world in those that are indifferent with respect to their opinions of them1 it easily comes to pass1 that a man of exalted and sincere virtue1 is often looked upon by a whole town1 as a person of intentional malignity4 ,,cvi4 ,whoever is upon his guard not to fall into one of the two beforementioned errors1 and has capacity to distinguish true virtue from false1 and a clear and good understanding1 from a cloudy1 crooked1 or crafty one1 will be convinced as ,i myself have been convinced1 that there never fails to be much virtue lodged in the person1 in whom you find a real good and clear understanding4 ,i would not however be understood to insinuate1 that all men of great genius and capacity should be saints2 for meritorious virtue1 or such as entitles a man to inherit eternal life1 is the child of grace1 and not of nature4 ,neither would ,i be understood to say1 that all kinds of moral virtues should be resplendent in such a man as ,i have been describing1 but only those1 whose opposite vices1 at first sight1 and without the assistance of any reasoning or reflection1 are manifest and apparent2 and whose deformity1 at a glance1 strikes the eye of every beholder2 nor would ,i even be understood to assert so much as this1 without some limitation and exception2 for every vehement passion during the time it lasts1 will make the most prudent man act like a mad one1 and the most acute one1 like a fool2 but abstracted from the intervention of such accidents1 it is my firm opinion1 that every man of a clear and good understanding1 is an honest and a good-intentioned one4 ,,the ,,great ,,and ,,masterly ,,authority of ,,experience4 ,,sect4 ,i4 ,i4 ,there arrived in the kingdom of ,cosmosia1 two famous women1 who were very opposite to each other2 but both with the same design1 which was that of obtaining the absolute dominion over that empire4 ,the first was called ,solidina1 the other ,idearia2 the first was learned1 but simple2 the second ignorant1 and ostentatious4 ,the people of the country1 were ignorant like the last1 and simple as the first4 ,hence1 ,solidina thought to win them to her by kindness1 and by instructing them2 and ,idearia1 to subdue them by craft and imposition4 ,idearia opened a public school1 and promised in pompous language1 that in a very short time1 and with little or no trouble1 she would make all those extremely learned and wise1 who chose to attend her lectures4 ,the greatness of the promise1 joined to the imposing appearance of the new doctress1 mounted in the professional chair1 together with her great volubility1 and flow of mountebank rhetoric1 soon filled the school with pupils4 ,she began her lectures1 which all consisted1 in laying before her auditors in new and unusual language1 the chimeras1 contained in the extensive field of the imagination4 ,and1 oh wonderful to relate6 either ,idearia had somewhat of enchantment about her1 or else there was something very singular in her method of applying her artifice and cunning2 for in a few years after opening her school1 she persuaded those miserable people1 they perfectly understood all that could be learned4 ,,ii4 ,solidina1 pursued a course diametrically opposite to that taken by ,idearia4 ,in an humble garb1 and without any parade or ostentation1 she went from house to house1 and familiarizing herself with all men1 taught them in plain and easy language1 true and useful documents4 ,the most retired cottages1 and the most humble work-shops1 were schools suited to her doctrines1 for she found in all of them1 sensible objects1 which examined by the help1 or auxiliary aid of the understanding1 served the purpose of books for teaching and explaining her lessons2 and so far was she from inspiring an indiscreet presumption in her disciples1 that she ingenuously told them1 that all she taught1 was a mere trifle1 compared to the infinite deal there is to be learned2 and that to arrive at a moderate knowledge of things1 required infinite labour and application4 ,this modesty of ,solidina's1 was very prejudicial to her1 because at the very time she made this declaration1 ,idearia1 was boasting and blazoning in her school1 that in a concise mode1 and with very little trouble1 she would make all her auditors universally learned2 the consequence of which was1 that the pupils of ,solidina one after another began to drop off1 and go over to ,idearia1 in hopes that in her school1 they should arrive at the summit of learning per saltum4 ,what contributed much to forward this defection1 was1 that ,idearia also spoke of ,solidina with contempt1 calling her base1 vile1 mechanical1 and stupid2 by which means1 the poor tutress became abandoned by all the people of rank1 and was obliged to retire from the city to the villages1 where she applied herself to instructing poor husbandmen1 in that sort of knowledge1 that was necessary and useful1 for the cultivation and improvement of their lands4 ,,iii4 ,idearia by the banishment of her rival1 now becoming triumphant1 entertained thoughts of establishing an absolute and despotic sway over her disciples2 and to accomplish this purpose1 she published an edict1 by which every one was required not to believe in future1 aught he should see with his eyes1 or touch with his hands1 but only to credit such things as she should be pleased to order him to believe2 requiring further1 that he should look upon it as an indispensable obligation1 always to defend with invincible obstinacy and unremitting vociferation her doctrines1 against whoever should presume to contradict them4 ,all heads bowed obedient to this tyrannic decree1 and people began firmly to believe many maxims1 which before they had found a difficulty in assenting to2 such for example1 as that the truth can never be found out or ascertained but by means of fiction2 that there is a mode of coming at the knowledge of things1 which may be taught to a child in four days2 that mankind are all alike1 which is a rule that will hold good with respect to every other species1 and if you know what one of a sort is1 you know what they all are2 that insensible and inanimate things1 have their desires1 their prejudices1 and their affections1 the same as animate ones2 that that body1 which is the most brilliant1 and most heating of any1 has nothing igneous in its composition2 and that on the other hand1 there is another very large body1 which is purely igneous1 that is neither luminous1 nor heating1 nor does it stand in need of any pabulum to sustain it2 that all living creatures have a large portion of fire in their composition1 without excepting even the fish1 although they are always in or under the water1 nor the turtle1 whose blood is positively cold4 ,,iv4 ,these and many other such-like portentous particulars1 did ,idearia teach to1 and impose on her credulous disciples2 who all received and embraced them as infallible truths2 but at length there arose in the very school of the doctress herself1 a contentious schism1 or scandalous disagreement1 which was begun by one ,papyratius1 a man of subtil and animated genius1 but a great lover of novelties4 ,this man introduced new and not less astonishing dogmas than the others2 such as that all the living creatures in the world1 man only excepted1 have no more sensation or feeling than stocks or stones2 and that in every man1 there is but a very small portion of the body which possesses the presence of the soul2 that the extension of the world is infinite2 that the motion of sublunary bodies1 is equally semper-eternal with that of the clestial ones2 that the imaginary space1 is really and truly a body2 that every thing upon the face of the earth1 is in so continual and rapid a motion1 as in the space of every twenty-four hours1 to travel some thousands of leagues2 that we in all things1 should give credit to our imaginations1 but none to our senses2 for that the representations made by these last1 are apt grossly to deceive us2 and that neither is the swan white1 or the crow black1 nor is fire hot1 or snow cold1 c4 ,v4 ,these novelties1 and others of the same sort1 although they were condemned from the beginning by the majority of ,idearia's disciples1 did not fail to attract a number of votaries1 sufficient to form a new school4 ,the two parties inveighed against each other with great bitterness1 and one side reprobated as absurd errors1 what the other maintained as conclusive dogmas4 ,,vi4 ,this division1 after long and obstinate disputes1 in which the arguments were so nearly poised in equilibrium1 that neither side could claim the victory1 in the course of time1 opened the eyes of many1 and made them doubt whether they had not lightly1 or even blindly1 admitted as articles of human faith1 doctrines1 that were uncertain1 and exposed to be terribly contested4 ,they observed1 that the arguments with which each side attacked the opinions of their opponents1 were beyond comparison stronger1 than the reasons with which they defended their own4 ,from hence they inferred1 that both the one and the other were evidently doubtful1 and might very probably be false4 ,this brought to their remembrance the poor and neglected ,solidina1 and made them reflect1 that she proved all she advanced1 by sensible and plain demonstrations4 ,this remark becoming every day more general1 and more adverted to by men of the first-rate ingenuity in the schools2 they took the matter into consideration1 and the result of their deliberations was1 a determination to recall ,solidina from her retirement1 and to bring her back to the city2 which after having done with solemn pomp1 they erected a magnificent school for her1 where she has continued to teach from that time1 with a reputation that has increased daily2 and her being favoured with the countenance and protection of some illustrious personages of high rank1 has greatly contributed to advance her credit1 and particularly the encouragement she has met with from the princes1 ,galindo and ,anglosio1 who are both great lovers1 and patrons of ,solidina4 ,,sect4 ,,ii4 ,,vii4 ,this ,history1 which was printed in ,french1 was given me to read by a stranger who was on his travels2 but as soon as ,i had read what ,i have just related1 he snatched the book out of my hands1 and asked me if ,i comprehended what ,i had read8 ,the question gave me to understand1 there was something mysterious in the ,history1 and that under the plain letter1 was conveyed some signification1 different from what the words expressed4 ,i answered him1 that ,i had not understood it in any other sense1 than what the language seemed to imply2 but that if he would permit me to read it over again with a little attention1 ,i might perhaps be able to comprehend its meaning4 ,he gave me leave1 and then upon reflection1 first on the nature of the doctrines it mentioned1 although they were not pointed out very clearly1 and secondly1 on the allusion of the names given to the personages who were introduced into the scene1 ,i found it was not very difficult to decypher the riddle1 which ,i interpreted in the following manner4 ,,viii4 ,the kingdom of ,cosmosia is the world1 which is the signification of the ,greek word ,cosmos4 ,solidina is experience1 and ,idearia imagination4 ,these names are very properly suited1 both to the characters and doctrines of the parties4 ,experience solidly proves her maxims1 by sensible and clear demonstrations2 and imagination1 grounds her opinions on the vain representation of her ideas4 ,solidina was a long while banished1 and during all that time1 ,idearia reigned triumphant2 for from the period that ,pythagoras reduced all philosophy to his numbers1 ,plato to his ideas1 and ,aristotle to his precisions2 and for many ages afterwards1 the world knew no other but an ideal physic2 nor did it pay the least attention1 to the experimental or solid4 ,in the first maxims of ,idearia1 we perceive many of the dogmas of the peripatetic doctrine1 and in her second1 many of the ,cartesian ones2 and they gave the name of ,papyratius to the broacher of this last system1 because the ,french word ,carte1 signifies the same as the ,latin word ,papyrus1 from whence the appellative was derived4 ,des ,cartes is ranged among the auditors of ,idearia1 because he was disposed instead of less1 rather more than the ,peripatetics1 to regulate all physics by imagination and ideas4 ,at length the mistake of this method was perceived1 and ,solidina was recalled from the villages to the city2 and experiment and observation1 which for a long time had only been in use among the rustics1 and employed in the business of husbandry1 to increase the product of the earth1 improve the mountainous land1 and to encourage the propagation1 and mend the breed of herds and cattle2 were not long since introduced in pomp1 and countenanced by some courts1 in the neighbourhood of which1 academies were instituted1 to examine nature by their help2 and as the most celebrated of these1 were the ,academy of ,sciences at ,paris1 and the ,royal ,society of ,london1 which were founded under the protection of the kings of ,france and ,england1 they called the two princes who were the lovers and patrons of ,solidina1 by the names of ,galindo1 and ,anglosio1 which were derived from the ,latin words ,gallia1 and ,anglia1 which in that language signify ,france and ,england4 ,,ix4 ,the stranger approved of the whole1 and every part of my explanation1 and assured me1 that by the context that followed what ,i had read1 the intention of the author of that mysterious ,history1 could be no other than what ,i had described it4 ,but ,i told him ,i was not inclined to approve1 nor could ,i approve of the whole and every part of its content2 for that ,i observed in it some latitudinary expressions1 which seemed to reflect upon1 and were derogatory of the peripatetic doctrine1 so ,i only acknowledged to him1 that in the most essential parts1 the thing seemed just and right4 ,he replied1 that as ,i was a ,spaniard1 and a sectary of the peripatetic school1 my objection and the reasons for it might be admitted4 ,upon saying this1 he took his leave of me1 and pursued his journey1 leaving me in a disposition to meditate on the subject of our conversation1 and lay before the public1 such reflections as should occur to me respecting the matter of it1 which may be seen in the sequel of this discourse4 ,,sect4 ,,iii4 ,x4 ,the first thing that offers itself to our consideration1 is the little or no progress1 which natural reason1 unassisted by experience1 has made in the examination of the affairs of nature in the course of so many ages4 ,nature is as little understood in the schools at this day1 as it was in the academies of ,plato1 of ,lyceus1 and of ,aristotle4 ,what secret have these academies developed8 or what diminutive portion of this most extensive country have they discovered8 ,what utility has the labours of so many men of excellent ingenuity1 as have cultivated philosophy in the reasoning and speculative way1 produced to the world8 ,what art1 either liberal or mechanical1 of the many that are necessary for the service of man1 or the good of the public1 do we owe to speculative invention2 and ,i might even say1 what small advancement in any such art1 has been derived from it8 ,what document of the schools1 has conduced to instruct a husbandman in the cultivation of his lands8 ,they there talk much of causes1 effects1 productions1 and dispositions of matter1 but all this has not yet produced any maxim that can be relied on1 for the most advantageous mode of cultivating the land1 in order to dispose it to the production of this or that particular plant1 nor to instruct us at what time it should be sown1 nor in the least to inform us with regard to many other circumstances1 that should be attended to in the raising it4 ,schoolmen1 after the example of ,aristotle1 treat largely of qualities1 which they place in a predicament apart1 or by themselves2 without having by this means1 discovered any qualities at all1 either in the mixtures1 or the elements2 but on the contrary1 ,aristotle has rather been miserably mistaken in those he attempted to point out1 by his rules of proportion and combination2 ,i mean in those that appertain to the air1 and the water1 as we have proved in another part of our works2 and it would not be difficult to prove the same thing1 with regard to those he has assigned to the earth4 ,if perchance he has been right in ascertaining the qualities belonging to fire1 7although in our ,physical ,paradoxes we have denied his position with respect to its being hot in the highest degree7 ,i say1 if he has been right in this particular1 it was not because philosophy had penetrated the secret1 but because the thing was manifested to us by our senses4 ,,xi4 ,these are the organs1 by which all the natural truths we are able to obtain a knowledge of are conveyed to our spirits4 ,even in the mathematical faculties1 which affect to confide every thing to theoretical demonstrations1 they cannot1 except in the two elemental ones1 arithmetic and geometry1 safely advance a step1 without holding before them1 the light of experience4 ,it was this taught the geographer1 the situation and position of the divers parts of the globe2 the navigator1 the directive virtue of the load-stone2 the static philosopher1 the weight1 the descent1 and acceleration of motion in their descent1 of heavy bodies2 the mechanic and engineer1 the augmentation of power by machinery1 or the multiplication of purchase2 the astronomer1 the movements and course of the stars2 the musician1 the consonant and dissonant intervals of music2 the optician1 perspective1 or the effects of vision when the eye surveys distant objects2 to the catoptrician1 and dioptrician1 the laws of reflexion1 and refraction4 ,,sect4 ,,iv4 ,,xii4 ,and it is very worthy of remarking1 that even after experience had made those first discoveries1 on which the theory and practice of arts are founded1 those primitive lights were in general found to be insufficient to enable the understanding to make further advances in them1 but it was rather found to be necessary1 that the same experience should continue as they proceeded on1 to direct their steps1 and correct their errors4 ,i will explain what ,i mean1 by two examples taken from navigation4 ,,xiii4 ,the first regards the direction1 or pointing of the magnetical needle to the pole4 ,this admirable property1 which was totally unknown to the antients1 was discovered in the thirteenth century1 and immediately applied to the improvement of navigation4 ,upon its first discovery1 the philosophers1 according to their wonted custom of pretending to discern the causes of things1 imputed this effect1 as derived from an occult sympathy with the pole1 contained in the very essence1 form1 and substance of the loadstone2 and as this is supposed to be invariable1 they concluded1 that the direction must infallibly be invariable also4 ,they continued in this good faith for about four hundred years1 at the end of which long period1 ,crinon1 a pilot of ,dieppe as some say1 or ,cabot1 a ,venetian ,navigator as others believe1 was the first who observed the declinations of the magnetical needle from the true north1 that is1 that it did not always point directly to the pole1 but declined in different places1 sometimes towards the west1 and at others towards the east4 ,the philosophers heard this novelty with great disgust1 because it gave the lye to some of their most established maxims1 and therefore they set about to contradict it with all their force4 ,but in the end1 they were obliged to submit to repeated experiments1 authorized and confirmed1 by the testimonies of people of undoubted credit4 ,,xiv4 ,having afterwards discovered1 that under the meridian of the ,azores or western islands1 there was no variation of the magnetical needle at all1 the astronomers and geographers1 thought they had found out a fixed station1 whereat to commence the first meridian1 which had before been counted arbitrarily1 from whatever place they chose to begin it4 ,but this idea soon vanished1 for a little while afterwards1 they discovered two other meridians1 where there was no variation2 the one at a head-land near the ,cape of ,good ,hope1 to which1 on this account they gave the name of ,needle ,cape2 and another1 at the spot where the city of ,canton is situated4 ,upon this1 they thought they had found out a certain principle1 whereon to ground a compleat system for calculating or computing variations1 by graduating them for the intermediate stations1 in proportion to their greater or less distance from the mean space between the two places where there was no variation4 ,,xv4 ,but as nature frequently mocks the ideal propositions that are fabricated by the brain of man1 this time of rejoicing lasted but a few years1 for they discovered1 that this declination of the magnetic needle1 varied more or less at the same place at different times1 and that this change of variation was perpetual4 ,this discovery1 not only demolished the antecedent imagined rules1 but nearly took away all hope1 of their ever in future1 finding out any certain one for their guidance2 and this1 notwithstanding many men1 eminent for their skill in physics and mathematics1 have long1 and still do1 labour at accomplishing it4 ,,xvi4 ,in this instance1 may be seen the fallibility of the most plausible reasonings unaccompanied by experiments4 ,and we shall see the same1 in the other we are about to mention1 which relates to the flux and reflux of the sea4 ,,xvii4 ,as the flux and reflux of the sea1 is evident and apparent to all those who inhabit near the sea-coasts1 and the course and changes of the ,moon to all mankind1 it was easy and natural1 to observe the correspondence there was between the movements of the one and the other2 that is1 that the rising and falling of the tide1 keeps pace with the rising and setting of the moon2 and it is probable1 that the first people who remarked this1 fancied that by this single observation1 they had discovered the system of these admirable movements4 ,but this delusion was but short-lived1 for they soon afterwards observed1 that within the space of the same lunar month1 there was a great disproportion between the rising and falling of the tide1 and that it flowed higher1 and ebbed lower1 at the new and full moon1 than it did at the quarters4 ,but when they had advanced this step1 it is likely they gave themselves credit for having discovered the whole secret1 and supposed1 that they knew all that was to be known of the matter2 and when they observed there was so exact a correspondence1 between the motions of the tide1 and the phases of the moon1 they did not entertain the least doubt1 but that they were totally influenced by this planet4 ,but experience also undeceived mankind with respect to this error1 for they found out1 that there was another variation of the tides1 which did not depend upon the revolutions of the moon1 but upon those of the sun2 that is1 that supposing other things to be equal1 they rise higher1 at1 or near the equinoxes1 than they do at the solstices4 ,this gave them to understand1 that the moon did not reign so despotic over the tides1 as to exclude the sun from all share in the dominion of them4 ,,xviii4 ,but after all this was ascertained1 they found1 that by trusting the bringing of ships into barr'd or tide harbours1 to the mere combination of the before-nam'd observations1 they fell into very dangerous errors2 for that there are two other variations1 which are very considerable1 and especially one of them1 and which can't be comprehended under any general rule whatsoever2 the one is with respect to the time of full sea2 and the other1 regards the quantum of rise of the water4 ,the time of full sea varies at different ports1 even under the same meridian1 and does not happen in all of them at the same hour4 ,they vary also with respect to the magnitude of them1 because there is an enormous difference in the height they flow at some ports1 to what they do at others1 for the water will rise more than ten fathoms upon some coasts1 and not above a few feet on others1 and in others again1 the rise is hardly perceptible4 ,,sect4 ,v4 ,,xix4 ,if the rules deduced from experimental observations are so fallible1 that it is absolutely necessary in order to avoid all error1 to pursue the thread of them so scrupulously1 that reason should not venture to advance a step1 without the light of an experiment appropriated to the business it is in search of2 ,i say1 if these rules are not to be relied on1 what confidence can we place in those maxims1 which derive their origin from our arbitrary ideas8 ,,xx4 ,nature conforms to1 and is governed by the idea of its great artificer1 not by that of man2 and it is strange temerity in man1 to presume he can comprehend the idea of such an artificer4 ,i have sometimes thought1 that if we were told1 that there were numbers of those luminous bodies in the heavens which we call stars1 although we could not see them1 every one would imagine1 such a disposition and collocation of them in the sphere1 as best suited his own fancy4 ,one would conceive them distributed into various regular sets of figures1 such as triangular1 hexangular1 circular1 c4 which formed so many different constellations2 another1 that they were composed of a beautiful suit1 of well ranged and harmonious groups2 another1 that they were disposed after the manner of flowers1 which he had seen growing in parterres in some garden2 another1 that they were formed in such a position1 as resembled the shape of various images1 either mystic or natural4 ,in fact1 there would be no body1 that would not attribute to them some most beautiful resemblance1 or imitation1 of those things which he had ever seen1 that seemed most pleasing to him1 either in art1 or nature4 ,notwithstanding which1 they would all deceive themselves1 and be greatly surprised1 upon the firmament afterwards being displayed to their view1 to find the stars placed and ranged in a position1 quite different and distinct from all they had imagined4 ,,sect4 ,,vi4 ,,xxi4 ,thus it frequently happens1 that men think in one manner1 and ,god operates in another4 ,men suppose1 and they suppose right1 that the works of ,god are all executed with order1 and in proportion2 but although they suppose well1 they reason ill2 because they think there is no other order and proportion1 than that which comes within the reach of their comprehension4 ,the works of ,god1 it is true are wrought with proportion2 but with a sublime proportion1 which is much superior to our rules4 ,it is blind temerity in man1 to imagine that ,god in his works1 is to conform himself to our human gross ideas of proportions4 ,,xxii4 ,it was a confidence in such proportions1 that caused ,pythagoras to err egregiously in his dimensions of the magnitude1 and his calculation of the distance of the heavens1 which he thought to compute1 by the numerical series of the intervals of music4 ,and others were not much wiser than ,pythagoras1 who by fancying they had found some special perfection in the number four1 chose to stamp it on1 and regulate all the operations of nature by it4 ,from hence came the four elements1 the four first qualities1 the four cardinal points of the globe1 the four quarters of the year1 and the four humours of the body4 ,,sect4 ,,vii4 ,,xxiii4 ,if even in those consequences1 which to all human appearance1 we deduce immediately from the truths which nature herself presents to our senses1 we are sometimes liable to be mistaken2 what dependance can we place in those1 that are founded on principles1 which without consulting nature1 are established by our fancy8 ,what consequence to all appearance could seem better inferred1 than that of the repugnance of nature to a vacuum1 founded on the palpable experiment of the water rising in the pump8 ,but by the light of innumerable other experiments1 the mistake was discovered2 and it was found out1 that the true cause of that1 and all such-like phnomena1 was the weight of the air4 ,,xxiv4 ,we see with our eyes1 whether we explain the cause of it as proceeding from an intrinsic quality1 or from attraction1 or from impulse1 that gravity precipitates bodies with a swift movement towards the earth4 ,it seems most natural to suppose1 by reasoning from the famous axiom1 sicut se habet simpliciter ad simpliciter1 ita magis ad magis1 that to a duplicate gravity1 there would correspond a duplicate acceleration of motion4 ,but the fact differs widely from this proportion4 ,,xxv4 ,it is plain1 that air is much more subtle and thin than water4 ,who from hence1 would not infer as an unavoidable consequence1 that air must penetrate all bodies which water penetrates8 ,notwithstanding this1 we see that water penetrates paper1 which air does not penetrate1 or it penetrates it in so small a degree1 or so slowly1 that we look upon it as next to no penetration at all4 ,,xxvi4 ,who judging by general or common principles1 would not conclude1 that wet hay was much less liable to take fire than dry8 ,but experience teaches us1 that by putting together quantities of hay too moist1 it will take fire of itself1 which could never have happened1 if the hay had been put together sufficiently dry1 or more thoroughly made4 ,,xxvii4 ,what maxim is better established1 or more generally assented to among the naturalists1 than that a vivifying heat of the blood1 is indispensably necessary for the preservation of life8 ,but with all this1 ,father ,plumier1 a learned priest of the order of ,minimus1 in a voyage in the ,pacific ocean1 for want of water1 found himself under a necessity of drinking the blood of turtles1 and declares1 he found it as cold as the common water in ,europe4 7,mem4 de ,trevoux1 an4 #agjd1 tom4 #a4 page #age47 ,who1 agreeable to the laws of ratiocination1 can say otherwise1 than that the third quality1 resulting from the mixing three or four ftid things together1 must be ftid also8 ,but experience manifests to us1 that this consequence is not infallible4 ,mr4 ,lemeri bought a certain quantity of the gums galbanum1 sagapenum1 and opopanax1 and also some bitumen of ,juda1 which he put all together into a retort1 and found that there resulted from the mixtures1 a strongly scented oil1 greatly resembling musk2 now the bitumen in smell1 does not in the least resemble musk1 and the other three drugs are absolutely ftid4 7,hist4 de l',academ4 ,royal1 ann4 #agjf47 ,,xxviii4 ,if a philosopher1 destitute of all other information1 except that which he had acquired in the schools1 should be told that two liquids1 which to the touch appear cold1 should upon being mixed together1 not only heat and boil1 but also emit a flame2 he would be in a terrible agitation1 and armed with his infallible conclusive principle1 that nothing can communicate a quality which it does not possess1 would exclaim against the proposition4 ,but let him exclaim as much as he will1 it is a certain fact1 that from mixing a pure acid1 with the essential oil of an aromatic plant1 there will result that commotion4 ,,xxix4 ,we know that water1 is much heavier than air2 and we also know1 that the vapours which arise from the earth1 are nothing else but particles of water1 very minutely divided1 and consequently1 that they must be much heavier than particles of air of the same size4 ,we know also1 that a liquid cannot ascend above another1 when they are put together1 except when it's particles of equal size are lighter than those of the other4 ,from these premises1 it should follow as an infallible consequence1 that these vapours cannot rise superior to the air we breathe4 ,but let this consequence appear ever so infallible1 experience convinces us that the fact is otherwise4 ,,xxx4 ,nobody is ignorant1 that the aromatic species1 such as the clove1 the pimienta1 and the cinnamon1 are hot or heating1 and that the regions nearest the poles are cold1 and those nearest the equinoctial hot4 ,from these premises1 what naturalist would not infer1 that the use of these species would be less pernicious to the inhabitants of the cold regions1 than to those of the hot8 ,but experience is ever demonstrating to us the contrary4 ,for a scruple of clove is more offensive to1 and has a greater effect on the first1 than a drachm has on the last4 ,,xxxi4 ,and similar to this1 has been the experience of the ,hollanders1 in some of their voyages to the ,east ,indies4 ,it happened once1 that upon passing the line1 the greatest part of the people belonging to a ship were taken sick1 and that more than half of them died1 and that those only recovered1 to whom in their sickness they gave great quantities of brandy4 ,the medical men found great difficulty in believing1 that these people could owe the preservation of their lives to drinking to excess of a liquor1 which if not taken sparingly and with moderation1 is found to be very pernicious to health4 ,but in the end1 they found themselves obliged to yield to experience2 and admit of the liberal use of brandy1 which afterwards delivered with equal success1 all the afflicted from their illness4 ,,xxxii4 ,it is then absolutely necessary to submit to experience1 and if we are not disposed to abandon the real road of truth1 to seek for nature in herself1 and not in the deceitful image which our fancy forms of her4 ,,sect4 ,,viii4 ,,xxxiii4 ,i am not ignorant that there are some schoolmen1 who represent the application to experiments1 as disgraceful to1 and beneath the dignity of philosophy4 ,but this is a most absurd error1 for at this rate1 studying the imaginations of men1 would be a more honourable occupation1 than ruminating on the works of ,god4 ,in books of theory1 we contemplate human ideas2 in natural entities1 divine ones4 ,let reason now determine1 which is the most noble study4 ,,xxxiv4 ,the prince of philosophers1 ,aristotle1 thought differently in this respect to the present school ones1 for he said1 we should not disdain to examine with our senses1 the most trifling works of nature1 for that we should find in them all1 marks of sublime wisdom1 and just and beautiful ingenuity3 ,aggredi enim quque sine ullo pudore debemus1 cum in omnibus natur numen1 et honesium1 pulchrumque insit ingenium4 ,for so it is1 that in the most humble plant1 in the most vile insect1 and in the most rude rock1 we see the traces of an omnipotent hand1 and the marks of infinite wisdom4 ,,xxxv4 ,besides this1 it is a matter of great importance to him who is in search of truth1 to chuse the path that leads directly on to his object1 and not to pursue that which will conduct him out of his way1 although it should to the eye1 appear the most desirable1 and the most pleasant to walk through4 ,there is no doubt1 that a physician in a college1 mounted in a professional chair1 and reading a lecture1 makes a more pompous figure1 than when he is attending to1 and observing the dissection of a dead body in an hospital2 but it is by attending to the dissection1 that he attains a knowledge of the situation and arrangement of the internal parts of the body1 which he could never have acquired1 by reasoning or disputing all his life long in a school4 ,ideal gold1 is possessed in imagination by lazy people1 who while they are sleeping in their beds1 dream it is showered down on them2 but the true ore1 can only be acquired by force of labour1 and digging in the mines with diligence and industry4 ,and in no other manner1 otherwise than in appearance only1 can we attain more1 than that shadow of truth1 which we call probability1 for these are the largest advances we can make1 by the force of our imaginations exerted in the retirements of the closet2 and the truth itself1 is only to be found by scrutinizing sensible objects1 and searching in them1 for the hidden secrets of nature4 ,,sect4 ,,ix4 ,,xxxvi4 ,there is another objection to experimental observations1 which is not more reasonable1 or better founded than that we have just mentioned1 which is made by some superficial schoolmen1 who say1 that these sort of enquiries1 do not require reason and perspicuity1 but only eye-sight1 diligence1 and memory2 on which account they condemn them1 as things not well calculated for the exertion of invention1 and ingenuity4 ,but how little do these people know of the nature of those physical experiments1 or of the manner in which they are made1 which have employed the attention of so many learned and sublime spirits1 of ,france1 ,italy1 ,england1 and ,germany4 ,in order to discover whether any deceitful appearance has crept in1 they repeat every experiment many times over2 and invent many ingenious methods of examination1 to find out1 whether the phenomenon proceeded from that cause1 which at first sight it seemed to be derived from1 or whether it was the effect of some accidental1 or occult one4 ,they make exact and nice combinations of their experiments1 and invent ingenious methods of comparing them one with another1 and then weigh in a most delicate balance1 both the analogies1 and the differences between them1 in order to derive with almost mathematical certainty1 the consequences to be deduced from them2 and they peep into those crevices of nature that are nearly imperceptible1 that they may discern through them1 her inmost secrets2 and ,i beyond comparison1 find more delicate ingenuity1 and more perspicuity1 in many of the experiments of the famous ,boyle1 than ,i do in all the abstractions1 and reduplications1 of the most subtle metaphysicians4 ,,sect4 ,x4 ,,xxxvii4 ,it is certainly and indispensably necessary1 to make experimental observations with the most exquisite attention1 in order to avoid our being deceived by them1 as our forefathers have been1 and as many people are at this day2 who1 confiding in a superficial and careless experiment1 have precipitated their conclusions1 and without giving themselves time to reflect1 have deduced consequences1 from the first information of their senses4 ,from the ascent of the water in the pump1 by considering the thing inattentively1 was inferred the repugnance of nature to a vacuum4 ,to what labours did ,torrizeli1 ,pascal1 and other sublime geniuses submit1 what a variety of experiments did they make1 and with what ingenuity did they combine and compare them1 in order to undeceive the world1 and convince mankind1 that the true cause of this phenomenon was the weight of the air6 ,,xxxviii4 ,from the flame flying upwards1 was inferred the chimerical region of fire1 immediately adjoining to the heaven of the moon4 ,in our essay on ,physical ,paradoxes1 we related the ingenious experiment with which my ,lord ,bacon proved1 that the flame did not ascend from any natural propensity it had to fly upwards1 but because it was compelled to it1 by the lateral pressure of the air4 ,,xxxix4 ,i was once in conversation with some school philosophers1 and our discourse happening to turn upon physical matters1 ,i took occasion to propose a question to them1 which was1 whether cold water 7and the same may be said of every other liquid7 was more subtil and penetrating than hot1 which it seemed evidently to be1 by the following experiment1 that when we poured iced water to drink in summer time into a glass1 we perceived the glass wet and moist on the outside1 which had the appearance of the water having transuded through the pores of the glass2 and as this did not happen when the water was luke warm1 or in a temperate state1 it was inferred that such water1 was not so subtil and thin as cold4 ,as the bystanders seemed converts to the force of the before-named experiment1 it gave me a good deal of trouble1 to undeceive and convince them of their mistake1 although at length ,i accomplished doing it1 by making it evident to them by various most clear experiments1 that the moisture which adhered to the outside of the glass1 did not transude through its pores1 but that it consisted of the coagulated vapours1 of the circumambient air1 which being in a warm state1 condensed and were converted into water1 upon their coming in contact with any very cold body1 and that they became more condensed the less porous this body was4 ,for this reason1 the vapours that are raised by fire1 condense as soon as they come to the head of the alembick2 and for the same1 if we breathe upon a bright iron bar1 or any other metallic body1 that has a smooth or polished surface1 and is very cold1 the vapour we breathe from our mouths1 when it comes in contact with that body1 will condense1 and adhere to it2 and it is also for the same reason1 that in frosty nights1 we see the inside of the glass of windows moist1 when they are dry without1 which appearance1 ,i have known surprise many people1 who thought that that humidity was a portion of the external air1 which had penetrated through the glass2 and it is likewise for the same reason1 that our breath1 and the breath of other animals1 is visible in cold weather1 it being then sufficiently condensed by the circumambient air1 to make it become apparent4 ,but the most convincing argument ,i made use of in the dispute1 and which ,i advanced as a conclusive one1 was1 that if you covered the exterior superficies of the glass with paper1 there would not the least moisture adhere to it1 in the whole course of a frosty night1 and it is clear that the paper is not impenetrable to moisture1 but can only prevent the external air1 from coming immediately in contact with the glass4 ,,xl4 ,as it relates to the subject of the impenetrability of glass by liquids1 ,i cannot forbear in this place taking notice of another very common error1 which has originated from drawing conclusions hastily from experiments1 without making proper reflexions on them4 ,it is generally believed1 that the zest of the rind of a lemon penetrates through glass1 which opinion is founded on the persuasion1 that if you press out the zest on the outside of a glass1 the liquor that is within will taste of it4 ,i concluding this penetration to be impossible1 after meditating upon the matter1 easily discovered the cause of this error2 which is as follows1 upon pressing out the zest1 some of the particles are apt to fly and rest on the edges of the glass or very near it1 and adhere to that part1 which in drinking the lip is applied to2 and thus the palate perceives the taste of the zest1 which is communicated to it1 from the edge of the glass4 ,to determine whether this was not the case1 ,i squeezed some of the zest in the ordinary way against the outside of the glass1 and then turning it half round1 applied my lips to the opposite side1 and did not perceive the least taste or flavour of the zest of the lemon4 ,and it will happen the same to any one1 who will give himself the trouble to make the same experiment4 ,,sect4 ,,xi4 ,,xli4 ,the evidence of our senses alone1 then1 is not sufficient to enable us to derive just conclusions from experiments2 for caution1 reflection1 judgement1 and reason1 are always necessary2 and sometimes in so great a degree1 that all the exertion of human talents and ingenuity1 is not equal to an adequate examination of the phenomena4 ,sir ,isaac ,newton1 an ,englishman1 who was a genius of the first rate1 and a member of the ,royal ,society of ,london1 in the beginning of the present century1 published various tracts upon optics1 in which1 he displayed a great novelty to the philosophers and mathematicians2 that is1 that all colours exist and are contained1 actually and formally1 in the rays of light2 which are constituted of heterogeneous particles1 of unequal refrangibility4 ,he proved this singular opinion1 with many experiments of exquisite invention1 contrived and considered1 with no less exquisite delicacy1 and in fact1 made more than a few converts to his opinion in many parts1 but more especially among the ,english mathematicians2 and a ,mr4 ,gauger who was one of these1 enforced the ,newtonian doctrine1 with a great number of additional experiments2 but in a short time1 one ,senor ,rizetti1 wrote against this new system1 and stated many experiments in favour of the old opinion1 and even pretended1 that those which had been quoted by ,gauger1 militated against the ,newtonian sentiment4 ,gauger replied to this1 and paid ,rizetti in his own coin2 that is1 he not only defended the consequences which he deduced from his own experiments1 but turned those derived from the experiments of ,rizetti against the doctrine of the ,italian4 ,it is certain that experience1 as applied to many objects1 opens a most extensive and fertile field for exercising the ingenuity of man1 and that nature1 even to him who seeks to know her in that way1 is in various instances impenetrable and inaccessible4 ,,xlii4 ,but we should acknowledge that in general1 the difficulties are not so invincible1 as not to be surmounted by reason and industry1 and that the deceptions which sometimes result from experiments1 proceed either from the want of proper diligence and attention in making them1 or from the want of adequate ingenuity1 to judge of1 and decide upon them4 ,,xliii4 ,this is very frequently the case with respect to medicinal observations2 and from hence springs that enormous disagreement1 with respect to the opinions that are alledged to be founded upon them4 ,one says1 that he has experienced the efficacy and salutary fruits1 of such a medicine1 in such a disease2 and another insists1 that he has administered the same medicine1 in the same disease1 and under the same circumstances1 and found it to be pernicious4 ,one of the two must be mistaken1 and ,i believe it is not very uncommon for both of them to be so2 for it might possibly happen1 that the medicine neither did good nor harm1 and that the administration of it1 was a mere matter of indifference1 and the thing itself what we call a chip in porridge4 ,but from what could this difference of sentiment and assertion arise8 ,why from one of them seeing that his patient1 after administering the medicine to him grew better1 and from the other perceiving1 that his after taking it grew worse2 although it might possibly happen1 that neither the one grew better1 nor the other grew worse in consequence of taking the medicine1 but from a very different cause4 ,the diseases of the two patients1 from their different constitutions1 or internal temperaments1 7which is for the most part1 a thing impenetrable to physicians7 might be in such a state1 that the one was disposed to abate1 and the other to increase4 ,,xliv4 ,and although the patients may be numerous1 with respect to whom this experience is alledged2 and admitting that they neither all die1 nor all recover1 every one according to his pre-occupation1 will impute to the remedy1 either the happiness of those who did well1 or the misfortune of those who perished2 and unless they shall resolve1 to make a computation of the good or bad success of the practice of those who use that medicine1 with that of those who never administer it1 and compare them carefully together1 this doubt will probably never be cleared up4 ,,sect4 ,,xii4 ,,xlv4 ,this inattention1 is without doubt what produces1 and what keeps up in the world1 men's estimation for an infinite number of useless things1 on which they bestow the noble epithet of remedies2 and this false notion1 has filled the medical books and the apothecaries shops1 with an infinite deal of trash1 the reading of which fatigues the memory2 and the taking of which1 ruins the health and constitution of the patient4 ,you will find accumulated in them1 a great number of remedies for slight diseases1 which if left to nature1 would cure themselves2 and although all practitioners do not approve of the same remedy for the same disorder2 does this prove1 that the patient of each got better by taking this or that thing8 ,i say does this prove it8 for neither the imprudent sick person1 nor those about him1 hardly ever reflect1 that there were many others besides him1 who were affected with the same disorder1 and who without taking any medicine at all1 recovered as well1 and as quickly as he did8 ,,xlvi4 ,a benign or favourable sort of catarrh1 as is very frequently the case1 becomes epidemical in a city2 for which1 some call-in the doctor and take medicines1 and others do not2 and such is the blindness of those who have had advice as it is called1 that they believe they owe the recovery of their health to the doctor1 although they evidently see1 that all those recovered as well as they1 who had no advice1 and who took no physic4 ,,xlvii4 ,the delicate fine lady1 who whenever she feels a slight pain in her head1 sends for the doctor1 is fully persuaded1 although the pain continues for the space of twenty or thirty days1 that the capital pills he prescribed for her1 removed it2 but it does not occur to the poor lady1 that many of her friends and neighbours1 who at times have the same sort of pains in their heads1 and who take nothing for them1 get well as soon1 and frequently sooner1 than she with the help of all her pills4 ,,xlviii4 ,it is very common for those who have pains in their teeth and jaws1 7and ,i say the same of all those affections which come and go of themselves17 to fancy1 and give the preference to a particular remedy1 which they are of opinion relieved them2 but it is proper to observe here1 that every one applauds his own1 and reprobates as insignificant1 that which is used by other people4 ,from whence does this arise8 some will say1 that as peoples temperaments are different1 it may happen1 that in the same species of complaint1 the remedy which does good to one man1 may have no effect on another2 but this is a common and inefficient evasion1 and such a one1 as overturns and levels to the ground1 the use of all medicinal applications2 for if this was the case1 as all individuals have distinct temperaments1 no less than distinct faces1 it would be necessary to contrive a distinct medicine for every single individual1 and in all his disorders1 to apply particular remedies1 different from those1 which in the same species of complaints1 should be administered to every other person4 ,,xlix4 ,the cause then of this opposition of sentiments1 is most probably as follows4 ,the first time a man is attacked with a pain in his teeth or jaws1 it is very common for him to make use of various applications1 for besides those which are ordered by the doctor1 all those who have felt the same pain1 recommend1 some one thing1 and some another2 and as the sensation is acute1 the poor patient anxious to be relieved1 proceeds in succession1 to apply all those remedies1 at length1 perhaps at the end of eight1 ten1 or fifteen days1 the pain abates2 and as there is not one of those days1 in which the patient has not made use of one or other of these receipts1 happy is that which he used the last2 for to that he attributes his relief1 and reprobates all the others as insignificant4 ,another diseased person1 proceeds to take his medicines in regular order2 but the course of this regulation1 frequently depends upon the casual concurrence in opinion of the people who are consulted1 or the power that one of them has of prevailing over1 and leading the rest2 from whence it frequently happens1 that this man of persuasive eloquence1 advises the using a medicine in the first instance1 which some other practitioner might think it advisable to administer last4 ,the result of which is1 that in case the patient does well1 his recovery is imputed to the application of the last remedy2 and hence it comes to pass1 that one reprobates a medicine which another applauds1 and so vice versa4 ,thus all the reputation the remedy acquires1 be it what it may1 depends upon the casual application of it1 just at the time nature was disposed to terminate the disorder by a favourable crisis1 and hence it is1 that the relief came to be attributed to the medicine4 ,and notwithstanding that afterwards1 upon another occasion1 by using the same medicine in the first attacks of the same complaint1 they did not experience the same effects from it2 still the same prepossession is continued in its favour1 that was formed on its supposed success on the first trial2 and although the patient1 did not find himself better for several days after taking it in this last instance1 they persisted in imputing his recovery to the favourite receipt1 and in thinking that without the assistance of it1 the disease would have been more tedious1 and more severe4 ,nor is it of any avail to remove this prejudice1 their seeing that others1 who neither make use of that or any other remedy1 do not suffer more prolix1 or more acute pain than those who apply it2 for although they see they will not perceive it2 and if they do perceive it1 they will not attend to or acknowledge it4 ,,sect4 ,,xiii4 ,l4 ,there is a certain delusion1 that is very fortunate for the apothecaries1 and very fatal to the sick1 that is derived from a persuasion in many of these last1 that their diseases would be eternal1 or incurable1 without the help of medicine2 although they see every day1 others cured of the same diseases1 without this aid2 and although the disorder was of so slight a sort1 that all those who did nothing but leave nature to itself1 recovered from it1 he who called in a physician1 upon his getting well1 thanked the doctor for his cure1 when in reality1 he perhaps did nothing but delay it4 ,i protest that when catarrhs have been epidemical1 ,i have in various instances observed1 that they lasted as long with those who took medicines1 as they did with those who took none2 and the only difference that ,i could perceive between them was1 that the last recovered their natural state of robustness as soon as the catarrh left them2 and that those who had taken physic1 did not recover it till several days afterwards4 ,,li4 ,there is another mistake said to be built upon experience1 under the deception of which1 many shelter themselves1 and pretend1 in opposition to those who differ from them in opinion1 to justify the necessity of plentiful evacuations4 ,the rigid ,helmonists1 or sectaries of ,van ,helmont1 reprobate as prejudicial1 purging and bleeding1 in every case whatever2 and in opposition to this doctrine1 is urged the common experience1 deduced from the cases of an infinite number of patients1 who have been purged and blooded1 and have all done well2 and that there have been some weeks in sickly times1 in which one physician has ordered a hundred patients to be purged1 and as many to be blooded1 and that not one of them has died4 ,how then in opposition to this experience1 say the ,galenists1 can any one pretend to insist1 that bleeding and purging do harm8 ,,lii4 ,i do not undertake to defend the ,helmonists1 nor do ,i consider their opinion1 as more probable than the contrary one2 but ,i say1 that from the experience alledged1 nothing can be concluded to their prejudice4 ,we should suppose1 that those who exclaim against purging and bleeding1 do not think them so pernicious1 as to be fatal to all those who undergo these operations2 for even supposing them to be injurious1 they are not capable of destroying a man in perfect health1 nor one that is visited by a slight disorder4 ,i believe1 that although an intemperate use of them kills many1 they are chiefly those who are affected with some obstinate disease2 for in these cases1 when nature is much weakened by struggling with a powerful disorder1 if you add a fresh enemy for her to encounter in the imagined remedy1 you compleat her overthrow1 and lay her prostrate on the earth4 ,but those who are affected with a disease that is not dangerous1 7and there are many of this sort1 which in appearance seem violent ones17 generally preserve a sufficient degree of strength1 to resist both the distemper1 and some unnecessary bleedings and purgings2 and although these may weaken the natural faculties1 and retard the cure1 they very seldom are known to deprive the patient of life4 ,,liii4 ,that the number of mild disorders1 greatly exceeds that of the dangerous ones1 is very plain and certain2 what then can we find extraordinary1 in those who are attacked with the first sort getting well1 notwithstanding they may have been injudiciously purged and blooded8 out of a hundred patients that a physician visits in a week1 seldom more than one or two of them labour under dangerous disorders4 ,it is customary with many people to send for the doctor1 upon being attacked with a slight inflammation1 a catarrh1 an ephemeris or fever of a day1 a fluxion of the eyes1 a repletion of the stomach1 and such kind of indispositions2 and if he happens to be one of the common or vulgar sort1 he seldom fails to purge and bleed4 ,but admitting that the purging and bleeding were never so improperly administered1 does it follow from thence1 that the patient must die8 ,or why should this be an unavoidable consequence1 if in the same situation1 he had been stabbed with a poignard that had not penetrated very deep1 or that had not wounded a vital part1 he would have escaped with his life8 ,,liv4 ,as ,i observed before1 ,i am neither a partizan of the ,helmonists1 nor a favourer of the ,galenists2 but ,i look upon it as a thing certain1 that an intemperate use of purging and bleeding1 has destroyed many men1 and especially1 if administered when nature is much weakened2 notwithstanding which1 ,i am persuaded that they are serviceable in many cases4 ,whether they are absolutely necessary1 and whether patients could not do well1 if other remedies were substituted in their places1 is a point ,i will not take upon me to determine2 and especially1 when ,i have fresh in my memory1 the declaration of a physician1 whose authority has great weight with me4 ,this is ,lucas ,tozzi1 a famous ,italian physician1 who in his exposition of the third aphorism of the first book of ,hippocrates1 ,habitus ,athletarum1 c4 after combating and controverting the usefulness of bleeding1 with seemingly very efficacious and persuasive reasoning1 he asserts1 and offers to prove1 that it is not necessary in any one of the diseases1 in which the ,galenists insist it cannot be dispensed with2 and in answer to the experience they alledge of its utility1 he quotes his own2 and says1 if they appeal to experience1 and insist that it is evident from thence1 that many people have been cured of various disorders by blood-letting2 ,i reply1 that in the hospital of the ,anunciada at ,naples1 where ,i have officiated as physician many years1 ,i have cured in a short space of time1 and without taking from them one drop of blood1 hundreds and thousands of patients1 who have been attacked with some one or other of the following disorders1 frensies1 pleurisies1 quinsies1 inflammations of the liver1 spitting of blood1 erysipelases1 and all kinds of fevers4 ,,lv4 ,what shall we say to this8 ,lucas ,tozzi was not only a great theorist1 but also a most expert1 successful1 and much esteemed practitioner1 and as such1 his advice was solicited with anxiety by people of the first rank4 ,if he without bleeding cured all those disorders1 which in the common opinion stand most in need of that evacuation1 and not only cured them1 but did it in a short time1 what diseases must they be which cannot be cured without blood-letting8 ,,lvi4 ,and it is very remarkable1 that in the same manner the ,galenists endeavour to deduce from experience the necessity of blood-letting in many diseases1 they endeavour also to establish the preference1 that should be given to drawing blood in particular disorders1 from particular veins1 such as the hepatic1 and cephalic4 ,anatomy however1 makes it as clear as the sun at noon-day1 that this preference is not grounded on any solid foundation1 and that the cephalic vein bears no more relation to1 nor is any more connected with the head1 than the hepatic1 nor the hepatic with the liver1 than the cephalic2 and that all the veins of the same arm1 communicate indifferently with all parts of the body1 as the laws of circulation demonstrate2 and as that observation which was pretended to be derived from experience1 was founded in mistake1 it is not improbable1 that that which is generally alledged in favour of bleeding1 may be so likewise4 ,,lvii4 ,what appears to me is1 that the rule so much cried up by the ,galenists1 and which establishes the necessity of bleeding1 in pleurisies1 is liable to so many exceptions1 that we ought not to regard it as a general one2 and we have observed in another part of our works1 that in some epidemical pleurisies1 it has been found to be evidently injurious4 ,it is but a little while ago1 that a learned ,french physician1 whose works are mentioned in the ,memoirs of ,trevoux1 wrote strongly against bleeding in winter pleurisies and peripneumonies2 and his reasoning had great weight with some eminent physicians of ,paris4 ,i can certify1 that in the last winter #agca1 when many people were attacked with pleurisies in this country1 it was generally remarked1 and we received informations to the same effect from all quarters1 that those who were blooded died1 and that those who were not did well4 ,,lviii4 ,i would have it understood1 that ,i wish all ,i have said1 with respect to the utility or inutility of purging and bleeding in general1 should be considered as the sentiments of a man1 who takes no side in the dispute1 but who proposes what he advances problematically1 and with a view of convincing the world1 that in order to avoid being misled1 they should examine with great attention and exactness1 any observation that is alledged to be founded on experience1 for this is the principal object ,i had in view1 in writing this discourse4 ,,lix4 ,it would argue weakness and want of judgment1 for any one to esteem a thing as a remedy for a particular disease1 without reflecting and making a remark1 the propriety of which must stare every man in the face1 and that is1 comparing the success of the practice of those who use that medicine1 with that of those who do not make use of it4 ,there have been physicians1 who have declared themselves enemies to the administration of the bark2 but notwithstanding this1 there is no body at this day1 who disputes its febrifuge efficacy in intermittent cases2 for experience shews1 that it will stop the fit1 although it may return again afterwards1 and although in the opinion of some people1 the medicine may leave some bad impression on the body4 ,if purging and bleeding would have the same effect1 in some sort of fevers1 we should all agree in attributing to them a febrifuge virtue2 notwithstanding that some practitioners1 might give the preference to other remedies1 as more safe1 and better adapted4 ,but this is so far from being the case with respect to these evacuations1 that their efficacy of removing fevers1 is at this day strongly contested1 for experience has not yet manifested1 that they are remedies for these disorders1 in any degree or manner1 that is not exceedingly doubtful or disputable4 ,,sect4 ,,xiv4 ,,lx4 ,as far as the nature of the case will permit us 7for all things are not capable of being mathematically or decisively demonstrated71 we should endeavour to discover the truth1 by imitating the diligence and attention which many ,english physicians exercised1 in examining into the eligibility of the precautionary remedy called inoculation1 practised by the ,turks1 to elude the fatal effects of the small-pox4 ,this is a subject1 that has been much talked on in other kingdoms for some years2 although in ,spain we have hardly heard it mentioned4 ,the event of communicating the infection in this way1 most generally is1 that the person inoculated has the distemper very lightly1 and is hardly ever obliged through the whole course of the disease1 to keep his bed4 ,,lxi4 ,the account of this precautionary method1 was brought to ,england by one ,maitland1 who was surgeon to ,mr4 ,wortley ,mountague1 his ,britannic majesty's ambassador at the ,porte1 and was from thence communicated to the other nations of ,europe4 ,maitland had observed1 that this practice was almost universal in all the cities of the ,levant1 and that it was attended with wonderful success4 ,he communicated these remarks to ,mr4 and ,mrs4 ,mountague1 and they had fortitude enough1 upon the faith of what he had told them1 to make the experiment upon a son they had with them of six years old1 which being attended with success1 they repeated it upon another of their children when they returned to ,england4 ,many were animated with these examples and these accounts2 and the practice of inoculation1 began to be much approved1 and much adopted in ,england1 notwithstanding it was greatly opposed1 and objected to by some people there1 and by many in other countries2 and especially by the physicians of ,paris1 who exclaimed strongly against it4 ,,lxii4 ,but as this contest was such a one1 as ought not to be determined by speculative reasoning1 an appeal was made to experience1 which appeal1 was prosecuted in such a manner by those who were advocates for the practice1 as seemed to exclude all doubt and perplexity4 ,physicians who resided in different parts of the kingdom1 were requested to give accounts of the success of their practice by this method1 and to transmit them to ,london1 which when received1 were printed and published4 ,by these accounts1 two facts were established2 the first was1 that inoculation freed the patient from the danger of a second infection2 and the second was1 that those to whom the small-pox was communicated in this way1 very rarely died2 and although it is true that some few of them miscarried1 they were mostly such1 as were afflicted with some other disorder at the time of their inoculation1 of which they would have died1 if they had not had the small-pox2 but these altogether1 did not amount to but very little more than a tenth part of those1 who perished by catching it in the natural way2 for by the best calculation they could make1 one out of eight died of the last1 and not above one in eighty of the first4 ,,lxiii4 ,this is the account ,i have read of this matter in the ,memoirs of ,trevoux2 to which some may object1 that it is possible the relations of the cases1 were not published so faithfully as they were received4 ,to this ,i answer1 that it is probable great pains were taken in making the enquiries1 and great fidelity observed in publishing the accounts1 as the ,memoirs of ,trevoux tell us1 that upon the strength of their authority1 some of the royal family of ,england were inoculated4 ,,lxiv4 ,and let it not be insisted in opposition to this1 that if the fact had been so well established1 it could have admitted of no contradiction4 ,they know little of the human passions1 who think this remark a solid one4 ,those who contradict1 either through blind prepossession1 or from motives of emulation1 interest1 or envy1 seldom submit1 or will own themselves convinced by proofs that are self-evident2 nor is there any species of evidence1 that can bar every door1 at which a false subterfuge may steal in1 nor against the intrusion of a thousand sophistical objections1 introduced by those1 who are under the dominion of the beforenamed passions4 ,i speak feelingly of this matter1 having had woeful experience of the truth of what ,i assert1 since ,i first began to write for the public4 ,,lxv4 ,in reality1 some of the objections that were made to inoculation1 were the most ridiculous in the world4 ,some rigid ,presbyterians1 made the cause of religion interested in the question1 and asserted1 that that practice1 was an affront to the sovereignty1 and an opposition to the decrees of ,god2 and one of them declared in his preaching1 that it was a diabolical invention1 for the devil by inoculation had communicated the small-pox to ,job1 which was the distemper that so sorely afflicted that holy ,patriarch4 ,into what absurdities1 does a violent ardour hurry a man in a controversy6 ,of all sensible human beings1 there are none so nearly allied to mad men1 as passionate disputants4 ,,lxvi4 ,towards the conclusion of this virulent contest1 a very curious circumstance came to light1 which was1 that this precautionary method which had made so much noise1 and which had generally been supposed to have been brought from ,turkey1 had for ages before1 been in use in the island of ,great ,britain itself2 for that it had been practised from time immemorial1 in the southern parts of the principality of ,wales1 where they communicated the infection in two ways either by rubbing some of the variolous matter hard on the skin of the person to whom the distemper was to be given1 or else by dipping a needle into that matter1 and pricking his skin with it2 and as they gave the person from whom the matter was taken a small sum of money1 this was called buying the small pox2 and they produce very authentic testimonies1 that scarce any one of those who came by the distemper in this manner died1 and that there was no instance of a person who had acquired the disease in this way1 ever having had it a second time4 ,,sect4 ,,xv4 ,,lxvii4 ,we shall conclude this discourse1 by pointing out three capital errors1 which are derived from want of proper attention in making experiments4 ,the first is1 that of taking for the effect1 what in reality is the cause1 and taking for the cause1 what is nothing more than the effect4 ,the second consists in taking for the cause1 something that comes in by accident1 and which has no influence whatever4 ,the third consists1 in between two effects proceeding from one and the same cause1 taking one of them for the cause of the other4 ,i shall give examples of these three errors1 in observations appertaining to medicine1 which are said to be derived from experience1 because mistakes in this branch1 are generally attended with worse consequences1 than those in other ordinary physical matters4 ,,lxviii4 ,it happens1 that a man feels an ardent and extraordinary thirst upon himself1 without being able to assign any apparent cause of it2 he drinks water to great excess1 and in a few hours is seized with a fever1 or an acrid fluxion4 ,it is common in such cases1 to attribute the indisposition to the excessive drinking of water1 and to apprehend1 that was the cause of the disease2 but this was so far from being the case1 that the indisposition was rather the cause of his drinking to that excess4 ,but ,i would have it observed1 that ,i speak of an instance1 in which the thirst was not brought on by any manifest or apparent cause1 such as the having used any violent exercise1 or having been exposed to some great heat1 either of the sun or fire1 or having been a long time without drinking1 or having eaten something very salt4 ,i say that agreeable to this state of the case1 it is very clear1 that the thirst must have arisen from some internal cause2 but the question is1 from what cause8 ,why it could be from no other1 than a morbific disposition1 that had begun to prevail within his body2 or let us express it in another manner1 and say1 that it proceeded from an acrid or salt humour1 which had just begun to get in motion1 and by vellicating the fibres that produce the sensation of thirst1 had by that means excited it4 ,every preternatural and extraordinary effect1 demands a preternatural and extraordinary cause to occasion it2 and if we suppose that the thirst was such an effect1 and we cannot assign any external cause to which we can attribute it2 we must conclude that it proceeded from some preternatural internal cause2 which in all probability1 must be the morbific disposition4 ,,lxix4 ,the want of this reflection1 occasions great errors to be committed in physic1 for by running counter to the course of nature1 you must unavoidably mistake the road that leads to the cure4 ,the consequence of mistaking the effect for the cause1 is administering as a medicine1 what in reality is poison2 for it is clear1 that if the physician apprehends the humidity and coldness of the water to be the cause of the distemper1 when in truth it was produced by the acrid1 salt1 peccant1 or inflammatory humour1 ,i say if this should happen to be the case1 and he calculates his prescriptions to correct the humidity and coldness1 he by so doing1 will inflame and increase the original disorder4 ,,lxx4 ,this species of error1 is not confined to the case we have instanced1 but is capable of being extended to a vast expanse4 ,i am much inclined to think1 that all the extraordinary and vehement emotions1 both of the irascible1 and libidinous kind1 which precede distempers a small distance of time before they make their appearance1 and for which you can assign no special external cause1 are the effects of those distempers1 in their original stages2 ,i mean1 that in the first agitations of such cases as we are speaking of1 a person is apt to fall into violent passions upon very slight provocations1 such as he knows by his own experience1 were never used to agitate or have that effect on him1 and either immediately1 or within a few hours afterwards1 he is seized with a fever4 ,people are apt to suppose1 that the passion was the cause of the disease2 but ,i say1 that the disease occasioned the anger2 for if this man1 agreeable to his natural disposition1 was never subject to such violent starts of passion1 upon such1 or even greater provocations1 it necessarily follows1 that that which he experienced upon this occasion1 must have been the effect of some preternatural internal cause1 which lay concealed within him1 most probably the first fermentative movements of the peccant humour1 which soon afterwards produced a fever4 ,in reality1 it is easy for any one to perceive1 and ,i have remarked it many times both with respect to myself and others1 that the irascible passion1 is much more apt to be inflamed upon slight occasions1 in those first stages1 or almost insensible beginnings of such indispositions as tend to be somewhat serious1 than at other times4 ,,lxxi4 ,i do not however deny1 that the ardour of passion may excite a fever2 for this without doubt1 may have a great share in producing such an effect1 and we may reasonably suppose that it has1 and especially in such people as are of a choleric disposition2 but when this is not the case1 we should rather suppose1 that the passion tended to augment the indisposition which followed the sudden fit of anger1 and which would have made its appearance without the intervention of that anger1 although it might have been attended with milder symptoms4 ,and the same we say of anger1 is applicable to sadness and fear also1 for they conformable to the language of the philosophers1 are passions appertaining to the irascible4 ,,lxxii4 ,we may reason in the same general way1 upon the effects of the amorous passion4 ,all vehement desires for ordinary objects1 which frequently present themselves to a man's view1 and which are totally unusual to him1 and for which we cannot assign any special external circumstance that should excite those desires1 we should conclude1 that they proceed from some preternatural internal disposition4 ,the indulgences or gratifications of these extraordinary desires1 are always attended with actions of excess1 to which are generally attributed the indisposition that follows them2 but in truth1 the indisposition which laid concealed1 irritated the appetite1 and was the cause of the excess1 and not the excess of the indisposition4 ,,lxxiii4 ,the following mistake also1 is very frequently fallen into4 ,a person who has always been indifferent about this or that particular food1 we will say lettuces for example1 all of a sudden takes a great fancy for them1 and will eat two or three large ones4 ,if he is afterwards attacked with a pain of the head1 and defluxion upon the breast1 or a diarrha1 the fault is sure to be laid upon the lettuces1 which are accused as the cause of all the mischief2 but in reality1 the mischief had before crept into the constitution1 and had induced the extraordinary desire to eat the lettuces4 ,,lxxiv4 ,i would not however1 be understood to insinuate1 that eating of any thing to excess1 does not frequently occasion or bring on various diseases2 for ,i only mean that my position should be understood to allude to a desire that is vehement1 and unusual to the person1 and for which1 you can assign no visible external cause that should excite it2 for under such circumstances1 there is a necessity for concluding it was owing to some internal cause1 that was sufficiently powerful to merit the name of a morbific disposition2 which is an appellation it could not have deserved1 if the appetite although extraordinary1 had not been excessive4 ,,lxxv4 ,i am confirmed in the truth of the remark ,i have just made1 by the reflexion1 that a diversity of appetites1 must undoubtedly proceed from a diversity or alteration of temperaments2 and it follows of course1 that every alteration in the temperament1 must be attended with an alteration of the appetite4 ,it is easy to discern1 that no sick person1 preserves his appetite in the same even state1 in which it continues when he is in health2 and this not only with respect to the quantity he eats and drinks2 but with respect to the quality of his nourishment also2 nor is this confined to the objects of his palate only1 but extends to those of all his other feelings and inclinations1 both internal and external4 ,,sect4 ,,xvi4 ,,lxxvi4 ,the second capital error committed in making experimental observations1 and which is more common than the first1 is that of mistaking for the cause1 something that intervenes by accident1 and is neither cause nor effect4 ,there is scarce any sick person1 who does not fancy he knows what has been the cause of his disorder1 which he generally imputes to something particular that he has done1 or some alteration he has made in his way of living a little before he was seized with his distemper2 although the thing to which he imputes it1 bears no allusion to1 nor any proportion with the disorder that afflicts him4 ,the having eaten an olive more than it was usual for him to eat1 or having fasted a quarter of an hour longer than his usual time1 or having drunk two spoonfulls more than common1 or abated twenty yards of his ordinary walking1 together with some other particulars1 that are equally trifling and insignificant with those we have mentioned2 but notwithstanding the futility of these observations1 he is apt to impute to such causes the disorder he labours under1 without reflecting1 that this machine of ours1 from the weakness of its own texture1 is sufficiently exposed to its breaks1 ebbings and flowings4 ,the humours of the body1 even when the influence of all external causes1 and every thing that depends on our own free will1 are regulated with perfect uniformity1 are nevertheless exposed to various alterations4 ,the heterogeneous nature of them as they respect one another1 and also considered with respect to every particle of each of them separately1 must necessarily conduce to their being in different states4 ,if those superstitious spirits1 who are such idolaters of their health1 that with respect to their own regimen they would weigh even atoms1 would well consider this1 they would free themselves from the continual anxiety in which they live1 and which is more pernicious to them1 than those very indispositions they are so terrified at1 and which they are at so much pains to escape4 ,,lxxvii4 ,but the most common accusation of all1 is that which charges the weather as the cause of our disorders4 ,he who commits no excesses1 and cannot assign any other cause for his being out of order1 lays the blame upon the weather1 and even he who does commit them1 to avoid criminating himself1 lays the blame on the weather also2 which be it hot1 moist1 dry1 variable1 or settled1 people are never at a loss to find out some pretence whereon to ground the accusation4 ,if in ,july1 as is customary at that season1 we find it very hot1 we say the heat is the cause of our disorders2 but if the weather at that time happens to be more benign and temperate than usual1 they still lay the blame upon it1 alledging that such a temperature of air is not natural to the season4 ,the same sort of charge is brought against the cold in winter1 whether it is intense or moderate4 ,if at that time of the year1 the weather is variable1 there is scarce any one who does not find fault with it2 neither is it exempted from blame if it is settled1 for then they say that change of weather is indispensably necessary to our constitutions2 and that any kind of weather which lasts a long while is hostile to them2 that long cold occasions constipations1 long heat dissolves and weakens us1 long wet suffocates us1 and that long drought burns us up and consumes us4 ,,lxxviii4 ,i have often remarked1 that all our misfortunes are imputed to two common enemies3 our spiritual ones to the ,devil1 and our bodily ones to the weather4 ,there is scarce any one1 who1 in order to extenuate his own guilt1 does not say1 he was tempted by the ,devil to commit the crime he has been guilty of4 ,he is as irrational who thinks1 that if there was no ,devil to tempt us1 we should never sin1 as he is who thinks1 that if the weather was regulated in a most perfect form and order1 we should never be sick4 ,within ourselves1 and in the very essence of our being1 lies the origin of all our ills1 both spiritual and temporal2 and our nature is swayed by its own weight1 towards both the one and the other evil2 although we can never be led into the first without our own consent2 but the other species1 may frequently be brought on us against our will4 ,,sect4 ,,xvii4 ,,lxxix4 ,the third error committed in making experimental observations1 although it is not so common as the two first1 is pretty often incurred4 ,if he for example1 who on account of his having used some violent exercise1 drinks small liquors to excess1 and afterwards finds himself feverish1 imputes his being so1 as is very frequently the case1 to his having drank such liquids to excess2 the generality of men1 seldom reflecting upon any excesses1 but those of the appetite2 but with all this1 violent exercise is much more likely to inflame the blood1 and disturb the humours1 than drinking to excess of small liquids1 and therefore it would be much more rational1 to impute the fever to the violence of the exercise1 than to drinking small liquids to excess4 ,,lxxx4 ,i believe that from the blunder of mistaking two effects of the same cause1 the one for the cause1 and the other for the effect1 arose the opinion1 which is so common among medical people2 that all fluxions wherever they fall1 the gout not excepted1 descend from the head2 and it being very common1 for those who are affected with acrid fluxions that fall on any part of the body1 to feel pains and heaviness in their heads2 ,i suppose that from thence sprung the notion1 that all fluxions originate in1 and are derived from the brain2 but there are not a few modern physicians who are of a contrary sentiment1 and in my opinion they are right4 ,,lxxxi4 ,in the first place1 ,i do not know why the vicious humours1 from whence the matter of fluxions are derived1 should make the grand circuit through the head1 before they fall on any particular part that is at a distance from it2 as they could1 by being mixed with the blood in their circulation through the veins and arteries1 be derived immediately from them1 on any member or part of the body4 ,,lxxxii4 ,secondly1 if such a vast quantity of humour1 as is discharged by some fluxions1 was to be lodged in the brain1 it seems to me that it must render a man quite stupid1 and that organ incapable of exercising any of its functions4 ,,lxxxiii4 ,thirdly1 it is not easy to point out the channel1 through which the humour passes from the interior part of the head4 ,many pretend to say it passes through the ,ethmoides1 or ,os ,criboso2 but ,sneider denies this1 for that you cannot find any cavities or perforations in this bone1 through which those humours could flow1 and especially if they are pituitous and clammy1 as the antients supposed them to be2 and to this we may add1 that this bone is entirely covered or lined by the meninges1 and the interior tunic of the nose4 ,it is true1 as ,doctor ,matinez observes in his treatise on anatomy1 that its upper part is very porous1 and that from thence it came to be called the os criboso1 or spungy bone2 but as these spungy pores do not pervade the whole bone1 and are not pierced through it1 setting aside the obstacle it would meet with from the membranes or tunics that surround it1 the humour could not pass that way4 ,if it is insisted1 that it flows through the nervous ducts1 ,i ask how it comes not to be attended with obstructions1 that must produce dangerous consequences8 ,,lxxxiv4 ,fourthly and lastly1 that through whatever channels you suppose the humour to pass2 how does it happen1 that neither in them1 nor the parts immediately connected with them1 it does not excite any sensations1 but that sore feelings1 are only perceived at the part where it vents itself8 ,is it not totally incredible1 that a very acrid humour derived from the head1 and which flows to the stomach1 to the breast1 to the intestines1 and even to the extremities of the feet1 should produce no sensations in the intermediate parts between the head1 and the place on which it falls8 ,this difficulty1 which occurred to me many years ago1 ,i have often mentioned to medical people1 but never could get any solution of it that was satisfactory to me4 ,,lxxxv4 ,if by way of objection to what ,i have here advanced1 the argument we have mentioned before is urged1 that defluxions on any part of the body are generally attended with a pain in the head2 ,i answer1 that it cannot be inferred from thence1 that the humour descends from the head4 ,in the first place1 for ,i have observed it many times with regard to myself1 these fluxions are often not attended with any pain in the head at all2 and to make the inference just1 they should always be attended with one4 ,secondly1 although a pain in the head should constantly accompany a defluxion1 the objection made would easily be removed1 by saying1 that this appearance is fallacious1 for that both the pain and the defluxion1 are effects of the same cause1 and not one the cause of the other4 ,in fact1 reason tells us this is the case2 for the acrid humour1 which when separated from the mass of blood1 falls on1 and discharges itself at this or that place1 while it continues in the circulation1 has nothing to hinder it from venting some portion of its poison on the head1 and exciting pain there2 and especially1 as it is generally supposed1 the nidus of the humour which flows in defluxions1 is in the glands1 and the brain holds the first place in that class2 for which reason1 ,hippocrates and ,wharton1 call it the great and principal gland4 ,,lxxxvi4 ,if it is replied to this1 that in every defluxion which is somewhat violent1 although we do not feel what may be properly called pain in the head1 we at least perceive a heaviness in it2 which renders that organ unfit for its operation4 ,i confess that this is so1 but to the confession1 shall beg leave to add two remarks4 ,the first is1 that this is not a symptom peculiar to fluxions1 for that the same thing happens in many other disorders2 but the generality of physicians do not conclude from hence1 that those diseases originate in the head4 ,secondly1 neither is this heaviness or inaptitude1 peculiar to the head1 for upon observation1 you will find that fluxions and many other disorders also1 have the same effect upon the other members of the body4 ,whoever is affected with a violent defluxion1 either on the throat1 the breast1 the stomach1 or any other part1 will find that his whole body1 and every member of it1 is more heavy and listless1 than when he is in good health2 and that all his limbs are less fit for action2 and that they all with a very little exercise of them1 become soon tired4 ,thus we have no reason to attribute a heaviness as peculiar to the head1 in the attacks of fluxions1 when we see it is common in those attacks1 to all the other members of the body2 and it has been for want of making this reflexion1 that the world have conjectured all defluxions were derived from the head4 ,a ,,display of the ,,intellectual ,,faculties ,,of ,,the ,,various ,,people1 ,with ,,remarks on the ,,talents of the ,,different ,,ones4 ,,sect4 ,i4 ,i4 ,there is no doubt1 but the different temperament of air in countries1 induces a sensible diversity in men1 brutes1 and plants4 ,in plants1 the difference is so great1 that the same which in one country is innocent and salutary1 in another is noxious and poisonous1 which1 as we are assured1 is the case with the ,persian apple4 ,the diversity between brutes1 is not less than that between plants1 both with respect to their size1 fierceness1 strength1 and other qualities2 but besides what is obvious and clear to the observation of all men in this matter2 we are assured there are countries1 where many sorts of animals1 degenerate totally from the characteristic property of their species4 ,if we are to believe ,lucianus1 ,macedonia produces serpents1 so social to the human race1 that they will play with children1 and gently apply their mouths to the nipples of women's breasts to suck their milk2 and as ,louis de ,marmol informs us1 in ,gruregra a mountainous country in the kingdom of ,fez1 the lions which are very numerous1 are so tame and so timid1 that the women with sticks in their hands1 beat and drive them about like so many domestic dogs4 ,,ii4 ,if the difference in our own species1 which is produced by a diversity of climate1 is not so great1 it is sufficiently evident and apparent4 ,it is manifest1 that there are countries1 where the inhabitants are remarkable for being of larger stature than they are in others1 or for being more active1 more strong1 more healthy1 or more beautiful2 and that this difference subsists with respect to all other things1 that depend upon the two faculties that are common to both men and brutes1 that is1 the sensitive and the vegetative4 ,even in nations which border upon each other1 this difference is sometimes observable4 ,,iii4 ,distinct dispositions of body1 are attended with distinct qualities of mind2 and from distinct temperaments1 result distinct inclinations2 and from distinct inclinations1 distinct customs and manners4 ,the first of these consequences is a necessary one2 but the second is not so certain1 because a man's free will may restrain the impetus of his inclination2 but as is most commonly the case1 men let their free will be led by the emotions1 which are produced by the interior disposition of the machine2 so that we may safely pronounce1 that men in one country are more addicted to passion and anger1 in another to gluttony1 in another to be lascivious1 and in another to be lazy or slothful4 ,,iv4 ,the inequality between men of different regions in the rational part1 is generally supposed not to be less1 but rather greater1 than it is in the sensitive and vegetative2 and it is not only in the conversation of the vulgar that we see this opinion upheld1 but we see it supported in the writings of the learned2 where we find one nation described as rude and savage1 another as stupid1 and another as barbarous2 so that when according to this description of them1 we come to compare one of these nations1 with one of those who are esteemed cultivated and polished1 we conceive that there is nearly as great a difference between the inhabitants of the one and the other1 as there is between men and wild beasts4 ,v4 ,i differ so widely from the common opinion in this particular1 that with respect to the essential part of the use of the understanding1 in the inhabitants of one nation and another1 the difference is imperceptible4 ,this sentiment cannot be better justified1 than by shewing1 that those nations which are commonly reputed rude and barbarous1 are not inferior in ingenuity to the most cultivated ones1 and perhaps in some instances excel them4 ,,sect4 ,,ii4 ,,vi4 ,we will begin our comparisons with the nations of ,europe4 ,the ,germans1 who have been so stigmatized for heavy dull people1 that ,father ,domingo ,bohursius a ,french ,jesuit1 in his ,conversations of ,aristius and ,eugenius1 made no scruple of pronouncing1 that he doubted whether it was possible to find a man of bright talents in the whole country3 however1 in answer to this charge1 it may be alledged1 that ,germany has produced so many excellent authors in all kinds of literature1 that it is hardly possible to number them4 ,i doubt whether the before-named ,frenchman1 by rummaging for them through the series of all past ages1 can point out two of his countrymen1 who were equally eminent with ,rabanus ,maurus1 and ,albertus the ,great4 ,the epithets which ,cardinal ,baronius bestows upon ,rabanus ,maurus1 are1 that he was the resplendent star of his age1 and the supreme ,theologian of his time2 and ,sextus ,senense1 recognizes him as a man most perfectly accomplished in all kinds of letters2 and the ,abbot ,trithemius1 after celebrating him as a most excellent ,theologian1 ,philosopher1 ,orator1 and ,poet1 adds1 that ,italy never produced a man equal to this2 and ,trithemius was not ignorant1 that ,saint ,thomas ,aquinas was a native of ,italy4 ,whom can ,france boast that exceeded ,trithemius himself1 who was so greatly venerated by ,cornelius ,agrippa2 or who excelled the ,abbot ,rupertus1 or ,father ,athanasius ,kircher1 who according to ,caramuel was divinely learned2 or ,father ,gaspar ,schotti1 and many others whom ,i shall omit8 ,neither should we forbear to mention that ray or flash of criticism1 ,gaspar ,sciopius1 who was the terror of all the learned men of his time1 who at the age of sixteen begun to write books1 which were the admiration of men of years and experience4 ,i have in this literary map of ,germany1 only pointed out the mountains of greatest eminence1 as ,i had not room to insert the lesser ones in it4 ,,vii4 ,the ,hollanders1 who in the days of antiquity were reputed for such stupid people1 that it was common among the ,romans1 when they had a mind to describe a heavy dull man1 or one that was slow of apprehension1 to make use of the following proverbial expression1 auris ,batava2 that he had the ears of a ,hollander2 however1 the ,dutch since then1 have clearly proved1 that imputation was a false one1 for the opinion of their being people of ability1 is at this day very fully established4 ,their civil government1 and their industry in commerce1 are the admiration of all the world2 and there is scarce an art1 that is not cultivated and brought to great perfection among them4 ,the two ,williams of ,nassau1 ,erasmus1 and ,hugo ,grotius1 are striking examples of their talents for policy and literature4 ,thus we see in this as well as other nations1 the want of application has been construed into rudeness2 but as soon as the neglect of study was remedied1 the injustice of the imputation became manifest4 ,,viii4 ,the abilities of the ,muscovites also1 have till of late days1 been held in as much contempt as those of the antient ,hollanders were2 for it was but in the last century1 that ,urban ,chevreau a celebrated wit of ,france1 laid that a ,muscovite was the man of ,plato2 by which expression1 the ,french ,author alluded to the poor definition that philosopher gave of a man1 when he described him to be an animal without feathers1 who walked upon two legs1 animal bipes implume2 this gave occasion to the joke of ,diogenes1 who having plucked the feathers off a cock1 threw him into the school of ,plato among his disciples1 calling out with a loud voice1 see the ,man of ,plato4 ,chevreau attempted to say1 that the ,muscovites were nothing like men but in their figure4 ,but after the ,czar ,peter ,alexiowitz had introduced arts and sciences among them1 it soon became evident1 that the ,muscovites were as much men in all respects1 as any of the other people in ,europe4 ,but if this never had been done1 how could any one suppose that a people who were stupid and senseless1 should have been able to form a most extensive empire2 and to preserve it for so long a space of time as the ,russians have preserved theirs8 ,it required great ability to conquer such an empire2 and to preserve it in the face of two such powerful enemies as the ,turks and the ,persians1 much more4 ,i am not ignorant1 that ,muscovy is a part of antient ,scythia1 whose moroders were reputed1 and with reason1 the most savage and barbarous of men2 this barbarism1 did not proceed from their want of natural talents1 but from the want of those talents being cultivated2 of which truth1 the famous philosopher ,anacharsis is a striking instance1 who was the only man of that nation1 that went to study in ,greece4 ,if numbers of other ,scythians had done the same1 ,scythia might possibly have exhibited many ,anacharsises4 ,,sect4 ,,iii4 ,,ix4 ,if we attempt going out of ,europe1 every thing beyond those limits seems barbarous to us4 ,when the imagination of the vulgar contemplates ,asia1 it represents to them1 the ,turks1 the ,persians1 the ,indians1 the ,chinese and the ,japonese1 as little better than so many congregations of satyrs1 or demi-brutes4 ,but notwithstanding this1 there are none of these nations1 who do not make as great advances in all the things they apply themselves to1 as we do in whatever we study4 ,x4 ,their abhorrence for1 nor their ignorance of the sciences in ,turkey1 is not so great as is generally imagined2 for they have professors both in ,constantinople and ,grand ,cairo1 who teach astronomy1 geometry1 arithmetic1 poetry1 and the ,arabic and ,persian languages4 ,but they have not so great an esteem for those faculties1 as they have for politics2 in their knowledge of which1 there is scarce any nation who is equal to them1 nor are there any subtilties appertaining to political arts1 which they are ignorant of4 ,the great ,english traveller1 ,mr4 ,chardin1 in the relation of his voyage to ,india by land1 tells us1 that when he passed through ,constantinople1 he had much conversation with ,senor ,quirini the ,venetian ambassador at the ,porte2 who assured him1 that he had never treated with a man of equal penetration to the vizir of that time2 and declared1 that if he had a son whom he wished to breed a negociator1 he would send him to the school of the ,ottoman court preferable to any other4 ,the ,turks excel in all things that require dexterity of hand1 and in all bodily exercises they take a fancy to4 ,they are the best pen men in the world1 and this is the reason1 why they never would permit the art of printing to be introduced among them2 and they are also the most active and dextrous rope-dancers in ,europe4 ,cardanus relates wonders of two of them he saw in ,italy1 one of whom became a ,christian1 and lived an exemplary life1 but always continued his old exercise2 although his becoming a convert to ,christianity1 removed the suspicion that the vulgar entertained of his dealing with the devil4 ,the dexterity of the ,turks as archers1 is so eminent1 that the force and exactness with which they can shoot arrows is almost incredible4 ,john ,barclay1 in the fourth book of his ,satyricon1 testifies to have seen a ,turk penetrate with an arrow1 a plate of steel1 that was above an inch thick2 and that he had seen another1 who with the shaft of an arrow without any iron to it1 split the body of a small tree4 ,in the art of confectioning poisons1 they are also very expert2 for they will make them not only very active1 but contrive them so1 as that they may be administered without creating suspicion2 a thin vapour with which a piece of fine linen is impregnated1 if it is afterwards made up in any form1 and sent as a present to the person to be dispatched1 is made the instrument to take away his life4 ,this is a most horrid and execrable art2 but although it proves the perverse and wicked disposition of those people1 is an argument of their great talents1 for acquiring a profound knowledge of all they apply themselves to understand4 ,,xi4 ,the ,persians1 are still more polished than the ,turks4 ,they have their colleges and universities1 where they study arithmetic1 geometry1 astronomy1 natural and moral philosophy1 medicine1 jurisprudence1 rhetoric1 and poetry2 which last1 they are passionately fond of1 and write elegant verses1 although they are generally too redundantly abounding in pompous metaphors2 and they are so far from being guilty of that ferocious neglect of urbanity which we are apt to impute to all the ,mahometans1 that there are no people who excel them in expressions of civility1 tenderness1 and affection4 ,whenever a ,persian invites any one to his house1 or is desirous of manifesting his esteem for him1 he generally makes use of these1 or some such like expressions2 ,i intreat you that you will honour my habitation with your presence2 and ,i shall be ready to devote myself to making it agreeable to you in every shape1 and to indulging all your wishes2 and should even be willing that the favourite females of my eyes1 should be converted to carpets for you to set your feet on4 ,,xii4 ,it is true that in the ,east ,indies1 we do not find the cultivation of letters1 but we find there a more than ordinary capacity for attaining them4 ,john ,baptist ,tavernier1 speaking of the negroes or mulattoes of that country called ,canarines1 many of whom are employed in various occupations in ,goa1 the ,philippine islands1 and other places in the possession of the ,portugueze and ,spaniards1 says1 that the children of those who apply themselves to study1 acquire more in six months1 than the children of ,europeans learn in a year2 and says further1 that he was told this by some of the religious of ,goa who had the tutelage of them4 ,i am persuaded that the ,portugueze1 when they first saw this sooty-faced race1 believed their reason1 was as obscure and dark as their complexions2 and that they supposed themselves nearly as superior in natural talents to them1 as men are to brutes2 and in how many parts of the globe1 where we judge the inhabitants to be stupid1 might we possibly see the same thing6 for the metal of their understandings1 for want of examining it by the touch-stone of study1 has remained occult and unknown4 ,,sect4 ,,iv4 ,,xiii4 ,but the greatest injustice that the vulgar have been guilty of in this particular1 is in the conception they have formed of the abilities of the ,chinese4 ,why do ,i say the vulgar8 ,when you hear men dignified with university honours1 whenever they have a mind to heighten an extravagant action1 or mode of proceeding that is contrary to all reason1 say at every turn1 this could hardly have happened among the ,chinese2 which amounts to the same thing1 as making the conduct of the ,chinese1 the standard for measuring extreme barbarism4 ,this certainly cannot tally very well with the idea those people entertain of themselves1 which is1 that they are the quintessence of policy1 ingenuity1 and penetration2 for it is a proverb among them1 that the ,chinese have two eyes1 the ,europeans but one1 and that all the rest of the world are totally blind4 ,,xiv4 ,the truth is1 that they have great reason to believe this2 for they excel in their civil government and policy all other nations4 ,their precautions for preventing civil1 and avoiding foreign wars are admirable2 and learned and wise men1 are not held in such estimation by any other people in the world1 as by them1 and it is to such only1 that they confide the reins of government4 ,this alone1 is sufficient to give them credit for being the most rational of mankind4 ,the excellence of their inventive faculty is evident1 from their being the first people1 who hit upon the three famous inventions1 of printing1 gun-powder1 and the nautical needle2 for the knowledge of these in ,china1 is supposed to be much anterior to our acquaintance with them in ,europe2 and there are also some well-grounded suspicions1 that they were communicated to us from the ,chinese4 ,they excel exceedingly1 in whatever arts they apply themselves to attain2 and notwithstanding our utmost exertions1 we in ,europe1 have not been able to equal1 nor even to imitate them in many4 ,,xv4 ,there is great reason to believe they excel us in their knowledge of medicine1 and in their mode of applying it4 ,their physicians1 are both physicians and apothecaries2 and it was formerly the custom in all nations to unite the two professions in one2 would to ,god it was the same now6 ,they keep in their houses all the medicines they make use of1 which consist of various simples1 whose virtues they have well examined and understand2 which they collect1 prepare1 and apply4 ,they are very attentive to1 and take a long time in examining the pulse2 and it is very common for them to be near an hour in exploring its movements4 ,but the information they get from this circumstance1 and the appearance of the tongue is such1 that by revolving these particulars in their mind2 they without asking any questions1 either of the sick person or those who attend him1 pronounce on what sort the distemper is1 the symptoms that attend it1 the time the patient was taken ill1 together with all the antecedent and subsequent circumstances1 that have accompanied1 and will accompany it4 ,,xvi4 ,i am well aware1 that this will appear incredible to our physicians2 but the various accounts we have of ,china1 some of which1 have been written by men of most exemplary and unexceptionable characters1 all agree in vouching the truth of these particulars1 so that our refusing to give credit to them1 would seem rash and unreasonable4 ,but if ,i could possibly have entertained any doubt of this matter1 our illustrious ,don ,joseph ,manuel de ,andaya y ,hara1 the worthy ,prelate of ,oviedo1 would have removed them1 who confirmed these relations to me1 upon his own experience of a ,chinese physician that practised in ,manila1 the capital of the ,philippine ,islands1 of whom he told me wonderful things1 both with respect to his prognostics and methods of cure4 ,i am persuaded that some of our physicians about the court1 have got the ,book of ,andrew ,cleyer1 the first physician of ,batavia1 intituled ,medicina ,chinensium1 which was printed at ,augsburgh4 ,the diary of the learned of ,paris in the year #afhb1 makes mention of it2 and in that may be seen more at large1 many of these accounts4 ,,xvii4 ,but1 skilful as the ,chinese physicians are in the practice of their art1 the ,chinese people are not behind them1 in their skilful and wise regulations for the government of the physicians4 ,if the physician1 after having examined the pulse and the tongue1 does not hit upon the distemper and the symptoms of it1 which rarely happens1 he is dismissed as unskilful1 and another called in4 ,if he does hit upon the foregoing particulars1 which is most commonly the case1 they confide the cure to him1 and he immediately goes home1 and fetches from his house a bag of simples1 which he gives directions for the using of1 pointing out the manner in which1 and the quantity of each that should be applied or taken4 ,when he has compleated the cure1 he is paid amply for his time and attendance1 and also for the medicines he has expended2 but if the patient does not recover1 the physician is not paid1 either for the one or the other2 so that the money of the sick person1 is saved if he does not get well2 and the physician1 loses both his time and his medicines if he does nor cure him4 ,it is much to be wished1 that such a regulation subsisted among us2 for although ,quevedo some time ago complained of the want of it1 he did not know it was established in ,china4 ,it is true1 that he made the complaint in a bantering way1 but ,i believe he felt the want of the regulation very sensibly4 ,,xviii4 ,we may say in general of ,asia1 that this was the country in which arts and sciences originated2 letters owed their birth to ,phenicia2 and were from thence transported into ,egypt and ,greece2 and the knowledge of astronomy came from ,chaldea1 and from thence was circulated into various other countries4 ,,sect4 ,v4 ,,xix4 ,as to what regards ,africa1 we should consider1 that it gave birth to a ,cyprianus1 and a ,tertullian1 and what is still more1 to an ,augustin2 and that the ,africans were at one time1 as much superior to the ,spaniards in military skill1 as the ,spaniards at this day are to the ,africans2 and that there was a time1 when the conquest of all ,spain cost the ,africans less blood1 than it has since cost ,spain to conquer a few spots in ,mauritania4 ,the soil and the climate of ,africa1 are the same now they were formerly1 and consequently capable of producing equal geniuses2 and the fault of not cultivating them1 should not be imputed to the soil or the climate1 but to the want of opportunities of instruction1 or to the neglect of application2 but with all this1 they are perhaps not so uncultivated as is commonly thought4 ,father ,buttier1 in his little treatise1 intituled ,an ,examination of ,vulgar ,prejudices1 gives us the copy of a speech1 which the ambassador from ,morocco made to ,louis the ,fourteenth1 which was as eloquent and as much to the purpose1 as if it had been composed by a learned ,european4 ,,sect4 ,,vi4 ,,xx4 ,the conceit1 which upon the first discovery of ,america was entertained of its inhabitants1 and which still subsists among the generality of people1 is1 that they are not so much directed by reason as by instinct2 as if some ,circe1 in her peregrinations through that vast country1 had transformed all their men into beasts4 ,but with all this1 there are abundant testimonies1 that their capacities are in no wise inferior to ours4 ,the illustrious ,palafox1 is not contented with allowing them to be equal to us in natural talents1 but in the memorial he presented to the ,king in their favour1 entitled ,a ,natural ,display of the ,indies1 declares they excel us4 ,he there gives a relation of an ,indian1 whose person he knew1 and who went by the name of ,the ,man of ,six ,trades1 from his understanding1 and being able to work well at that number2 and of another1 who learned to build organs in an amazing short time2 and of another1 who in an amazing short time also1 learned to play the organ4 ,he there likewise gives an account of the exquisite address1 with which an ,indian recovered a horse that had been purloined from him by a ,spaniard4 ,the ,indian1 commenced a prosecution against the ,spaniard for his horse1 and when the trial came on1 the beast was brought into court1 where the ,spaniard alledged that he had bought him1 and had had him in his possession for several years1 which he brought witnesses to confirm4 ,the ,indian1 who had no evidence to prove his property in the horse1 finding himself hard pressed1 instantly threw his cloak over the horse's head1 and requested that the ,spaniard who insisted that he had been owner of the horse for so long a time1 might tell of which eye he was blind2 the ,spaniard1 who was taken by surprise1 and much confounded with the question1 answered at random1 the right2 upon which the ,indian pulled the cloak off the horse's head1 and manifested to the whole court1 that he was not blind of either eye2 this evinced the roguery of the ,spaniard1 and the ,indian recovered his horse4 ,,xxi4 ,the ,europeans under the command of ,cortes1 had scarce penetrated into the kingdom of ,mexico1 before they experienced many particulars1 which convinced them1 that the natives of that country were of the same species with themselves1 and the children of the same common ,father4 ,we read in the ,history of the ,conquest of ,mexico1 many military stratagems of the ,indians1 that were not inferior to those of the ,carthaginians1 the ,greeks and the ,romans2 and many people have remarked1 that the ,crioles or children of ,spaniards who are born in ,america1 are more sprightly1 and have more intellectual quickness1 than those who are born in ,spain2 but whether what others add1 that although their ingenuity manifests itself sooner1 it does not last to so late a period of life1 be just or not1 ,i cannot pretend to determine4 ,,xxii4 ,it would be reasoning erroneously and grossly1 to entertain a mean opinion of the capacities of the ,indians1 because upon their first intercourse with us1 they gave pieces of gold for glass beads2 for he would be more rude than they1 who should conclude they were savage1 upon this account4 ,if we were to view glass free from our prepossession in favour of gold1 glass would appear the most beautiful of the two2 and with respect to what is sought after1 for the purpose of ornament and ostentation1 out of two things that are equally beautiful1 that which is most scarce is always preferred4 ,the ,americans then in this instance1 did no more than what is done by all the world4 ,they had plenty of gold but no glass2 and it was on this account that they concluded1 and not without reason1 that a string of beads1 was a fitter ornament to adorn the neck of a princess1 than a gold chain4 ,a diamond1 if we only regard the necessary utility of it1 is not of superior value to a glass bead2 but if we regard its lustre1 it certainly excels it2 and although1 notwithstanding the principal difference between the two things1 consists only1 in the lustre and beauty of the diamond1 the ,asiatics sell the ,europeans a diamond that weighs two ounces1 for an amazing number of pounds sterling2 and why is this8 ,it can only be1 because such diamonds are exceedingly scarce4 ,the inhabitants of the island of ,formosa1 esteemed fine brass preferable to gold1 because they had greater plenty of gold than fine brass1 and continued to do so1 till the ,hollanders gave them to understand1 the great estimation in which gold was held in other regions4 ,if there was a greater plenty of gold all over the world1 than there was of fine brass1 the last of these metals would be preferred to the first4 ,upon the arrival of the ,dutch ,admiral ,matelief at the ,cape of ,good ,hope in the year #afje1 the ,african inhabitants of that country1 gave him eight and thirty sheep and two bullocks1 for a small quantity of iron1 which did not in its value exceed twenty-pence2 and the best of it was1 that they were equally satisfied they had imposed upon the ,hollanders1 as the ,hollanders were that they had imposed upon them4 ,they had a super-abundance of cattle1 and were in great want of iron4 ,and in whatever country the same super-abundance of cattle1 and the same want of iron prevails1 they must purchase the iron with the same number of cattle4 ,,xxiii4 ,father ,lafitau a ,missionary ,jesuit1 who was a long time among thole ,north ,american ,indians1 who1 on account of their being esteemed the most barbarous of all1 are called savages1 gives great applauses of their government and civil policy1 and compares them in these respects1 to the antient ,lacedemonians3 and what is more extraordinary1 he also bestows great panegyrics on their eloquence2 and goes so far as to say1 that he has known here and there one of them1 whose orations were equal to those of ,cicero and ,demosthenes1 and expresses some doubt1 whether they may not be said to excel them4 ,this relation of ,father ,lafitau1 may be seen in the ,memoirs of ,trevoux of #agbd1 art4 #ajf4 ,it is possible1 that this account is somewhat hyperbolical2 but it should be considered1 that ,father ,lafitau had a long and an intimate intercourse with these people1 and there is no doubt1 but a man who sees things in a near point of view1 can judge better of them1 than those who see them at a distance4 ,,xxiv4 ,our intellectual sight1 is exposed to the same defect that our corporeal one is1 and is apt to represent distinct things less than they are4 ,there is no man1 let his stature be as gigantic as it will1 who does not appear like a pigmy at a great distance4 ,the same that happens with respect to the size of bodies1 happens with regard to the stature of souls4 ,those nations which are very remote from us1 appear so small in our eye as rational creatures1 that we scarce allow them to be endued with the faculty of reason2 but if we were to view them near1 we should probably form a different judgment of them4 ,,sect4 ,,vii4 ,,xxv4 ,it may perhaps be objected to what ,i have been advancing1 that the very absurd opinions entertained in matters of religion1 by the bulk of the people of ,asia1 ,africa1 and ,america1 without insisting1 upon the total want of any religion among some of them1 should induce us to form a very mean judgment of their talents4 ,,xxvi4 ,to this ,i answer in the first place1 that although errors in matters of religion are the worst of all errors1 they are no absolute proofs of the rudeness of those who assent to them4 ,nobody is ignorant1 that the antient ,greeks and ,romans1 who were exceedingly well skilled in arts and sciences1 were extremely absurd with respect to the objects of their adoration4 ,they worshiped as deities1 men who had been adulterers1 perfidious1 and guilty of all sorts of wickedness4 ,rome1 which as ,saint ,leon observes1 domineered over all the other nations1 was herself under the dominion of the errors of them all4 ,when a man sets himself to search for a divinity from among his own species1 it is a mark of a depraved imagination1 and the question respecting his capacity1 is not worth enquiring into1 as we may naturally conclude1 he has lost his reason before he makes the attempt4 ,and he who walks blindfold1 is not more terrified by a high precipice than a low one1 as he is unable to discern the difference4 ,i do not even know1 whether when a man first begins to err in these particulars1 he does not go the most extravagant lengths1 who has been the best-informed2 because in matters of religion1 when the first error has taken root1 it is easy for the person who is possessed with it1 to confound the mysterious with the ridiculous1 and by an affected subtilty1 pretend to discover some hidden signs of divinity in those things1 which in the eye of common sense1 are the most remote from1 or have the least to do with it4 ,,xxvii4 ,i answer secondly1 that we have no certainty1 that the idolatry of these various nations was so gross as it has been represented4 ,with respect to the antient idolaters1 some learned men have enforced this doubt very strongly1 and have insisted1 that there were solid reasons for supposing1 that in the image they did not worship the wood1 the metal1 or the marble of which it was made1 but some good genius or demon1 whom they believed to have resided in it4 ,truly it seems incredible1 that a statuary1 such a one as ,horace humourously describes in one of his ,satyrs1 should stand with his hatchet in one hand1 and having the other on the wood he was about to work1 suspended and perplexed1 whether he should carve the ,god ,priapus1 or ,escanus2 ,i say it is incredible1 that such a man should suppose himself vested with sufficient authority to fabricate a ,deity4 ,,xxviii4 ,i say the same of the animated idols4 ,how is it credible that the ,egyptians1 who were for some ages the repositories of the sciences1 should chuse for the ultimate object of their adoration1 a most vile snake1 and even a dog1 or an onion1 which ,juvenal ironically and with derision tells them1 was raised up to them in their own gardens8 ,o sanctas gentes1 quibus hc nascuntur in hortis numina4 ,it is much more reasonable to suppose1 that that nation1 who were much addicted to represent every thing enigmatically1 and by symbols1 should adore these vile creatures in some mystical sense1 which these served as a sort of hierogliphics to explain the signification of1 and that their adoration of them1 was not absolute but respective4 ,the same reasoning might be brought to apply to other nations1 both of former and modern times1 as well as to them4 ,,xxix4 ,i am confirmed in this opinion1 by what ,i have read concerning the superstition which prevails in the island of ,madagascar4 ,the inhabitants of that island1 worship a cricket1 and every one rears his own with great care and veneration4 ,some ,french ships in their voyage to ,india in the year #affe1 touched at ,madagascar1 and being apprized of the superstition of the natives1 a curious ,frenchman1 asked one of them whom they respected as a wise man1 what could induce them to worship so vile an animal1 who answered1 that they worshiped the principal and head of all1 that is the ,creator in the creature1 and that it was necessary to direct their adoration to a sensible object1 in order to fix the attention4 ,who could have expected to meet with so delicate a sentiment1 in such a country8 ,i do not insist1 that the reply exempts them from the note of superstition1 but it proves1 that they are not stupid and insensible4 ,if the same observation the ,frenchman made on the absurdity of the worship of the people of ,madagascar1 had been made to an antient ,egyptian1 he in all probability1 would have returned the same answer to it in substance1 which the ,madagascar man gave4 ,,xxx4 ,with regard to people who are supposed to have no religion at all1 ,i must declare1 that ,i doubt whether there are any such people in the world4 ,the voyagers who assure us there are such1 might possibly from their want of sufficient intercourse with them1 or from the want of understanding their language1 not be able to penetrate their sentiments on that head2 for all nature proclaims the existence of a ,creator with so loud a voice1 that the most sleepy reason cannot fail to be awakened with her cries4 ,,sect4 ,,viii4 ,,xxxi4 ,there is then1 scarce any people whatever1 if you examine deeply into things1 who can with justice be deemed barbarous4 ,i will not however deny1 that there is not between particular nations1 some inequality in the use or application of their reason4 ,yes1 but this depends in some measure1 on the disposition of their organs1 and the climate in which they are born1 and these possibly may have some influence to promote this disposition4 ,but if ,i was to be asked which are the most penetrating and acute nations1 ,i should answer ingenuously that ,i could give no judgment in the matter that might safely be relied on4 ,i see that the sciences1 at one time flourished among the ,phenicians1 at another among the ,chaldeans1 at another among the ,egyptians1 at another among the ,greeks1 at another among the ,romans1 and at another among the ,arabs1 and that at last1 they extended themselves to almost all the ,european nations4 ,i observe also1 that the inhabitants of every country into which they were not introduced1 were looked upon as rude and uncivilized2 but it was generally remarked1 that after they came to be introduced into one of these last1 the natives of it did not make less advances in them1 than those did1 who had the happiness to be the first visited by them4 ,perhaps if the world lasts much longer1 and there should happen great revolutions of empire in it1 as ,minerva goes wandering about the earth1 and continues to shift her station according to the violent agitations she receives from the impulse of ,mars2 ,i say if such revolutions should happen1 the ,iroquois1 the ,laplanders1 the ,troglodytes1 the ,garamantes1 and other people1 whom we now look upon with disdain1 and whom we with repugnance admit to be members of our species1 may one day possess the sciences in an eminent degree2 so that experience will hardly assist us to determine1 the inequality of ingenuity1 that prevails in different nations4 ,,xxxii4 ,much less then can we determine the point by physical reasonings4 ,many have endeavoured to establish1 that this inequality bears proportion1 to the predominance of the elemental qualities which prevail in different countries2 and it is commonly said1 that humid and cloudy climates1 produce heavy dull spirits1 and serene and dry ones1 sprightly and penetrating ones4 ,aristotle gives the preference in this matter1 to those who inhabit the hot countries4 ,agreeable to the first of these opinions1 the ,venetians and the ,hollanders1 should be very stupid dull people1 for the first live in marshes surrounded by standing waters1 and the last in a muddy low country1 that might be said to have been stolen from the sea1 and which is surrounded by standing waters also2 and agreeable to the second1 the negroes of ,angola1 should be more acute than the ,english4 ,it does not appear to me1 that any reasonable man should admit of either of these consequences4 ,but it is not necessary for us to dwell longer on this subject at present2 as we have shewn at large in our defence of the women1 that we cannot infer there is any inequality of understanding1 produced by the predominance1 the sensible qualities have on the temperament2 and that therefore1 we are under a necessity of acknowledging1 that the influence our native country may have over it1 is the effect of some occult cause1 which is impenetrable to our reason1 or at least1 which has not been penetrated by it as yet4 ,,xxxiii4 ,when ,i say that by experience1 we can hardly distinguish the inequality of ingenuity of nations1 ,i would be understood to mean1 in point of the essential qualities1 of penetration1 solidity1 and clearness2 and not in point of the accidental ones1 of superior quickness and readiness1 or those of being more slow and tardy of comprehension2 for with respect to these1 it is evident that some nations exceed others4 ,thus it is manifest1 that the ,italians and ,french are more quick and ready than the ,spaniards2 and even in ,spain itself1 there is a great difference between the inhabitants of one province and those of another in these respects2 for it is remarked1 that in ,asturias1 the people are quicker of apprehension1 and are more ready at explaining themselves1 than they are in any of the other provinces2 and the experience of this1 should be sufficient to dissuade us from falling-in with that general notion1 that rainy countries produce heavy dull people2 as it is well known1 that the heavens may rather be said to inundate1 than refresh this country1 so that it may be truly called1 ,nimborum patriam1 loca fta furentibus austris4 ,,xxxiv4 ,but if ,i was to give my opinion which of the nations of ,europe should be preferred to the rest1 with respect to their penetration1 ,i should incline to the sentiment of ,heidegger a ,german author1 who concedes this advantage to the ,english4 ,it is certain that ,great ,britain1 since literature1 arts1 and sciences1 were first cultivated in it1 has produced a copious harvest of authors of the first class4 ,the recital of those only1 which have arisen in that country1 out of the ,benedictine and ,seraphic orders of religious1 would be tedious and tiresome4 ,but ,i cannot forbear to mention1 that we are indebted to each of these two orders1 for three stars of the first magnitude4 ,to the ,benedictine1 for the venerable ,bede1 the famous ,alcuinus1 and the celebrated ,calculator ,suiset4 ,to the ,seraphic1 for ,alexander de ,ales1 the subtil ,scotus1 and his disciple ,william ,ocman4 ,cardanus in his ,treatise 7de ,subtilit4 lib4 #af4 de ,scient47 graduates among the twelve most acute geniuses of the world1 the subtil ,scotus and the ,calculator ,suiset1 in the fourth and fifth rank1 of whom he says3 ,barbaros ingenio nobis haud esse inferiores1 quandoquidem sub ,brum clo1 divisa toto orbe ,britannia duos tam clari ingeniique viros emisserit4 ,,xxxv4 ,neither should we conceal1 that at the time when the other nations of ,europe scarce knew what the mathematics meant1 the two beforementioned orders of ,religious exhibited two illustrious ,english mathematicians2 ,roger ,bacon1 and ,oliver of ,malmsbury2 of the first of whom1 the vulgar feigned the same tale1 they did of ,albertus ,magnus1 that is1 that he had made a brazen head1 which answered all questions that were put to it4 ,the other was not less famous than he1 of whom ,john ,pitseus relates1 that he had invented some machinery1 by the help of which he was enabled to fly1 although he never could attain at doing it1 for above the distance of about a hundred and twenty yards at a time2 but that was doing more1 than any other man ever did before him4 ,,xxxvi4 ,on physical subjects1 ,england has furnished a greater number of original authors1 than all the other nations of ,europe put together2 and the ,french1 who are very tenacious of the reputation of their country for producing men of ingenuity1 are obliged to confess1 that the ,english are superior to them in philosophical abilities4 ,it may without rashness or exaggeration be said1 that all the advances which have been made in physical knowledge for a century past1 are owing to my ,lord ,chancellor ,bacon4 ,it was he that broke through the strait limits1 within which1 ,physics till his time had been imprisoned2 and he was the man who threw down the columns1 on which to mark the boundaries of human knowledge in natural things1 ne plus ultra had been inscribed4 ,the most learned ,peter ,gassendo1 was nothing else but a faithful disciple of ,bacon's1 and what ,bacon had said in a summary way1 he repeated more at large1 in his extensive philosophical writings4 ,all that ,descartes said which was of any real value1 he took from ,bacon4 ,after ,bacon1 we may reckon as great originals1 ,mr4 ,boyle1 and the most subtil ,sir ,isaac ,newton2 as also ,john ,locke#b1 ,sir ,kenelm ,digby1 and many others2 but the misfortune is1 that the lustre of their ingenuity1 was tarnished with the same religious blemish my ,lord ,bacon's was2 and when they had once strayed out of the right path1 they flew with such velocity1 that the extent of their wanderings1 was great as the liveliness of their imaginations4 ,but with all this1 there has not been wanting in ,england1 since it was blemished with heresy1 a ,sir ,thomas ,more1 who was as celebrated for his ,catholic constancy1 as he was for his eminence in the sciences4 ,,xxxvii4 ,i must also say1 that ,i have always observed in the ,english philosophers1 great frankness1 and that they gave a simple plain relation of the result of their experience and labours1 free from all artifice and deceit2 which is a thing not very common with those of other nations2 and ,i have remarked this particularly1 in ,bacon1 ,boyle1 ,sir ,isaac ,newton1 and ,sydenham the physician2 and it has afforded me great pleasure1 to see1 how without boasting they have declared what they know1 and without blushing1 have confessed what they are ignorant of4 ,this is the true mark and characteristic of sublime geniuses4 ,oh6 how much it is to be lamented1 that such great lights1 should be obscured by heretical prejudices6 ,,end ,,of ,,the ,,fourth ,,volume4 ,,footnotes #a ,the translator thinks1 as he has not translated that ,discourse1 it will not be amiss to insert here the ,author's sentiment on this subject4 ,in the ,essay or ,discourse referred to1 after reciting the arguments that have been used to prove the invention came from ,china1 and the claims that have been made on the behalf of a variety of people1 to their being the inventors2 he gives it as his opinion1 that ,bertoldus ,schuvart1 a ,german ,franciscan friar1 and an eminent chemist1 was the man who invented it1 or at least was the person who1 brought the invention to perfection4 #b ,this is the same ,john ,locke1 of whose writings1 as also of those of ,rapin1 ,sidney1 and ,bishop ,hoadly1 the late ,david ,hume1 in his ,history of ,great ,britain1 gives the following description3 8,compositions of the most despicable kind both for style and matter1 which have been extolled1 and propagated1 and read2 as if they had equalled the most celebrated remains of antiquity40 ,vid4 vol4 viii4 pag4 #cbc1 of the last edition of ,hume's ,history of ,great ,britain1 published in #aggh4 ,,errata4 ,page #fh1 line #bg1 read such for example as spiritual entities4 ,page #aja1 line #h1 for that1 read and that4 ,page #ajd1 line #af1 read and after turning1 c4 ,page #abi1 line #be1 for executed1 read executes4 ,page #aeg1 line #ab1 for ascends1 read ascend2 and line #ba1 for lerned1 read learned4 ,page #aeh1 line #bj1 for but1 read yet4 ,page #afi1 line #ac1 read many of those instruments4 ,page #ahg1 line #bj1 read proper resolution4 ,page #bab1 line #i1 for had1 read has4 ,page #bac1 line #ad1 for raise1 read arise4 ,page #bga1 line #c1 for reasonable1 read reasoning4 ,page #bgb1 line #f1 for qulities1 read qualities4 ,page #bgc1 line #aj1 for is1 read are4 ,page #big1 line #ad1 read as it is called4 ,page #ceb1 line #f1 for eben1 read been4 ,transcriber's ,note3 ,the errata have been corrected1 along with a few other minor printing errors4