1 OF THE Theological Seminary, PRINCETON, N. J. Case, ^.^..^rr: n,^. Book, Ko, ... J] f ^. LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. JOHN LOCKE, one of the most eminent philosophers, and valuable writers of his age and country, was born at Wrington, in Somersetshire, on the 29th August 1632. His father, who had been bred to the law, acted in the capacity of steward, or court -keeper to colonel Alexander Popham, by whose interest, on the breaking out of the civil law, he became a cap- tain in the service of parliament. The subject of this article was sent, at a proper age, to Westminster school, whence he was elected in 1651 to Christ-church college, Oxford. Here he much distinguished himself for his application and proficiency ; and having taken the degree of BA. in 1655, and of MA. in 1658, he applied himself to the study of physic. In the year 1664, he accepted of an offer to go abroad, in the capacity of secre- tary to sir William Swan, appointed envoy from Charles II. to the elector of Brandenburg, and other German princes ; but he returned in the course of a year, and resumed his studies with renewed ardour. In 1666 he was introduced to Lord Ashley, afterwards the celebrated political earl of Shaftesbury, to whom he became essentially serviceable in his medical ca- pacity, and who was led to form so high an opinion of his general powers, that he prevailed upon him to take up his residence in his house, and urged him to apply his studies to politics and philosophy. By his acquaintance w^ith this nobleman, Mr Locke was introduced to the duke of Buckingham, the earl of Halifax, and others of the most eminent persons of their day. In 1668, at the request of the earl and countess of Northumberland, he ac- companied them in a tour to France ; and on his return was employed by lord Ashley, then chancellor of the exchequer, in drawing up the funda- mental constitutions of the American state of Carolina. He also inspected the education of that nobleman's son, and was much consulted on the mar- riage of the latter, the eldest son, by which was the celebrated author of the Characteristics. In 1670 he began to form the plan of his Essay on the Human Understanding ; and about the same time was made a fellow of the royal society. In 1672 lord Ashley, having been created earl of Shaftes- bury, and raised to the dignity of chancellor, he appointed Mr Locke to the office of secretary of presentations, which, however, he lost the following year, when the earl was obliged to resign the seals. Being still president of the board of trade, that nobleman then made Mr Locke secretary to the same ; but the commission being dissolved in 1674, he lost that appointment also. In the following year he graduated as a bachelor of physic, and being apprehensive of a consumption, travelled into France, and resided some time at Montpelier. In 1679 he returned to England, at the request of the earl of Shaftesbury, then again restored to power ; and in 1682, when that nobleman was obliged to retire to Holland, he accompanied him in his exile. On the death of his patron in that country, aware how much he was disliked by the predominant arbitrary faction at home, he chose to remain abroad ; and was in consequence accused of being the author of certain 3 4 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. tracts against the English government ; and altliougli tJieso were aflerwanls discovered to be the work of another person, he was arbitrarily ejected from his studentship of Christ churcli, by the king's connnand. Thus assailed, he contiiuied abroad, nobly refusing to accept a pardon, which the cele- brated ^VilliaIn Penn undertook to procure for him, expressing himself like the chancellor L'liospital, in similar circumstances, ignorant of the crimes of which he had been declared guilty. In 1G85, when Monmouth undertook his ill-concerted enterprize, the English envoy at the Hague demanded the person of Mr Locke, and several others, which demand obliged him to con- ceal himself for nearly a year; but in 1G86 he again appeared in public, and formed a literary society at Amsterdam, in conjunction with Limborch, Le Clerc and others. During the time of his concealment, he also wrote his first " Letter concerning Toleration," which was printed at Gouda, in 1689, under the title of " Epistola de Tolerantia," and was rapidly trans- lated into Dutch, French, and English. At the Revolution, this eminent person returned to England in the fleet which conveyed the princess of Orange, and being deemed a suflerer for the principles on which it was established, he was made a conmiissioner of appeals, and was soon after gratified by the establishment of toleration by law. In 1(390 he published his celebrated " Essay concerning Human Understanding," which was in- stantly attacked by various writers among the oracles of learning, most of whose names are now forgotten. It was even proposed, at a meeting of the heads of houses of the university of Oxford, to formally censure and discourage it ; but nothing was finally resolved upon, but that each master should endeavour to prevent its being read in his college. Neither this, however, nor any other opposition availed ; the reputation, both of the work and of the author, increased throughout Europe ; and besides being trans- lated into French and Latin, it had reached a fourth English edition, in 1700. In 1G90 Mr Locke published his second " Letter on Toleration ;" and in the same year appeared his two " Treatises on Government," in oppo- sition to the principles of sir Robert Filmer, and of the whole passive obe- dient school. He next wrote a pamphlet, entitled, " Some Considerations of the Consequences of lowering the Interest and Value of Money," 1691, 8vo, which was followed by other smaller pieces on the same subject. In 1692 he published a third " Letter on Toleration;" and the following year his " Thoughts concerning Education." In 1695 he was made a commis- sioner of trade and plantations, and in the same year published his " Rea- sonableness of Christianity, as delivered in the Scriptures;" which being warmly attacked by Dr Edwards, in bis " Socinianism Unmasked," Mr Locke followed with a first and second " Vindication," in which he de- fended himself with great mastery. The use made by Toland, and other latitudinarian writers, of the premises laid down in the " Essay on the Human Understanding," at length produced an opponent in the celebrated bishop Stillingfleet, who, in his " Defence of the Doctrine of the Trinity," censured some passages in Mr Locke's essay, and a conti-oversy arose, in which the great reading and proficiency in ecclesiastical antiquities of the prelate, necessarily yielded in an argumentative contest to the i-easoning powers of the philosopher. With his publications in this controversy, which were distinguished by peculiar mildness and m-banity, Mr Locke re- tired from the press, and his asthmatic complaint increasing, with the rec- titude which distinguished the whole of his conduct, he resigned his post of commissioner of trade and plantations, although king William was very unwilhng to receive it, observing, that he could not in conscience hold a situation to which a considerable salaiy was attached, without performing the duties of it. From this time he lived wholly in retirement, where he applied himself to the study of scripture ; while the sufferings incidental to his disorders were materially alleviated by the kind attentions and agree- able conversation of lady Maiiham, who was the daughter of the learned LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 5 Dr Cudworth, and for many years his intimate friend. Mr Locke existed nearly two years in a very declining state, and at length expired in a man- ner correspondent with his great piety, equanimity, and rectitude, on the 28th of October, 1704. He was buried at Oates, where there is a neat monument erected to his memory, with a modest Latin inscription indited by himself. The moral, social, and political character of this eminent and valuable man, is sufficiently illustrated by the foregoing brief account of his life and labours ; and the effect of his writings upon the opinions, and even fortunes of mankind, will form the most forcible eulogium on his mental superiority. Of his " Essay on the Human Understanding" it may be said, that no book of tlie metaphysical class has ever been more gene- rally read; or, looking to its overthrow of the doctrine of innate ideas, none lias produced greater consequences. In the opinion of Dr Reed he gave the first example in the English language of writing on abstract subjects with simplicity and perspicuity. No author has more successfully pointed out the danger of ambiguous words, and of having distinct notions on sub- jects of judgment and reasoning; while his observations on the various powers of the human understanding, on the use and abuse of words, and on the extent and limits of human knowledge, are drawn from an attentive reflection on the operations of his own mind, the only source of genuine knowledge on those subjects. Several topics, no doubt, are introduced into tliis celebrated production, which do not strictly belong to it, and some of its opinions have been justly controverted. In some instances, too, its author is verbose, and wanting in his characteristic perspicuity ; but with all these exceptions, and even amidst the improvements in metaphysical studies, to which this work itself has mainly conduced, it will ever prove a valuable guide in the acquirement of the science of the human mind. His next great work, his " Two Treatises on Government," although neces- sarily opposed by the theorists of divine right and passive obedience, and by writers of jacobitical tendencies, essentially espouses the principles which, by placing the house of Brunswick on the throne of Great Britain, may be deemed the constitutional doctrine of the country, and as such it has been ably and unanswerably defended. Besides the works already men- tioned, Mr Locke left several MSS. behind him, from which his executors, sir Peter King and Mr. Anthony Collins, published in 1706, his paraphi-ase and notes upon St Paul's Epistles to the Galatians, Corinthians, Romans, and Ephesians, with an essay prefixed for the understanding of St Paul's Epistles, by a reference to St Paul himself. In 1706 the same parties pub- lished, " Posthumous Works of Mr Locke," 8vo, comprising a treatise "On the Conduct of the Understanding;" "An Examination of Male- branche'e Opinion of seeing all Things in God," &c. Digitized by tine Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://www.archive.org/details/essayconcerniOOIock AN ESSAY CONCERNING HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. BY JOHN LOCKE, GENT. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THOMAS, EARL OF PEMBROKE AND MONTGOMERY; BARON HERBERT OP CARDIFF, LORD ROSS OF KENDAL, PAR, PITZHUOH, MARMION, ST QUINTIN, AND SHURLAND ; LORD PRESIDENT OF HIS majesty's MOST HONOURABLE PRIVY COUNCIL, AND LORD LIEUTENANT OF THE COUNTY OF WILTS, AND SOUTH WALES. MT ZiORD, This Treatise, which is grown up under your lordship's eye, and has ventured into the world by your order, does now, by a natural kind of right, come to your lordship for that protection, which you several years since promised it. It is not that I think any name, how great soever, set at the beginning of a book, will be able to cover the faults that are to be found in it. Things in print must stand and fall by their own worth, or the reader's fancy. But there being nothing more to be desired for truth tlian a fair, unprejudiced hearing, nobody is more like to procure me that than your lordship, who is allowed to have got so intimate an acquaintance with her, in her more retired recesses. Your lordship is known to have so far advanced your speculations in the most abstract and general know- ledge of things beyond the ordinary reach, or common methods, that your allowance and approbation of the design of this treatise will at least pre- serve it from being condemned without reading; and will prevail to have those parts a little weighed, which might otherwise, perhaps, be thought to deserve no consideration, for being somewhat out of the common road. The imputation of novelty is a terrible charge among those who judge of men's heads, as they do of their perukes, by the fashion ; and can allow none to be right, but the received doctrines. Truth scarce ever yet carried it by vote any where at its first appearance : new opinions are always sus- pected, and usually opposed without any other reason, but because they are not already common. But truth, like gold, is not the less so for being newly brought out of the mine. It ia trial and examination must give it price, and not any antique fashion : and though it be not yet current by the public stamp ; yet it may, for all that, be as old as nature, and is certainly not the less genuine. Your lordship can give great and convincing in- stances of this, whenever you please to oblige the public with some of those large and comprehensive discoveries you have made of truths hitherto un- known, unless to some few, from whom your lordship has been pleased not wholly to conceal them. This alone were a sufficient reason, were there no other, why I should dedicate this Essay to your lordship ; and its having some little correspondence with some parts of that nobler and vast system of the sciences your lordship has made so new, exact, and instructive a draught of, I think it glory enough, if your lordship permit me to boast, B 9 10 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. that here aiul there I have fallen into some thoughts not wholly different from yours. If your lordship tliink fit, that, by your encouragement, this should appear in the world, 1 hope it may bo a reason some time or other, to lead your lordship farther ; and you will allow me to say, that you here give the world an earnest of something, that, if they can bear with this, will be truly worthy their expectation. This, my lord, shows what a pre- sent I here make to your lordship ; just such as the poor man does to his rich and great neighbour, by whom the basket of flowers or fruit is not ill taken, though he has more plenty of his own growth; and in much greater perfection. Worthless things receive a value, when they are made the offerings of respect, esteem, and gratitude: these you have given me so mighty and peculiar reasons to have, in the liighest degree, for your lord- ship, that if they can add a price to what they go along with, proportion- able to their own greatness, I can with confidence brag, I here make your lordship the richest present you ever received. This I am sure, I am under the greatest obligations to seek all occasions to acknowledge a long train of favours I have received from your lordship : favours, though great and important in themselves, yet made much more so by the forwardness, con- cern, and kindness, and other obliging circumstances, that never failed to accompany them. To all this, you are pleased to add that which gives yet more weight and relish to all the rest : you vouchsafe to continue me in some degrees of your esteem, and allow me a place in your good thoughts ; 1 had almost said friendship. This, my lord, your words and actions so constantly show on all occasions, even to others when I am absent, that it is not vanity in me to mention what every body knows : but it would be want of good manners, not to acknowledge what so many are witnesses of, and every day tell me I am indebted to your lordship for. I wish they could as easily assist my gratitude, as they convince me of the great and growing engagements it has to your lordship. This, I am sure, I should write of the understanding without having any, if I were not extremely sensible of them, and did not lay hold on this opportunity to testify to the world, how much I am obliged to be, and how much I am. My Lord, Your Lordship's most humble And most obedient servant, JOHN LOCKE. Dorset- Court, 24 May, 1689. EPISTLE TO THE READER. Reader, I HERE put into thy hands, what has been the diversion of some of my idle and heavy hours : if it has the good luck to prove so of any of thine, and thou hast but half so much pleasure in reading, as I had in writing it, thou wilt as little think thy money, as I do my pains, ill bestowed. Mis- take not this for a commendation of my work ; nor conclude, because I was pleased with the doing of it, that therefore I am fondly taken with it now it is done. He that hawks at larks and sparrows, has no less sport, though a much less considerable quarry, than he that flies at nobler game : and he is little acquainted with the subject of this treatise, the understanding, who does not know, that as it is the most elevated faculty of the soul, so it is employed with a greater and more constant delight than any of the other. Its searches after truth are a sort of hawking and hunting, wherein the very pursuit makes a great part of the pleasure. Every step the mind takes in its progress towards knowledge, makes some discovery, which is not only new, but the best too, for the time at least. For the understanding, like the eye, judging of objects only by its own sight, cannot but be pleased with what it discovers, having less regret for what has escaped it, because it is unknown. Thus he who has raised him- self above the alms-basket, and, not content to live lazily on scraps of begged opinions, sets his own thoughts on work, to find and follow truth, will (whatever he lights on) not miss the hunter's satisfaction ; every mo- ment of his pursuit will reward his pains with some delight, and he will have reason to think his time not iU spent, even when he cannot much boast of any great acquisition. This, reader, is the entertainment of those who let loose their own thoughts, and follow them in writing ; which thou oughtest not to envy them, since they afford thee an opportunity of the like diversion, if thou wilt make use of thy own thoughts in reading. It is to them, if they are thy own, that I refer myself: but if they are taken upon trust from others, it is no great matter what they are, they not following truth, but some meaner consideration : and it is not worth while to be concerned, what he says or thinks, who says or thinks only as he is directed by another. If thou judgest for thyself, I know thou wilt judge candidly ; and then I shall not be harmed or offended, whatever be thy censure. For though it be cer- tain, that there is nothing in this treatise, of the truth whereof I am not fldly persuaded ; yet I consider myself as liable to mistakes, as I can think thee, and know that this book must stand or fall with thee, not by any opinion I have of it, but thy own. If thou findest little in it new or in- structive to thee, thou art not to blame me for it. It was not meant for those that had already mastered this subject, and made a thorough ac- quaintance with their own understandings ; but for my own information, and the satisfaction of a few friends, who acknowledged themselves not to 11 12 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. have sufficiently considered it. Were it fit to trouble thee with the history of this Essay, I should tell thee, that five or six friends meeting at my chamber, and discoursing on a subject very remote from this, found them- selves quickly at a stand, by tlio difficulties that rose on every side. After we had a while puzzled ourselves, without coming any nearer a resolution of those doubts which perplexed us, it came into my thoughts, that we took a wrong course : and that before we set ourselves upon inquiries of that nature, it was necessary to examine our own abilities, and see what objects our understandings were, or were not, fitted to deal with. This I proposed to the company, who all readily assented; and thereupon it was agreed, that this should be our first inquiry. Some hasty and undigested thoughts on a subject I had never before considered, which I set down against our next meeting, gave the first entrance into this discourse ; which having been thus begun by chance, was continued by entreaty ; written by inco- herent parcels ; and after long intervals of neglect, resumed again, as my humour or occasions permitted ; and at last, in a retirement, where an attendance on my health gave me leisure, it was brought into that order thou now seest it. This discontinued way of writing may have occasioned, besides others, two contrary faults, viz. that too little and too much may be said in it. If thou findest any thing wanting, I shall be glad, that what I have writ gives thee any desire that I should have gone farther : if it seems too much to thee, thou must blame the subject ; for when I put pen to paper, I thought all I should have to say on this matter would have been contained in one sheet of paper ; but the farther I went, the larger prospect I had ; new dis- coveries led me still on, and so it grew insensibly to the bulk it now appears in. I will not deny, but possibly it might be reduced to a narrower com- pass than it is ; and that some parts of it might be contracted ; the way it has been writ in, by catches, and many long intervals of interruption, being apt to cause some repetitions. But to confess the truth, I am now too lazy, or too busy to make it shorter. I am not ignorant how little I herein consult my own reputation, when I knowingly let it go with a fault, so apt to disgust the most judicious, who are always the nicest readers. But they who know sloth is apt to content itself with any excuse, will pardon me, if mine has prevailed on me, where, I think, I have a very good one. I will not therefore allege in my defence, that the same notion, having different respects, may be convenient or ne- cessary to prove or illustrate several parts of the same discourse ; and that 60 it has happened in many parts of this : but waiving that, I shall frankly avow, that I have sometimes dwelt long upon the same argument, and ex- pressed it different ways, with a quite different design. I pretend not to publish this Essay for the information of men of large thoughts, and quick apprehensions ; to such masters of knowledge I profess myself a scholar, and therefore warn them beforehand not to expect any thing here, but what, being spun out of my own coarse thoughts, is fitted to men of my own size ; to whom, perhaps, it will not be unacceptable, that I have taken some pains to make plain and familiar to their thoughts some truths, which esta- olished prejudice, or the abstractedness of the ideas themselves, might render difficult. Some objects had need be turned on every side ; and when the notion is new, as I confess some of these are to me, or out of the ordinary road, as I suspect they will appear to others ; it is not one simple view of it, that will gain it admittance into every understanding, or fLx it there with a clear and lasting impression. There are few, I believe, who have not observed in themselves or others, that what in one way of pro- posing was very obscure, another way of expressing it has made very clear and intelligible : though aflerward the mind found little difference in the phrases, and wondered wiiy one failed to be understood more than the other. But every thing does not hit alike upon every man's imagination. Wo EPISTLE TO THE READER. 13 have our understandingg no less different than our palates ; and he that thinks the same truth shall be equally relished by every one in the same dress, may as well hope to feast every one with the same sort of cookery : the meat may be the same, and the nourishment good, yet every one not be able to receive it with that seasoning ; and it must be dressed another way, if you will have it go down with some even of strong constitutions. The truth is, those who advised me to publish it, advised me, for this reason, to publish it as it is : and since I have been brought to let it go abroad, I desire it should be understood by whoever gives himself the pains to read it ; I have so little affection to be in print, that if I were not flattered this Essay might be of some use to others, as I think it has been to me, I should have confined it to the view of some friends, who gave the first oc- casion to it. My appearing therefore in print, being on purpose to be as useful as I may, I think it necessary to make what I have to say as easy and intelligible to all sorts of readers as I can. And I had much rather the speculative and quick-sighted should complain of my being in some parts tedious, than that any one, not accustomed to abstract speculations, or pre- possessed with difierent notions, should mistake, or not comprehend my meaning. It will possibly be censured as a great piece of vanity or insolence in me, to pretend to instruct this our knowing age ; it amounting to little less, when I own, that I publish tliis Essay with hopes it may be useful to others. But if it may be permitted to speak freely of those, who with a feigned modesty condemn as useless, what they themselves write, methinks it savours much more of vanity or insolence, to publish a book for any other end ; and he fails very much of that respect he owes the public, who prints, and consequently expects men should read that, wherein he intends not that they should meet with any thing of use to themselves or others : and should nothing else be found allowable in this treatise, yet my design will not cease to be so ; and the goodness of my intention ought to be some excuse for the worthlessness of my present. It is that chiefly which se- cures me from the fear of censure, which I expect not to escape more than better writers. Men's principles, notions, and relishes are eo different, that it is hard to find a book which pleases or displeases all men. I acknow- ledge the age we live in is not the least knowing, and therefore not the most easy to be satisfied. If I have not the good luck to please, yet nobody ought to be offended with me. I plainly tell all jny readers, except half a dozen, this treatise was not at first intended fof them ; and therefore they need not be at tiie trouble to be of that nuint)er. But yet if any one thinks fit to be angry, and rail at it, he may dr> it securely : for I shall find some better way of spending my time than in such kind of conversation. I shall always have the satisfaction to have aimed sincerely at truth and useful- ness, though in one of the meanest ways. The commonwealth of learning is not at this time without master-builders, whose mighty designs in ad- vancing the sciences, will leave lasting monuments to the admiration of posterity : but every one must not hope to be a Boyle, or a Sydenham : and in an age that produces such masters, as the great Huygenius, and the in- comparable Mr Newton, with some others of that strain, it is ambition enough to be employed as an under-labourer in clearing the ground a little, and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way to knowledge ; which certainly had been very much more advanced in the world, if the endea- vours of ingenious and industrious men had not been much cumbered with the learned but frivolous use of uncouth, affected, or unintelligible terms, introduced into the sciences, and there made an art of, to that degree, that philosophy, which is nothing but the true knowledge of things, was thought unfit, or incapable to be brought into well-bred company, and polite con- versation. Vague and insignificant forms of speech, and abuse of language, have so long passed lor mysteries of science ; and hard and misapplied 14 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. words, with little or no meaning, have, by prescription, such a right to be mistaken for deep learning, and height of speculation, that it will not be easy to persuade either those wiio speak, or those who hear tiieni, that they are but the covers of ignorance, and liinderance of true knowledge. To break in upon the sanctuary of vanity and ignorance, will be, I suppose, some service to human understanding ; though so few are apt to think they deceive or are deceived in the use of words, or that the language of the sect they are of has any faults in it, which ought to be examined or cor- rected ; that I hope I shall be pardoned, if I have in the tliird book dwelt long on this subject, and endeavoured to make it so plain, that neither the inveterateness of the mischief, nor the prevalence of the fashion, shall be any excuse for those who will not take care about the meaning of their own words, and will not suffer the significancy of their expressions to be in- quired into. I have been told that a short epitome of this treatise, which was printed 1688, was by some condemned without reading, because innate ideas were denied in it ; they too hastily concluding, that if innate ideas were not sup- posed, there would be little left eitber of the notion or proof of spirits. If any one take the like offence at the entrance of this treatise, I shall desire him to read it through ; and then I hope he will be convinced, that the taking away false foundations, is not to the prejudice, but advantage of truth ; which is never injured or endangered so much, as when mixed with, or built on, falsehood. In the second edition, I added as followeth : The bookseller will not forgive me, if I say nothing of this second edi- tion, which he has promised, by the correctness of it, shall make amends for the many faults committed in the former. He desires too, that it should be known, that it has one whole new chapter concerning identity, and many additions and amendments in other places. These, I must inform my reader, are not all new matter, but most of them, either farther con- firmations of what I had said, or explications, to prevent others being mis- taken in the sense of what was formerly printed, and not any variation in me from it ; I must only except the alterations I have made in Book II, Chap. 21. What I had there writ concerning liberty and the will, I thought deserved as accurate a view as I was capable of: those subjects having in all ages exercised the learned part of the world with questions and difficulties that have not a Httle perplexerl morality and divinity, those parts of knowledge that men are most concerned to be clear in. Upon a closer inspection into the working of men's minds, and a stricter examination of those motives and views they are turned by, I ha.ve found reason somewhat to alter the thoughts I formerly had concerning that, which gives the last deternunation to the will in all voluntary actions. Thia I cannot forbear to acknowledge to the world with as much freedom and readiness, as I at first published what then seemed to me to be right ; thinking myself more concerned to quit and renounce any opinion of my own, than oppose that of another, when truth appears against it. For it is truth alone I seek, and that will always be welcome to me, when or from whence soever it comes. But what forwardness soever I have to resign any opinion I have, or to recede from any thing I have writ upon the first evidence of any error in it ; yet this I must own, that I have not had the good luck to receive any light from those exceptions I have met with in print against any part of my book ; nor have, from any thing that has been urged against it, found rea- son to alter my sense in any of the points that have been questioned. Whether the subject I have in hand requires often more thought and atten- tion than cursory readers, at least such as are prepossessed, are willing to allow ; or whether any obscurity in my expression casts a cloud over it, and these notions are made difficult to others' apprehensions in my way of treating them; so it is, that my meaning, I find, is often mistaken, and I EPISTLE TO THE READER. ; 15 have not the good luck to be every vv^here rightly understood. There are so many instances of this, that I think it justice to my reader and myself to conclude, that either my book is plainly enough written to be rightly understood by those who peruse it with that attention and indifferency, which every one who will give himself the pains to read, ought to employ in reading ; or else, that I have writ mine so obscurely, that it is in vain to go about to mend it. Whichever of these be the truth, it is myself only am affected thereby, and therefore I shall be far from troubling my reader witli what I think might be said, in answer to those several objections I have met with to passages here and there of my book ; since I persuade myself, that he who thinks them of moment enough to be concerned whe- ther they are true or false, will be able to see, that what is said is either not well founded, or else not contrary to my doctrine, when I and my opposer came both to be well understood. If any, careful that none of their good thoughts should be lost, have pub- lished their censures of my Essay, with this honour done to it, that they will not suffer it to be an Essay ; I leave it to the public to value the obli- gation they have to their critical pens, and shall not waste my reader's time in so idle or ill-natured an employment of mine, as to lessen the satis- faction any one has in himself, or gives to others in so hasty a confutation of what I have written. The booksellers preparing for the fourth edition of my Essay, gave me notice of it, that I might, if I had leisure, make any additions or iterations I shoidd think fit. Whereupon I thought it convenient to adwrtise the reader, that besides several corrections I had made here and there, there was one alteration which it was necessary to mention, because it ran through the whole book, and is of consequence to be rightly understood. What I thereupon said was this : Clear and distinct ideas are terms, which, though familiar and frequent in men's mouths, I have reason to think every one, who uses, does not perfectly understand. And possibly it is but here and there one, who gives himself the trouble to consider them so far as to know what he himself or others precisely mean by them : I have therefore in most places chose to put determinate or determined, instead of clear and distinct, as more likely to direct men's thoughts to my meaning in this matter. By those denomi- nations, I mean some object in the mind, and consequently determined, i. e. such as it is there seen and perceived to be. This, I think, may fitly be called a determinate or determined idea, when such as it is at any time objectively in the mind, and so determined there, it is annexed, and without variation determined to a name or articulate sound, which is to be steadily the sign of that very same object of the mind or determinate idea. To explain this a little more particularly. By determinate, when applied to a simple idea, I mean that simple appearance which the mind has in its view, or perceives in itself, when that idea is said to be in it : by determi- nate, when applied to a complex idea, I mean such an one as consists of a determinate number of certain simple or less complex ideas, joined in such a proportion and situation, as the mind has before its view, and sees in itself, when that idea is present in it, or should be present in it, when a man gives a name to it : I say should be, because it is not every one, not perhaps any one, who is so careful of his language, as to use no word, tiU he views in his mind the precise determined idea, which he resolves to make it the sign of. The want of this is the cause of no small obscurity and confusion in men's thoughts and discourses. I know there are not words enough in any language to answer all the variety of ideas that enter into men's discourses and reasonings. But this hinders not, but that when any one uses any term, he may have in his mind a determined idea, which he makes it the sign of, and to which he should keep it steadily annexed, during that present discourse. Where he does 16 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. not, or cannot do this, he in vain pretends to clear or distinct ideas : it is plain his are not so ; and therefore there can be expected nothing but ob- scurity and confusion, where such terms are made use of, which have not such a precise determination. Upon tJiis ground I have thought determined ideas a way of speaking less liable to mistakes, than clear and distinct ; and where men have got such determined ideas of all that they reason, inquire, or argue about, they will find a great part of their doubts and disputes at an end. The greatest part of the questions and controversies that perplex mankind, depending on the doubtful and uncertain use of words, or (which is the same) indeter- rained ideas, winch they are made to stand for ; I have made choice of these terms to signify, 1. Some immediate object of the mind, which it perceives and has before it, distinct from the sound it uses as a sign of it. 2. That this idea, thus determined, i. e. which the mind has in itself, and knows and sees there, be determined without any change to that name, and that name determined to that precise idea. If men had such determined ideaa in their inquiries and discourses, they would both discern how far their own inquiries and discourses went, and avoid the greatest part of the disputes and wranglings they have with others. Besides this, the bookseller will think it necessary I should advertise the reader, that there is an addition of two chapters wholly new ; the one of the association of ideas, the other of enthusiasm. These, with some other larger additions never before printed, he has engaged to print by themselves, after thaHame manner, and for the same purpose as was done when this Essay had the second impression. In the sixth edition, there is very little added or altered ; the greatest part of what is new is contained in the 21st chapter of the second book, which any one, if he thinks it worth while, may, with a very little labour, tran- scribe into the margin of the former edition. AN ANALYSIS OF MR LOCKE'S DOCTRINE OF IDEAS, IN HIS ESSAY ON HUMAN UNDERSTANDING Tlic Word idea comprelic-ridg whiUucvcr i« tlie Object of the Undemtaoding, b. 1. c. I. I. locm i)Pt innate. lipoauM it !• of no UM to .up|.o»c: lli.-in >o. book 1. ' ''■ S !• «• 3. 4 «!• The ilcpi to knu«li-dge diMoverablc. ibid. u4 ^ li >■■ «• «■ '■ *i •• *"• ^ ■*• "■ *• ^ **• Nut purovivcd ia a atal« of infancy, b, 1. e< 8. ^ ^. lleuion iit'cciwry to lltlir discovery, ibid. ^ 9. Idea of God, not innate, c. 4. ^ H, (licreforo no ol'i* r. t 17. l*rineiltlcft not iunute, bfcuuse idea* arc not 10. c. i^'- '. *>• l^* Rcir-eridrnce not lufneient to |iri>ve llicm W. a. •!■ U 1". ^tl, 23. Nor iniiv.rul aairnL. ibid. ^S 3, »■ rs, • ■ AtuMit not truly nnircrpal in prinaiplea.-^ , ^ Men think not alivnyi. b. i. c. I. ^ 10, he. i I'J To tnpiiOHC the contrary woulil be making iIiH And baviiiK tbou^litt that come neitlicr fron> . Probable that thinking may he no more tlian i Impoiaible to determine whether God may im> Whence llio opiidon of innalu Ideas, b. 1. c. -t. ^ '■' ^7■ landn 1.5 C. m of the aoul. ibid, and c. 19. 4 4. L thongbl If 1 Mlid aubttaaco. b. i. . 3. S i. ig. b. 3. t. 1. « 19. S. 4 6. FlOni .SlKRATlMK. I. 'rlio primary rjualili *l. 1*hn letondui*)- r)ualilici 11. Th» iJ/i(.in of our loll**. C Solidity, From touch only. b. S. o. 4. ) I'-MOMion, I j,.^„„ .i-i.t „„a touch. 0. S. i From one acntc only. c. 3 ? Eiiat not ad extra, c. 8. ^ 13. I MoliM, ? j,j^^ ^^j „„j ,„ujh „ J t-ltcat, > rSounJa, 'l'a>le«, J Coloira, 1 Smclla, I of Bcnaation ollon ftlttro rl. The hiM a. K-M.i ■ judgment c. 0. %h 8, «, 10. '.Is knowledge, c. 9. 4 15. , 9. 4 1. • .1 or pasiive poroepUon. ibid, and % 4. uotian of objecu on our organs. § 3. . kinds with respect U its objects, c. 21. 4 i. ' '• < il by attention and rcpetilton. 4 3. I I., iiind'oitcn active in iu 4 7. ( MdonjB to Brutes. I) 10. . . , C Chance. 4 5. Armcfrom | Habit. 4 C. ,, , C Antipathies. 4 7. Una. of iErrors.449, 18. >•• It 0 114 s. implv mydcfc. 4 6 11. 44 10, 11. en.ral. 4 9. made. b. 3. c. 3. ^% 6, 7, 8. Ir use c. 0.439. ibid. 4 II. «.d.p.ei,.. {-^2 IXxtKl not ad estrn. ibid. 3...3.4.5.,.c,.4..8.^S:rr7;"''^'.^- ^1. ArVKr;..! Iri. , .. . e. C. ^ «. 9. SiKi. »g>. ibid. 4 3. 3 II, . '■ '• '■ '^ '■ c them. ibid. 4 3. r. .- -».«... C Moat words so. 4 1. I . l.encr.1 te. Mi c. 3. ^ ^^^ _^^j_. ^^ ^ ^ 9. Names of simple J J ideas. ..4. ^f 111. Ideas considered with regard to iheir Objects. ^1. Sucli nncompoanded appearances, Sum iBIUs. \ mentioned in part 2, < Those the materials of all our knowledge, b. 2. . The mind can neither make nor destroy them. < . Cannot be defined, b. 3. c. 3. 44 4, . Nor ranked into genusesj'ibid. 4 16 . All odeiiuale. b. 2. c. SI. 4 2. . Not fictions of oui- fancies, but real. causes or pallems. ibid. . Positive ideas from private causes. I Numbri . 7. 4 10. 2. 4 2. Motion, Pcrcepli lastes, kc. b. 2. c. rest, &c. c. 5. >n, retention, &c. IV. Ideas toosidcrpd with regard to their Qualitiea. What meant by theLf. b. S. c. 29. 44 2, 4. Causes of obscurity. I i^) 'I. Simiile. -; :. 30. ^ 2. b. 4. c. 4. § \. though thej do not antwer to an; . 2. o. 8. ^^ 1, 6. A probable reason of it. ibid. ^ ^ rindefinite. b. 2. o. 16. % S. . < Not actually infinite, c 17. § 8. ^.Imperfect for want of names, o. IG § 5. rits ideii from sight or touch, c. 5. Synonymous to extension, c. IS. § 24. J Vacuum or ncgntion of body. ibid. § 22. 1 Mode of finite beings, c. 15. % S. I A relative idea. o. 26.^ 3. LRel.aivc to the situation of bodies, c. 13. 4 7. f Means continuance of existence, c. 14. § 9. Its idea not from motion, c. 14. ^ 6. But from rcfiectiun on the train of our ideas. ^ 2. Motions too quick or slow, not perceived, why. §§ 7, 8. Time, mode of finite beings, c. 17, § I. A mode of quantity, c. 17, § 1. Why not applicable to other ideas, ibid. % 6. A.n imaginary addibility without end. % 4. \pplied to number, space, and duration, in the same I sense. §§ 7-10. Partly positive, partly negative. ^§ 15 — 19. I^How applied to the Deity. § I. Modes of motion, sounds, colours, tastes, &c. o. 18, ^J."^'*Mtelalive. c.28. § 15. ..? Absolute or 3 Relative, ibid. 5. § 10. C 1. Dull organs. % 2. <2. Slight imi*rft-otio C3. Weak men ory. ib , _ 1 ory. ibid. So, with regard to tliuir names. § 10, and b. 3. c. 2. % 4. Some 5*^'^'"^ ^° reisoH. b. 2. c. 29. ^§ U, 15. C Obscure to imagination, ibid. , What meant by ther ;. b. 2. c. 2*i. % 4. So with regard to tli^ir numcs. %% 5, C, 10, Jl. ^1. Want of a sufioient number 3. Causes of this oonfu! ion. 'I. Voluntary combination of ideas, c. 22. % 2. b. 3. c. 5. § 3. ] S. Want of orde! L3. Want of stca^ nple ideas in the aumplex the disposition of them. 4 8*- ^. in the application of names. 4 ^• ^ ,4, 14, 15. t' stead Distinct in some res leots, conliised in others nple ideas rea . e. 30. 4 2. . Ideas of substances il ay be either. 4 ^ " TlsTieALr I •*• *"'' "'>"'" "f relatioiii. 443, 4. L4. With respect to nauies. ^C ri. All true in a metaphysical sense, c. 32. 44 2, 3, 2(}. IV. 2. Simple ideas true. 4 18. Tnor. and J ,i. And modes. 4 17. F.iUK, or BicnT "( 4. Substances, when not Uuc. 4 ,18. and Wno.to. TOther men's ideas. 4 81. 5. Ideas may be so eWiep with respect to < Some real existence. 4 22. L (T\\e essence of things. 4 24. ri. Simple ideas. 0. 31. |4 2, 12. i V. 2. Modes. 44 3, 14. >Ade.,ualc. , AoEatJiTK and J 3. Relations, ibid. J iNAnctlua'rK ] 4. Substances always. (§ 6, 10. i I 5. Modes may be with respect >Inade<|uate. I to names. 4 4. ) 2. Mi 2. Preserved by 1 ^j J 3. Eaist only in the mind. b. 2. 1 4. All adequate. 22. 4 8. b. . 31. 4 3. V. Of Knowledge, Reason, Faith, Judgment. 4 12. except with reference to names. 4 4. or to the ideas in other men's minds. 4 5. 5. Beal if made of consistent ideas, b. 2. c. 30. 4 4. C Invention, c. 22. 4 9. ,6. Acquired by < Observation, ibid. C Use of words, ibid, and b. 3. c. 5. 4 IS. [1. Collection of qualities existing together, c. 23. 4 9. 2. Applied differently to God, spirit, and body. 0. 13. 4 IS. 3. Ranked according to their nominal essences, b. 5. c. 3. 4 2. tic 4. No substratum beyond the qualities, b. 2. c. 13, 18, 20. 0. 23. 4 23. 5. Material and immaterial, their ideas equally clear, c. IS. 4 IS. c. 23. 4 5. 6. Their ideas inadequate, c. 31. 4 8. L7. Collective ideas of them, what. c. 24. f I. lletwixt two things at least, c. 25. 44 1,6. , 9. ..^11 aUm.«« w..|AUUuat r.,larinn .*."' ^^ -'""ill" ijii 11^^ ■ S. Terminate in simple ideas, c. 28. 4 18. c. K. 4 9. ~ 4. Often clearer than the things related, c. 28. 4 19. 0. 25. 4 8. Absolute terms stence. 44 2, 17. I., .Kf„„ ,1 5 4. Why. 4 : .' - 4 15. and c. 5. Particle I C Connect i.le . :. < Show their ( Mai'ks of at . ..ences. 4 14. ^.tlier. 4 10. ». 4 IS. ). 4 «. . Volition. 6. Ahslntel terms, o. H. Xj. Concrete, ibid, p ro..rf..Ung. ^ „.„,„„,,,,. r of choosing, > Man not free. ^ 2.^ ^ - - lulling. 5 Uett-Pinincd by «n\iclv. % SS. i «.■"""■ "*"'^«"«^''? <1 ■ ,blc. b. I. e. S. % 3 t. a. c: 20. § I. 9. Pair ucMsurilT bitvfji ,;,ij. A. Fixittcnee. c. ". ^ 7 I A. Unitv. ibid. Li>oiihir.ii, «),,. ,. >w made. ^ U. fen- 5 Real rssenoes. o. 9. % ]S. dCoexistii)gqualities,^^l3, U. togt'lhrr. % 1. Uiion». f^S 3, 4. iclion tin the mind. ibid, prc-dicable of oDe inothrr. % 1. mi^wMW 'I often stand for them. c. 25. ^ 3. c. 26. §§ 4, G. Often without c 0. 25. ^ 2. All terms relative which lead the mind bryond the inatcd. % 10. 5. May alter, and the things remain the same. c. 25. ^^ 5, 10. 6. Proportional, as bigger, equal, &o. c. 28. § 1. 7 . Natural, at father, son. ibid. § 2. 8. Civil, or instituted, ibid. ^ 3 9. Moral, as referred to ! elative terms. Mibject denom- C Divine. ^S ;law. §§ 4, 14. < Civil, § 'j. C Of esteem. 10. Identity and di- Tcrsity. c. 27." ^ 10. be. §§ 3. U 29. THodes. § 2. Substances, ibid, priocipium individu Vegetables. % 4. Animals. ^ 5. Man. %% 6, 8, 9. fDefincd. ^ 9. A forensic terra. % 26. docs not consist in the aaro bstanoes. §^ ii4l. ibidsr How known. 3. Iden(ica), tcauh nothing, ibid. % 2. TAs to simple iileas i J Not so as to substances, ibid. &cc. 4. Genei^l. o. 6.-S Of^en trifling, c. 8. % 9. I Concern not cxistcnoQ. c. 9. % 1. LThcir certainty, in what. c. C. k 16. 5. MornI, capable of demonstration, c. 3. ^ 8. c. 12. % 8. Of little use, 5 Not first known, c. 7. ^^ 8, 9. because \ Nut the foundati( May be uf L6. Mr.v: 3. Ideas, as to thei aprecmenL or disagreemvilt. which consists CIn disputing. ^ it. C In teuoliing the scit I, Identity or di 2i RclAlion. o. 1 ]j Coexistence, i -ersity. o. 1. § 4. c. 3. § 8. § 5. 0.3. ^ 18. c. 7. ^ A. 1. ^ 6. c. 3. $9.0. 7. § 5 ' Of oursel cs. ibid. 7. k 4. 4i 1. Actual, c. I. 4 8. 2. Habitual. 4 9. 3. Real and visiona 9. 4 3. by intuition. iifcit,i'fe^.ii.lsji'!p?' ' 7. Things conlr», 8. One last juilg. 9. Its province tiiini«-iit' LAvoiding hypothes< ' «. 17. 4 1. re nothing but the immediate objects of our minds in thinking: so that unless any one can op- pose'the a^rficle your lordship defends, without thinking on something, he must use the things signified by ideas; for he that thinks, must have some immediate object of his mind in thinking, i. e. must have ideas. But whether it be tlie name, or the thing; ideas in sound, or ideas in significa- tion; that your lordship apprehends may be of dangerous consequence to that ar- ticle of faith -which your lordship endeavours to defend; it seems to me, I will not say a new -ivay of reasoning (for that belongs to me), but were it not your lordship's, I should think it a very extraoixlinary way of reasoning, to write against a book, wherein your lordship acknowledges they are not used to bad purposes, nor emploj'ed to do mischief, only because j'ou find that ideas are, by those who oppose your lordship, employed to do mischief; and so apprehend they may be of dangerous consequence to the article your lordship has en- gaged in the defence of. For whether ideas as terms, or ideas as the immediate objects of the mind signified by those terms, may be, in your lordship's appre- hension, of dangerous consequence to that articCe ; I do not see how your lord- ship's writing against the notions of ideas, as stated in my book, will at all hinder your opposers y/'0?re employing them in doing mischief, as before. However, be that as it will, so it is, that your lordship apprehends these neio terms, these ideas, -with -which the -world hath of late been so strangely amused, * Answer to Mr Locke's First Letter. t In his Second Letter to the Bishop of Worcester. Ch. 1. INTRODUCTION. fl7 {though at last they come to be only common notions of things, as 30ur lordihlp owns,) may be of dangerous consequence to that article. My lord, if any, in answer to your lordship's sennons, and in olhev pamphlets, wherein your lordship complains they have talked so much of ideas, have been troublesome to your lordship with that term, it is not strange that your lordship should be tired with that sound: but how natural soever it be to our weak con- stitutions to be offended -with any sound wherewith an importunate din hath been made about our ears; yet, my lord, I know your lordship has a better opinion of the articles of our faith, than to tliink any of them can be overturned, or so much as shaken, with a breath formed into any sound or term whatsoever. Names are but the arbitrar}' marks of conceptions; and so they be sufficiently appropriated to them in their use, I know no other difference any of them have in particular, but as they are of easy or difficult pronunciation, and of a more or less pleasant sound; and what particular antipathies there may be in men to some of them, upon that account, it is not easy to be foreseen. Tliis, I am sure, no ierm whatsoever in itself, bears one more than another, any opposition to truth of any kind; they are only propositions that do or can oppose the truth of any article or doctrine; and thus no term is privileged from being set in opposition to truth. There is no word to be found, which may not be brought into a proposition, wherein the most sacred and most evident truths may be opposed; but that is not a fault in the term, but him that uses it. And therefore I cannot easily persuade myself (whatever your lordship hath said in the heat of your concern) that you have bestowed so much pains upon my book, because the word idea is so much used there. For though upon my saying, in my chapter about the existence of God, 'that I scarce used the word idea in that chapter,' your lordship wishes that I had done so quite through jny book; yet I must rather look upon that as a compliment to me, wherein your lordship wished that my book had been all through suited to vulgar readers, not used to that and the like terms, than that your lordship has such an apprehension of the word idea; or that there is any such harm in the use of it, instead of the word notion (with which your lord- ship seems to take it to agree in signification,) that your lordship would think it worth your while to spend any part of your valuable time and thoughts about my book, for having the word idea so often in it; for this would be to make your lordship to write only against an impropriety of speech. I own to your lord- ship, it is a great condescension in your lordship to have done it, if that word have such a share in what your lordship has writ against my book, as some expressions would persuade one; and I wo.vay o/" ideas, as an effectual battery against the mysteries of the Chris- tian faith. In which place, by nexi< way of ideas, nothing, I tliink, can be con- strued to be meant, but my expressing myself by that o( ideas; and not by other more common words and of ancienter standing in the E}tglish language. As to the objection of the author's way by ideas being a new way, he thus an- swers: my new way by ideas, or my way by ideas, which often occurs in your lordship's letter, is, I confess, a very large and doubtful expression; and may, in the full latitude, comprehend my whole essay; because treating in it of the un- derstanding, which is nothing but tlie faculty of thinking, I could not well treat of that faculty of the mind, which consists in thinking, without considering the immediate objects of the mind in thinking, which I call ideas: and therefore, in treating of the understanding, I guess it will not be thought strange, that the greatest part of my book has been taken up in considering what these objects of the mind, in thinking, are; whence thej' come; what use the mind makes of them, in its several ways of thinking; and what are tlie outward marks whereby it sig- nifies them to others, or records them for its own use. And this, in short, is my way by ideas, that which your lordship calls my new way by ideas; which, my lord, if it be 7iew, it is but a new history of an old thing. For I think it will not be doubted, that men always performed the actions of ^A/wA^wj", reasoning, be- lieving, and knowing, just after the same manner that they do now ; though whether the same account has heretofore been given of the way how they perfoi-med these actions, or wherein they consisted, I do not know. Where I as well read as your lordship, I should have been safe from that gentle repx-imand of your lordships for thinking my way of ideas IHEW, for want of looking inW other men's thoughts, which appear in their books. Your lordship's words, as an acknowledgement of your instructions in the case, and as a warning to others, who will be so bold adventurers as to spin anything barely out of their own thoughts, I shall set down at large. And they run thus: "Whether you took this way of /V/fos from the modern philosopher mention- ed by you, is not at all material; but I intended no reflection upon you in it (for that you mean, by my commending you as a scholar of so great a master.) I never meant to take from you the honour of your own inventions: and I do believe you when you say. That you wrote from your own thoughts, and the ideas you had there. But many things may seem new to one, that converses only with his own thoughts, which really are not so; as he may find, when he looks into the thoughts of other men, which appear in their books. And, there- fore, although I have a just esteem for the invention of such, who can spin vo- lumes barely out of their own thoughts, yet I am apt to think they would oblige the world more, if, after they have thought so much themselves, thej' would examine what thoughts others liavc had before them, concerning the same things; that so those may not be thought their own inventions, which are common to themselves and others. If a man should try all the magnetical experiments himself, and publish thciu as his own thoughts, he might take himself to be the inventor ot thuni; hut lie that cxuniinys and compares them with what Gilbert and others Ch. 1. INTRODUCTION. 39 have done before him, will not diminish the praise of his diligence, but may wish he had compared his thoughts with other men's; by which the world would receive greater advantage, although he had lost the honour of being an original." To alleviate ray fault herein, I agree with your lordship, that many tilings may seem new to one that converses only ~Mth his oion thoughts, ivldch really are not so: but I must crave leave to suggest to your lordship, that if, in the spinning of them out of his own thoughts, they seem new to him, he is certainly the inven- tomf'them? Htid they may as justly he thought his own invention, as any one's; anTTtre^s'as certainly the inventor of them, as any one who thought on them be- fore him: the distinction of invention, or not invention, lying not in thinking first, or not first, but in borrowing, or not borrowing, our thoughts from another: and lie to whom, spinning them out of his own thoughts, they seem nevi, could not certainly borrow them from another. So he truly \n\ exited, printing in Europe, ■who, without any communication with the Chinese, spun it out of his own thoughts; though it was never so true, that the Chinese had the use of printing, nay of printing in the very same way among them, many ages before him. So that he that spins any thing out of his own thoughts, Xh&X. seems new to him, cannot cease (o think it his own invention, should he examine ever so far: ivhat thoughts others have had before him, concerning the same thing, and should find, by ex- amining, that they had the same thoughts too. But what great obligation this ivoiildhe to the world, or weighty cause of turn- ing over and looking into books, I confess I do not see. The great end to me, in conversing with my own or other men's thoughts, in matters of speculation, is to find truth, without being much concerned whether my own spinning of it out of mine, or their spinning of it out of their own thoughts, helps me to it. And how little I affect the honour of an original, may be seen at that place of my book, where, if any where, that itch of vain glory was likeliest to have shown itself, had I been so overrun with it as to need a cure: it is where I speak of certainty, in these following words, taken notice of by your lordship, in another place: " I think I have shown wherein it is that certainty, real certainty consists; which, whatever it was to others, was, I confess, to me, heretofore, one of those desiderata which I found great want of." Here, my lord, however new this seemed to me, (and the more so because, possibly I had in vain hunted for it in the books of others) yet I spoke of it as new, only to myself; leaving others in the undisturbed possession of what, either by invention, or reading, was theirs before; without assuming to myself any other honour, but that of my own ignorance, until that time, if others before had shown wherein certainty lay. And yet, my lord, if I had, upon this occasion, been for- ward to assume to myself the honour of an original, I think I had been pretty safe in it; since I should liavc had your lordship for my guarantee and viridicator in that point, who are pleased to call it nexo, and, as such, to write against it. And truly, my lord, in this respect, my book has had very unlucky stars, since it hath had the misfortune to displease your lordship, with many things in it, for their novelty; as, nexo xvay of reasoning, neiv hypothesis about reason, new sort of certainty, new terms, nexo way of ideas, new method of certainty, £/c. And yet, in other places, your lordship seems to think it worthy in me of your lord- ship's reflection. Cor saying but what others have said before; as where I say, "In the different make of men's tempers, and application of their thoughts, some arguments prevail more on one, and some on another, for the confirmation of the same truth." Your lordship asks, " jrhat is thi^ different from what all men of understanding have said .?" Again, I take it, your lordship meant not these words for a commendation of my book, where you say, but if no more be meant by "The simple ideas that come in by sensation, or reflection, and their being the foundation of our knowledge," 67/f that our notions of things come in, either from, our senses, or the exercise of our minds,- as there is nothing extraordinary in the discovery, so your lordship is far enough from opposing that, wherein you think all matifcind are agreed. And again. But what need all this great noise about ideas and certainty, true and real certainty by ideas, if, after all, it comes only to this, that our ideas only represent to us such things, from whence we bring arguments to prove the truth of things? 40 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Bookl. But the ivovUl hath been strantfely amused with ideas of late; and nve have been told, that sirauffi'. thinffx might be done by the help q/" ideas; and yet these ideas, aX last, come to be only common notions of things, -vhich ive must make use of in our reasoning. Ami to tlic like imipose in otlior places. Whetlier, tluTcfore, at last, your lory its being new, must be left to your lordship. This 1 find by it, that my book cannot avoid being condemned on the one side or the other; nor do I see a possibility to help it. If there be readers that like only 7iew thoughts; or, on the other side, others that can bear nothing but what can be justified by received authorities in print; I must desire them to make themselves amends in that part which tliey like, for the displeasure thcj- receive in the other; but if any should be so e>;aot, as to find fault with both, truly I know not well what to say to them. The case is a plain case; tlie book is all over naught, and there is not a sentence in it, that is not, either for its antiquity or novelty, to be con- demned; and so there is a short end of it. Prom your lordship, indeed, in par- ticular, I can hope for something better; for your lordship thinks the general design of it so good, tliat this, I flatter myself, would prevail on your lordship to preserve it from the fire. But as to the way, your lordship thinks, I should have taken to prevent the having it thought my invention, when it was common to me with others, it unluck- ily so fell out, in the subject of my Essay of Unman Understanding, that I could not look into the thoughts of other men to inform myself: for my design being, as well as I could, to copy nature, and to give an account of the opera- tions of the mind in thinking, I could look into nobody's understanding but my own, to see how it wrought; nor have a prospect into other men's minds, to riew their thoughts there, and observe what steps and motions they took, and by what gradations they proceeded in their acquainting themselves with truth, and their advance in knowledge: what we find of their thoughts in books, is but the result of this, and not the progress and working of their minds, in coming to the opinions or conclusions they set down and published. • All, therefore^ that I can say of my book is, that it is a copy of my own mind, in its several ways of operation: and all that I can, say for the publisliing of it is, that I think the intellectual faculties are made, and operate alike in most men; and that some, that I showed it to before I published it, liked it so well, that I was confirmed in that opinion. And, therefore, if it should happen that it should not be so, but that some men should have wa3^s of thinking, reasoning, or arriv- ing at certainty, different from others, and above those that I find my mind to use and acquiesce in, I do not see of what use my book can be to them. I can only make itniy humble request, in my own name, and in the name of those that are of my size, who find their minds work, reason, and know in the same low way that mine does, that tliose men of a more happy genius would show us the way of their nobler fliglUs; and particularly would discover to us their shorter or surer way to certainly, than by ideas, and the observing their agreement or disagreement. Your lordship adds, lint now it seems, nothing is hitelligible but what sxdts with the new way of ideas. My lord, the 7iew way of ideas, and the old way of speak- ing intelligibly*, was always and ever will be the same; and if I may take the liberty to declare my sense of it, herein it consists; 1. That a man use no words, but such as he makes the sign of certain determined objects of his mind in thinking, which he can make known to another. 2. Next, That he use the same word steadily for the sign of the same immediate object of his mind in thinking. 3. That he join those words together in propositions, according to the grammatical rules of that language he speaks in. 4. That he unites those sentences into a coherent discourse. Thus, and thus only, I humbly conceive, any one may ])reserve himself from the confines and suspicion of jargon, whether he pleases to call those immediate objects of his mind, which his words do, or should stand for, ideas or no. * Mr Locke's Third Letter to the Bishop of Worcester. Ch. 2. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES IN THE MIND. 41 CHAPTER II. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES IN THE INIIND. Sect. 1. The way shown how we come by any knowledge, sufficient to prove it not innate. — It is an established opinion among some men, that there are in the understanding certain innate principles ; some primary no- tions; K6/yg< ivyoiai, characters as it were, stamped^uppn the mind of man, which tne soul receives in its very first being, and brings into the world with it. It would be sufficient to convince imprejudiced readers of the false- ness of this supposition, if I should only show (as I hope I shall in the following parts of this discourse) how men, barely by the use of their nat- ; ural faculties, may attain to all the knowledge they have, without the help of any innate impressions ; and may arrive at certainty, without any such ori- ginal notions or principles. For I imagine any one will easily grant, that it would be impertinent to suppose the ideas of colour innate in a creature,> to whom God hath given sight and a power to receive them by the eyes, from external objects : and no less unreasonable would it be to attribute se- veral truths to tlie impressions of nature, and innate characters, when we may obserie in ourselves faculties fit to attain as easy and certain know- ledge of them, as if they were originally imprinted on the mind. But because a man is not permitted, without censiu-e, to follow his own thoughts in the search of truth, when they lead him ever so little out of the common road, I shall set down the reasons that made me doubt of the truth of that opinion, as an excuse for my mistake, if I be in one ; which I leave to be considered by those, who, with me, dispose themselves to embrace truth, wherever they find it. Sect. 2. General assent, the great argument. — There is nothing more commonly taken for granted, than that there are certain principles, both speculative and practical (for they speak of both) universally agreed upon by all mankind ; which, therefore, they argue, must needs be constant im- pressions which the souls of men receive in their first beings, and which they bring into the world with them, as necessarily and really as they do any of their inhei'ent faculties, v Sect. 3. Universal consent proves .nothing innate. — This argument, drawn irom universal consent, has this misfortune in it, that if it were true, in matter of fact, that there were certain truths wherein all mankind agi"eed, 'I it would not prove them innate, if there can be any other way shown how . men may come to that ujiiversal agreement in the things they do consent in; which I presume may be done. Sect. 4. " WJiatjs, is," and " it is impossible for the same thing to he, and not to be," not universally assented to. — But, which is worse, this ar- gument of universal consent, which is made use of to prove innate princi- ples, seems to me a demonstration that there are none such ; because there are none to which all mankind give a universal assent. I shaU begin with the speculative, aud instance in those magnified principles of demonstration, " whatsoever is, is;" and, " it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be ;" which, of all others, I think have the most allowed title to in- nate. These have so settled a reputation of maxims universally received, that it will no doubt be thought strange, if any one should seem to question it. But yet I take liberty to say, that these propositions are so far irom having a universal assent, that there are a great part of mankind to whom they are not so much as known. F 42 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. >£l , Sect. 5. Not on the mind naturally imprinted, because not known, to children, ideots, cj-c. — For, first, it is evident, tliat all children and idcots have not the least apprehension or thono;ht of them ; and the want of that is / enough to destroy that universal assent, which must needs he the neces- ' sary concomitant of all innate truths ; it seeming to me near a contradiction to say, that there arc truths miprinted on the soul, which it perceives or understands not; imprinting, if it signify any thing, being nothing else but, the making certain truths to be perdeivcd. For, to imprint any thing on the mind, withoiit the mind's perceiving it, seems to me hardly intelligible. If, therefore, children and ideots have souls, have minds, with those impres-/i-^ sions upon them, thej'^ must unavoidably perceive them, and necessarily'^ know and assent to these truths ; which, since they do not, it is evident that there are no such impressions: for if they are not notions naturally imprinted, how can they lie irmatel and if they are notions imprinted, how can they be unknown ! To say a notion is imprinted on the mind, and yet at the same time to say that the mind is ignorant of it, and never yet took notice of it, is to make this impression nothing. No proposition can be said to be in tlie mind, wliich it never yet knew, which it was never yet conscious of: for if any one may, then, by the same reason, all propositions that are true, and the mind is capable of ever assenting to, may be said to be in the mind, and to be imprinted : since, if any one can be said to be in the mind, which it never yet knew, it nnist be only because it is capable of knowing it; and so the mind is of all truths it ever shall know. Nay, thus truths may be imprinted on the mind which it never did, nor ever shall know ; for a man may live long, and die at last in ignorance of many truths, which his mind was capable of knowing, and that with certainty. So that, if the capacity of knowing be the natural impression contended for, all the truths a man ever comes to know, will, by this account, be every one of them innate; and this gi-eat point will amoiuit to no more, but only to a very improper way of speaking : which, whilst it pretends to assert the contrary, says nothing different from those who deny innate principles; for nobody, I think, ever denied that the mind was capable of knowing several tmths. The capacity, they say, is innate; tlie knowledge, ac- quired. But then, to what end such contest for certain innate max- ims'? If truths can be imprinted on the understanding without being per- ceived, I can see no difference there can be between any truths the mind is capable of knowing, in respect of tlicir original : they must all be innate, or all adventitious : in vain shall a man go about to distinguish them. He, therefore, that talks of innate notions in the understanding, cannot (if he intend thereby any distinct sort of truths) mean such truths to be in the understanding, as it never perceived, and is yet wholly ignorant of: for if these words (to be in the understanding) have any propriety, they signify to be understood : so that, to be in the understanding, and not to be un- derstood— to be in the mind, and never to be perceived — is all one as to say, any thing is, and is not, in the mind or understanding. If therefore these two propositions, " whatsoever is, is," and, " it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be," are by nature imprinted, children cannot be ignorant of them; infants, and all that have souls, must necessarily have them in their understandings, know the truth of them, and assent to it. Sect. 6. That men know them when they come to the use of reason, answered. — To avoid this, it is usually answered, that all men know and assent to them, when they come to the use of reason, and this is enough to prove them innate. I answer. Sect. 7. Doubtful expressions, that have scarce any signification, go for clear reasons to those who, being prepossessed, take not the pains to examine even what they themselves say. For to apply this answer with any tolerable sense to our present purpose, it must signify one of tliese two things: either, that as soon as men come to the use of reason, Ihose eupposed native inscriptions come to be known and observed by them ; or Ch. 2. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES IN THE MIND. 43 else, that the use and exercise of men's reason assists them in the discove- ry of these principles, and certainly makes them known to them. Sect. 8. If reason discovered them, that would not prove theminnate. "' — If they mean, that by the use of reason men may discover these prin- . ciples, and that this is sufficient to prove them innate, their way of argu- ing will stand thus, viz. that whatever truths reason can certainly discover to us, and make us firmly assent to, those are all naturally imprinted on the mind; since that universal assent, which is made the mark of them, amounts to no more but this ; that by the use of reason we are capable to come to a certain knowledge of, and assent to them ; and by this means, there will be no difference between the maxims of the mathematicians, and theorems they deduce from them : all must be equally allowed innate ; they being all discoveries made by the use of reason, and truths that a rational creature may certainly come to know, if he apply his thoughts rightly that way. Sect. 9. It is false that reason discovers them. — But how can these men think the use of reason necessary to discover principles that are sup- posed innate, v.'hen reason (if we may believe them) is nothing else but the faculty of deducing unknown truths from principles, or propositions, I that are already known 1 That certainly can never be thought innate, which we hare need of reason to discover; unless, as I have said, we will have all the certain truths that reason ever teaches us to be innate. We may as well think the use of reason necessary to make our eyes discover visi- ble objects, as that there should be need of reason, or the exercise thereof, to make the understanding see what is originally engraven on it, and can- not be-in the understanding, before it be perceived by it. So that to make reason discover tliose truths thus imprinted, is to say, that the use of rea- son discovers to a man. what he knew before ; and if men have those innate impressed truths originai.y, and before the use of reason, and yet are always ignorant of them, till they come to the use of reason; it is in effect to say, that men know, and know them not, at the same time. Sect. 10. It will here perhaps be said, that mathematical demonstrations, tind other truths that are not innate, are not assented to as soon as pro- posed, wherein they are distinguished from these maxims, and other innate truths. I shall have occasion to speak of assent upon the first proposing, more particularly by and bye. I shall here only, and that very readily, al- low, that these maxims and mathematical demonstrations are in this differ- ent; that the one has need of reason, using of proofs, to make them out, and to gain our assent ; but the other, as soon as understood, are, without any the least reasoning, embraced and assented to. But I withal beg leave to observe, that it lays open the weakness of this subterftige, which re- ■ quires the use of reason for the discovery of these general truths; since it must be confessed that in their discovery there is no use made of reasoning at all. And I think those who give this answer will not be forward to affirm, that the knowledge of this maxim, " that it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be," is a deduction of our reason; for this would be to destroy that' bounty of nature they seem so fond of, whilst they make the knowledge of those principles to depend on the labour of our thoughts. For all reasoning is search, and casting about, and requires pains and ap- plication ; and how can it, with any tolerable sense, be supposed, that what was imprinted by nature, as the foundation and guide of our reason, should need the use of reason to discover if? Sect. 11. Those who will take the pains to reflect witli a little atten- tion on the operations of the understanding, will find, that this ready assent^ of the mind to some truths, depends not either on native inscription, or on^ the use of reason; but on a faculty of the mind quite distinct from both of them, as we shall see hereafter. Reason, therefore, having nothing to do in procuring our assent to these ma::ims, if bv saving that men know nv^ g> 4-1 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. .• t • assent to them when they come to the use of reason, be meant, that the use of reason assists us in the knowledge of these maxims, it is utterly false ; and were it true, would prove them not to be innate. Sect. 12. The comivf>- to the use of reason, not the. time we come to know these iitaxims. — If by knowing and assenting to them, when we come to the use, of reason, be meant, that this is the time wlien they come to be taken notice of by the mind; and that, as soon as children come to the use of reason, they come also to Icnow and assent to these maxims; this also is false and fi-ivolous. First, it is false : because it is evident these maxims are not in the mind so early as the use of reason, and therefore the coming to the use of reason is falsely assigned as the time of their discovery. How many instances of the use of reason may we observe in children, a long time before they have any knov/ledge of this maxim, " that it is impossi- bj^for the same thing to be^ and not to be?" And a great part of illiterate people, and savages, pass many years, even of their rational age, without ever thinking on this and the like general propositions. I grant, men come not to the knowledge of these general and more abstract truths, which are thought innate, till they come to tlie use of reason ; and I add, nor then neither: which is so because, till after they come to the use of reason, those general abstract ideas are not framed in the mind, about which those gener- al maxims are, which are mistaken for innate principles : but are indeed discoveries made, and verities introduced and brought into the mind, by the same way, and discovered by the same steps, as several other propo- sitions, wliich nobody was ever so extravagant as to suppose innate. This I hope to make plain in the sequel of this discourse. I allow therefore a necessity that men should come to the use of reason before they get the knowledge of those general truths, but deny that men's coming to the use of reason is the time of their discovery. Sect. 13. By this they are not distinguishedfrom other knowahletruths. — In the mean time it is observable, that this saying. That men know and assent to these maxims when they come to the use of reason, amounts, in reality of fact, to no more but this, That they are never known nor taken notice of, before the use of reason, but may possibly be assented to, some time after, during a man's life, but when, is uncertain ; and so may all other knowable truths, as well as these ; which therefore have no advantage nor distinction fi-om others, by this note of being known when we come to the use of reason, nor are thereby proved to be innate, but quite contrary. Sect. 14. If coming to the use of reason were the time of their discov- ery, it would not prove them inyiate. — But, secondly, were it true that the precise time of their being known' and assented to were when men come to the use of reason, neither would that prove them innate. This way of arguing is as frivolous as the supposition of itself is false. For by what kind of logic will it appear, that any notion is originally by nature imprin- ted in the mind in its first constitution, because it comes first to be obser- ved and assented to, when faculty of the mind, which has quite a distinct province, begins to exert itself? And therefore, the coming to the use of speech, if it were supposed the time that these maxims are first assented to, (which it may be with as much truth as the time when men come to the use of reason) would be as good a proof that they were innate, as to say, they are innate, because men assent to them when they come to the use of reason. I agree then with these men of innate principles, that there is no knowledge of these general and self-evident maxims in the mind, till it comes to the exercise of reason ; but I deny that the coming to the use of reason is the precise time when they are first taken notice ofj and if thaTwerc the precise tirne, I deny that it would prove them innate. All that can, with any truth, be meant by this proposition, that men assent to them when they come to tlie use of reason, is no more but this ; that the Ch. 2. ON INNATE PRINCIPLES IN THE MIND. 4B making of general abstract ideas, and the understanding of general names, being a concomitant of the rational faculty, and growing up with it, children commonly get not those general ideas, nor learn the names that stand for them, till, having for a good while exercised their reason about familiar and more particular ideas, they are, by their ordinary discourse and actions with others, acknowledged to be capable of rational conversation. If assenting to these maxims, when men come to the use of reason, can be true in any other sense, I desire it may be shown ; or at least, how in this, or any other sense, it proves them innate. Sect. 15. The steps by which the mind attains several truths. — The | senses at first let in particular ideas, and furnish the yet empty cabinet ; l and the mind by degrees growing familiar with some of them, they are lodg- | ed in the memory, and names got to them : afterward the mind, proceeding ' farther, abstracts them, and by degrees learns the use of general names. In this manner, the mind comes to be furnished with ideas and language, the materials about which to exercise its discursive faculty ; and the use of . ; reason becomes daily more visibloj as tKesc'ihaterials that give it employ- V ment mcrease. But though the having of general ideas, a,nd the use of gen- eral wordVahd" reason, usually gi'ow together, yet, I see not how this any way proves them innate. The knowledge of some truths, I confess, is very early in the mind, but in a way that shows them not to be innate. For, if we wiU observe, we shall find it still to be about ideas, not innate, but ac- quired ; it being about those first which are imprinted by external things, with which infants have earliest to do, which make the most jfrequent im- pressions on their senses. In ideas chus got, the mind discovers that some agree and others differ, probably as soon as it has any use of memory ; as soon as it is able to retain and perceive distinct ideas. But whether it be then, or no, this is certain; it floes so long before it has the use of words, or comes to that, which we commonly call "t]iej^se_ofjreagon." For a child knows as certainly, before it can speak, the difference between the ideas of sweet and bitter (i. e. that sweet is not bitter) as it knows aflerward (when it comes to speak) that wormwood and sugar plums are not the same thing. Sect. 16. — A child knows not that three and four are equal to seven, till he comes to be able to count seven, and has got the name and idea of equal- ity ; and then, upon explaining those words, he presently assents to, or ra- ther perceives the truth of, that proposition. But neither does he then readily assent, because it is an innate truth, nor was his assent wanting till then,^ecause he wanted the use of reason ; but the truth of it appears to him, ra^soon as he has settled in liis mind the clear and distinct ideas that these names stand for; and then he knows the truth of that proposition, upon the same grounds, and by the sam.e means, that he knew before that a rod and a cherry are not the same tiling ; and upon the same grounds also, that he may come to know afterward, "that it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be," as shall be more fiiUy shown hereafter. So that the later it is before any one comes to have those general ideas, about wliich those maxims are ; or to know the signification of those general terms that stand for them ; or to put together in his mind the ideas they stand for ; the later also will it be before, he comes to assent to those maxims, whose terms, with the ideas they stand for, being no more innate than those of a cat or a weasel, he must stay tiU time and observation have acquainted him with them ; and then he will be in a capacity to know the truth of these maxims, upon the first occasion that shall make him put together those ideas in his mind, and observe whether they agree or disagree, according as is expres- sed in those propositions. And therefore it is, that a man knows that eigh- teen and nineteen are equal to thirty-seven, by the same self-evidence that he knows one and two to be equal to three ; yet a child knows this not so soon as the other, not for want of the use of reason, but because the ideas 46 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1 the words eighteen, nineteen, and thirty-seven stand fur, are not so soon got, as those wiiicli are signified by one, two, and three. Sect. 17. Assent ini>; as soon as jrroposed and understood, proves them not innate. — Tiiis evasion therefore of general assent, wlieu men come to the use of reason, failing as it does, and leaving no difference between those supposed innate, and other truths that are atlerward acquired and learnt, men have endeavoured to secure a universal assent to those they call max- ims, by saying, they are generally assented to as soon as proposed, and the terms they are proposed in, understood: seeing all men, even children, as soon as they hear and understand the terms, assent to these propositions, they think it is sufficient to prove them innate. For since men never fail, after they have once understood the words, to acknowledge them for imdoubt- ed truths they would infer, that certainly these propositions were first lodged in the imderstanding, which, without any teaching, the mind, at the very first proposal, immediately closes with, and assents to, and after that never doubts again. Sect. 18. If such an assent be a mark of innate, then "that one and two are equal to three; that sweetness is not bitterness,'^ and a thousand the like, must be innate. — In answer to this, I demand " whether ready as- sent given to a proposition upon first hearing, and understanding the terms, be a certain mark of an innate principle !" If it be not, such a general assent is in vain urged as a proof of them: if it be said, that it is a mark of innate, they must then allow all such propositions to be innate which are generally assented to as soon as heard, whereby they will find themselves plentifully stored with innate principles. For upon the same ground, viz. of assent at first hearing and understanding the terras, that men would have those maxims pass for innate, they must also admit several propositions about numbers to be innate; and thus, that one and two are equal to three; that two and two are equal to four ; and a multitude of other the like proposi- tions in numbers, that every body assents to at first hearing and understand- ing the terms, must have a place among these innate axioms. Nor is this the prerogative of numbers alone, and propositions made about sevetal of them ; but even natural philosophy and all the other sciences, afford proposi- tions which are sure to meet with assent as soon as they are understood. That two bodies cannot be in the same place, is a truth that nobody any more sticks at, than at these maxims: "that it is impossible for the same things to be, and not to be ; that white is not black ; that a square is not a circle ; that yellowness is not sweetness ;" these, and a million of other such propositions (as many at least as we have distinct ideas of), every man in his wits, at first hearing, and knowing what the names stand for, must ne- cessarily assent to. If these men will be true to their own rule, and have assent at first hearing and understanding the terms to be a mark of innate, they must allow, not only as many innate propositions, as men have dis- tinct ideas, but as many as men can make propositions, wherein different ideas are denied one of another. Since every proposition, wherein one dif- ferent idea is denied of another, will as certainly find assent at first hear- ing and understanding the terms, as this general one, "it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be ;" or that which is the foundation of it, and is the easier understood of the two, "the same is not different:" by which account they will have legions of innate propositions of this one sort, without mentioning any other. But since no proposition can be in- nate, unless the ideas, about which it is, be innate; this will be, to suppose all our ideas of colours, sounds, taste, figure, &c. innate, than which there cannot be any thing more opposite to reason and experience. Universal and ready assent, upon hearing and understanding the terms, is (I grant) a mark of self-evidence ; but self-evidence, depending not on innate impres- sions, but on something else (as we shall show hereafter), belongs to sev- eral propositions, which nobody was yet so extravagant as to pretend to be Imiate. Ch. 2. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES IN THE MIND. 47 Sect. 19. Such less general propositions known before these universal maxims. — Nor let it be said, that those more particular self-evident pro- positions, which are assented to at first hearing, as, that one and two are equal to three ; that green is not red, &c. ; are received as the consequence of those more universal propositions, which are looked on as innate prin- ciples ; since any one, who will but take the pains to observe what passes in the understanding, will certainly find, that these, and the like less general propositions, are certainly known, and firmly assented to, by those who are utterly ignorant of those more general maxims ; and so, being earlier in the mind than those (as they are called) first principles, cannot owe to them the assent wherewith they are received at first hearing. Sect. 20. One and one equal to two, <^c. not general nor useful, answered. — If it be said, that " these propositions, viz. two and two are equal to four ; red is not blue, &c. are not general maxims, nor of any great use;" I answer, that makes nothing to the argument of universal assent, upon hearing and understanding: for, if that be the certain mark of innate, whatever proposition can be found that receives general assent as soon as heard and understood, that must be admitted for an innate proposition, as well as this maxim, " that it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be;" they being upon this ground equal. And as to the difference of being more gen- eral, that makes this maxim more remote from being innate ; those general and abstract ideas being more strangers to our first apprehensions, than those of more particular self-evident propositions ; and therefore it is longer be- fore they are admitted and assented to by the growing understanding. And as to the usefulness of these magnified maxims, that perhaps will not be found so great as is generally conceived, when it comes in its due place to be more fully considered. Sect. 21. These maxims not being known sometimes until proposed, proves the?n not innate. — But we have not yet done with assenting to propositions at first hearing and understanding their terms ; it is fit we first take notice, that this, instead of being a mark that they are innate, is a proof of the contrary ; since it supposes that several, who understand and know other things, are ignorant of these principles, until they are proposed to them ; and that one may be unacquainted with these truths, until he hears them from others. For if they were innate, what need they be proposed in or- der to gaining assent ; when, by being in the understanding, by a natural and original impression (ifthere were any such), they could not but be known before f Or doth the proposing them print them clearer in the mind than nature did 1 If so, then the consequence will be, that a man knows them better after he has been thus taught them than he did before. Whence it will follow, that these principles may be made more evident to us by others' teaching, than nature has made them by impression ; which will ill agree with the opinion of innate principles, and give but little authority to them ; but, on the contrary, makes them unfit to be the foundations of all our other knowledge, as they are pretended to be. This cannot be denied; that men grow first acquainted with many of these self-evident truths, upon their being proposed ; but it is clear, that whosoever does so, finds in himself that he then begins to know a proposition which he knew not before, and which, from thenceforth, he never questions ; not because it was innate, j but because the consideration of the nature of the things contained in those i words, would not suffer him to think otherwise, how or whensoever he is brought to reflect on them : and if whatever is assented to, at first hearing and understanding the terms, must pass for an innate principle, every well- grounded observation, drawn from particulars- into a general rule, must be innate; when yet it is certain, that not all, but only sagacious heads, light at first on these observations, and ii^uce them into general propositions, not innate, but collected from a preceii'ug acquaintance, and reflection on particular instances. These, when observing men have made them, un- 4S OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. observing ni^, vvheu they are proposed to them, csmnot refuJse their as- sent to. Sect. 22. Implicitly known before proposing, signifies, that the mind is capable of andeislunding them, or else signifies nothing. — If it be said, " the understanding liath an implicit knowledge of these principles, but not an explicit, before this tirst hearing," (as they must, who will say, '« that they are in the understanding, before they are known") it will be liard to conceive what is meant by a principle imprmted on the understanding im- plicitly, unless it be this; that the mind is capable of understanduig and assenting firmly to such propositions. And thus all mathematical demon- strations, as well as first principles, must be received as native impressiona on the mind ; which I fear they will scarce allow them to be, wlio find it harder to demonstrate a proposition, than assent to it when demonstrated. And few mathematicians will be forward to believe, that all tlie diagrams they have drawn were but copies of those innate characters wliich nature had engraven upon their minds. Sect. 23. The argument of assenting on first hearing, is upon a false supposition of no precedent teaching. — There is, I fear, this further weak- ness in the foregoing argument, which would persuade us, that therefore those maxims are to be tiiought innate, wliich men admit at first hearing, because they assent to propositions, which they are not taught, nor do re- ceive from the force of any argument or demonstration, but a bare explication or understanding of the terms. Under which, there seems to me to lie this fallacy ; that men are supposed not to be taught, nor to learn any thing de novo ; when, in truth, they are taught, and do learn something they were ignorant of before. For first, it is evident, that they have learned the terms and their signification, neither of wliich was born with them. But this is not ail the acquired luiowledge m the case : the ideas themselves, about which the proposition is, are not bom with them, no more than their names, but got afterward. So that in all propositions that are assented to at first hearing, the terms of the proposition, their standing for such ideas, and the ideas them- selves that they stand for, being neither of them innate, I would fain know what there is remaining in such propositions that is innate. For I would glad- ly have any one name that proposition, whose terms or ideas were either of them innate. We by degrees get ideas and names, and learn their appro- priated connexion one with another ; and then to propositions made in such terms, whose signification we have learnt, and wherein the agreement or dis- agreement we can perceive in our ideas, when put together, is expressed, we at first hearing assent; though to other propositions, in themselves as certain and evident, but which are concerning ideas not so soon or so ea- sily got, we are at the same time no way capable of assenting. For though a child quickly assents to tliis proposition, that an " apple is not fire," when, by familiar acquaintance, he has got the ideas of those two different things distinctly imprinted on his mind, and has learnt that the names apple and fire stand for them ; yet, it will be some years after, perhaps, before the same child will assent to this proposition, " that it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be;" because, that though, perhaps, the words are as easy to be learnt, yet the signification of them being more large, comprehen- sive, and abstract, than of the names annexed to those sensible things the child hath to do with, it is longer before he learns their precise meaning, and it requires more time plainly to form in his mind those general ideas they stand for. Till that be done, you will in vain endeavour to make any child assent to a proposition made up of such general terms : but as soon as ever he has got those ideas, and learned their names, he forwardly closes with the one as well as the other of the fore-mentioned propositions, and with both for the same reason, viz. because he finds the ideas he has in his mind to agree or disagree, according as the words standing for them are ailirmsd or denied one of another in the projiosition. But if propo.sitioud Ch. 2. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES IN THE MIND. 49 be brought to him in words, which stand for ideas he has not yet in hia mind, to such propositions, however evidently true or false in themselves, he affords neither assent nor dissent, but is ignorant : for words being but empty sounds, any farther than they are signs of our ideas, we cannot but assent to them, as they correspond to those ideas we have, but no ferther than that. But the showing by what steps and ways knowledge comes into our mhids, and the grounds of several degrees of assent, being the business of the following discourse, it may suffice to have only touched on it here, as one reason that made me doubt of those innate principles. Sect. 24. Not innate, because not universally assented to. — To conclude this argument of universal consent, I agree, with these defenders of innate principles, that if they are innate, they must needs have universal assent ; for that a truth should be innate, and yet not assented to, is to me as unin- telligible, as for a man to know a truth, and be ignorant of it at the same time. But then, by these men's own confession, they cannot be innate ; since they are not assented to by those who luiderstand not the terms, nor by a great part of those who do understand them, but have yet never heard nor thought of those propositions; which, I think, is at least one half of mankind. But were the number far less, it would be enough to destroy universal assent, and thereby show these propositions not to be innate, if children alone were ignorant of them. Sect. 25. These maxims not the first known. — But that I may not be accused to argue from the thoughts of infants, which are unknown to us, and to conclude from what passes in their understandings before they ex- press it ; T say next, that these two general propositions are not the truths that first possess the minds of children, nor are antecedent to all acquired and adventitious notions: which, if they were innate, they must needs be. Whether we can determine it or no, it matters not ; there is certainly a time when children begin to think, and their words and actions do assure us that they do so. When therefore they are capable of thought, of know- ledge, of assent, can it rationally be supposed they can be ignorant of those notions that nature has imprinted, were there any such? Can it be imagi- ned with any appearance of reason, that they perceive the impressions from things without, and be at the same time ignorant of those characters which nature itself has taken care to stamp within] Can they receive and assent to adventitious notions, and be ignorant of those which are supposed woven into the very principles of their being, and imprinted there in in- delible characters, to be the foundation and guide of all their acquired know- ledge and future reasonings 1 This would be to make nature take pains to no purpose, or at least, to write very ill ; since its characters could not be read by those eyes which saw other things very well ; and those are very ill supposed the clearest parts of truth, and the foundations of all our know- ledge, which are not first known, and without which the undoubted know- ledge of several other things may be had. The child certainly knows that the nurse that feeds it is neither the cat it plays with, nor the blackmoor it is afraid of; that the wormseed or mustard it reftises is not the apple or sugar it cries for; this it is certaintly and undoubtedly assured of: but will any one say, it is by virtue of this principle, " that it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be," that it so firmly assents to these and other parts of its knowledge ; or that the child has any notion or apprehen- sion of that proposition, at an age, wherein yet, it is plain, it knows a great many other truths 1 He that will say, children join these general abstract speculations with their sucking bottles, and their rattles, may per- haps with justice, be thought to have more passion and zeal for his opinion, but less sincerity and truth, than one of that age. Sect. 26. And so not innate. — Though therefore there be several gen- eral propositions that meet with constant and ready assent, as soon as proposed to men grown up, who have attained the use of more general G 50 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. and abstract ideas, and names standing for them ; yet tlicy not being to be found in those of tender years, who nevertheless know other things, they cannot protend to universal assent of intelligent persons, and so by no means can be supjjoscd innate; it being impossible that any truth which is innate (if there were any such) should be unknown, at least to any one who knows any thing else: since, if there arc innate truths, they must be innate thoughts; there being nothing a trutii in the mind that it has never thought on. Whereby it is evident, if there be any innate truths in the mind, they must necessarily be the first of any thought on ; the first that appear there. Sect. 27. Not innate, because they appear least, where what is innate shows itself clearest. — That the general maxims we are discoursing of are not known to children, idiots, and a great part of mankind, we have already sufficiently proved ; whereby it is evident, they have not a universal assent, nor are general impressions. But there is tliis farther argument in it against their being innate : that these characters, if they were native and original impressions, should appear fairest and clearest in those persons in whom yet we find no footsteps of them : and it is, in my opinion, a strong presumption that they ere not innate, since they are least known to those, in whom, if they were innate, they must needs exert themselves with most force and vigour. For children, idiots, savages, and illiterate people, being of all others the least corrupted by custom, or borrowed opinions, learning and education having not cast their native thoughts into new moulds, nor by superinducing foreign and studied doctrines, confoimded those fair characters nature had written there ; one might reasonably imagine, that in their minds, these innate notions should lie open fairly to every one's view, as it is certain the thoughts of children do. It might very well be expected, that these principles should be perfectly known to naturals, which being stamped immediately on the soul (as these men suppose), can have no dependence on the constitutions or organs of the body, the only con- fessed difference between them and others. One would think, according to these men's principles, that all these native beams of light (were there any such) should in those who have uo reserves, no arts of concealment, shine out in their full lustre, and leave us in no more doubt of their being there, than we are of their love of pleasure and abhorrence of pain. But, alas ! among children, idiots, savages, and the grossly illiterate, what gen- eral maxims are to be found ] What universal principles of knowledge ] Their notions are few and narrow, borrowed onlyf rom those objects they have had most to do with, and wliich have made upon their senses the frequentest and strongest impressions. A child knows his nurse and his cradle, and by degrees, the playthings of a little more advanced age ; and a young savage has, perhaps, his head filled with love and hunting, according to the fashion of nis tribe. But he that from a child untaught, or a wild inhabitant of the woods, would expect these abstract maxims and reputed principles of sciences, will, I fear, find himself mistaken. Such kind of general propo- sitions are seldom mentioned in the huts of Indians, much less are they to be found in the thoughts of children, or any impressions of them on the minds of naturals. They are the language and business of the schools and academies of learned nations, accustomed to that sort of conversation or learning, where disputes are frequent; these maxims being suited to arti- ficial argumentation, and useful for conviction, but not much conducing to the discovery of truth or advancement of knowledge. But of their small use for the improvement of knowledge, I shall have occasion to speak more at large, I. 4, c. 7. Sect. 28. Recapitulation. — I know not how absurd this may seem to the masters of demonstration : and probably it will hardly down with any body at first hearing. I must therefore beg a little truce with prejudice, and the forbearance of censure, till I have been heard out in the sequel of Ch. 2. NO INNATE PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES. 51 this discourse, being very willing to submit to better judgments. And smce I impartially search after truth, I shall not be sorry to be convinced that I have been too fond of my own notions ; which, I confess, we are all apt to be, when application and study have warmed our heads with them. Upon the whole matter, I cannot see any ground to think these two speculative maxims innate, since they are not universally assented to ; and the assent they so generally find is no other than what several propositions, not allowed to be innate, equally partake in with them ; and since the as- sent that is given them is produced another way, and comes not from natural inscription, as I doubt not but to make appear in the following dis- course. And if these first principles of knowledge and science are found not to be innate, no other speculative maxims can (I suppose) with better right pretend to be so. CHAPTER III. NO INNATE PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES. Sect. 1. No moral principles so clear and so generally received as the forementioned speculative maxims. — If those specidative maxims, whereof we discoursed in the foregoing chapter, have not an actual universal assent from all mankind, as we there proved, it is much more visible concerning practical principles, that they come short of a universal reception : and I think it will be hard to instance any one moral rule which can pretend to so general and ready an assent .as, "what is, is;" or to be so manifest a truth as this, "that it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be." Whereby it is evident that they are farther removed from a title to be in- nate ; and the doubt of their being native impressions on the mind is stronger against those moral principles than the other. Not that it brings their truth at all in question : they are equally true, though not equally evident. Those speculative maxims carry their own evidence with them : but moral princi- ples require reasoning and discourse, and some exercise of the mind, to dis- cover the certainty of their truth. They lie not open as natural characters engraven on the mind ; which, if any such were, they must needs be visible by themselves, and by their own light be certain and known to every body. But this is no derogation to truth and certainty, no more than it is to the truth or certainty of the three angles of a triangle being equal to two right ones ; because it is not so evident, as, "the whole is bigger than a part ;" nor so apt to be assented to at first hearing. It may suffice, that these moral rules are capable of demonstration ; and therefore it is our own fault if we come not to a certain knowledge of them. But the ignorance wherein many men are of them, and the slowness of assent wherewith others receive them, are manifest proofs that they are not innate, and such as offer them- selves to their view without searching. Sect. 2. Faith and justice not owned as principles by all men. — Whether there be any such moral principles, wherein all men do agree, I appeal to any who have been but moderately conversant in the history of mankind, and looked abroad beyond the smoke of their own chimneys. Where is that practical truth, that is universally received without doubt or question, as it must be if innate] Justice, and keeping of contracts, is that which most men seem to agree in. This is a principle which is thought to extend itself to the densof thieves, and the confederacies of the greatest villains ; and they who have gone farthest towards the putting off of humanity itself, keep faith and rules of justice one with another. I grant that outlaws themselves do this one amongst another ; but it is without receiving these as the innate 52 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. ^ .-i'?^=i^^>Uw»^ Book. 1. laws of nature. They practise them as rules of convenience within their own coinmunilies : but it is impossible to conceive, tliathe embraces justice as a i)ractical princi])le, who acts fairly with his fellow-higiiwayrnaii, and at the same time plunders or kills the next honest man he meets witli. Jus- tice and truth are the common ties of society; and, therefore, even outlaws and robbers, who break with all the world besides, must keep faith and rules of equity among themselves, or else they cannot hold together. But will any one say, that those that live by fraud or rapine have innate principles of truth and justice which they allow and assent to. Sect. 3. Objection, Though men deny them in their practice, yet they admit them in their thoughts, answered. — Perhaps it will be urged, that tlie tacit assent of their minds agrees to what their practice contradicts. I answer, first, I have always thought the actions of men the best interpre- ters of their thoughts. But since it is certain, that most men's practices, and some men's opeu professions, have either questioned or denied these prin- ciples, it is impossible to establish an universal consent (though we should look for it only amongst grown men,) without which it is impossible to con- clude them innate. Secondly, it is very strange and unreasonable to sup- pose innate practical principles that terminate only in contemplation. Prac- tical principles derived from nature are there for operation, and must pro- duce conformity of action, not barely speculative assent to their truth, or else they are in vain distinguished from specidative maxims.|l| Nature, I con- fess, lias put into man a desire of happiness, and an aversion to misery ; tliese indeed are innate practical principles, which (as practical principles ought) do continue constantly to operate and influence all our actions with- out ceasing; these may be observed, in all persons and all ag-es, steady and universal; but these are inclinations of the appetite to good, not impressions of truth on the understanding. I deny not that there are natural tendencies ^ imprinted on the minds of men ; and that, from the very first instances of sense and perception, there are some tilings that are grateful, and others un- welcome to them ; some things that they incline to, and others that they fly ; but this makes nothing for innate characters on the mind, which are to be the principles of knowledge, regulating our practice. Such natural im- pressions on the understanding are so far fi"om being confirmed hereby, that this is an argument against them ; since, if there were certain characters imprinted by nature on the understanding, as the principles of knowledge, we could not but perceive them constantly operate in us, and influence our knowledge, as we do those others on the will and appetite; which never cease to be the constant springs and motives of all our actions, to which we perpetually feel them strongly impelling us. Sect. 4. Moral rules need a proof, ergo, not innate. — Another reason that makes me doubt of any innate practical principles, is, that I think there cannot any one moral rule be proposed, whereof a man may not just- lydemand a_reason ; which would be perfectly ridiculous and absurd, if they ■WereTnnate, or so much as self-evident ; which every innate principle must needs be, and not need any proof to ascertain its truth, nor want any reason to gain it approbation. He would be thought void of common sense, who asked, on the one side, or on the other side went to give a reason, why "it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be." It carries its own light and evidence with it, and needs no other proof: he that understands the terms, assents to it for its own sake, or else nothing will ever be able to prevail with him to do it. But should that most unshaken rule of morality, and foundation of all social virtue, " that one should do as he would be done unto," be proposed to one who never heard it before, but yet is of ca- pacity to understand its meaning, might he not, without any absurdity, ask a reason why 7 And were not he that proposed it bound to make out the truth and reasonableness of it to him 7 whicli plainly shows it not to be in- nate ; for if it were, it could neither want nor receive any proof; but must « 1 a' V Ch. 3 NO INNATE PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES. 53 needs (at least as soon as heard and understood) be received and assented to, as an unquestionable truth, which a man can by no means doubt of. So tliat tlie truth of all these moral rules plainly depends upon some other an- tecedent to them, and from which they must be deduced ; which could not IjeTif eitlier they were innate, or so much as self-evident. \ Sect. 5. Instance in keeping compacts. — That men should keep their ' compacts, is certainly a great and undeniable rule in morality. But yet, if \\ a Christian, who has the view of happiness and misery in another life, be , ( asked why a man must keep his word ! he will give this as a reason ; Because ' God, who has the power of eternal lite and death, requires it of us. But if a Hobbist be asked why, he will answer. Because the public requires it, I and the leviathan will punish you if you do not. And if one of the old \ philosophers had been asked, he would have answered. Because it was dis- fs honest, below the dignity of a man, and opposite to virtue, the highest per- fection of human nature, to do otherwise. Sect. 6. Virtue generally approved, not because innate, but because \>^ profitable. — Hence naturally flows the great variety of opinions concern- P ing moral rules which are to be found among men, according to the differ- ^ ent sorts of happiness they have a prospect of, or propose to themselves : ^ j which could not be, if practical principles were innate, and imprinted in our ] ^ x^ -. minds immediately by the hand of God. I grant the existence of God is so V^ many ways manifest, and the obedience we owe him so congruous to the ^ light of reason, that a great part of mankind give testimony to the law of j a^, ; »>. nature ; but yet I think it must be allowed, that several moral rules may re- j i J I I J ceive from mankind a very general approbation, without either knowing or \» ^ ! admitting the true ground of morality; which can only be the will and law K . > ' of a God, who sees men in the dark, has in his hand rewards and punish- I ^ \} raents, and power enough to call to account the proudest offender: for God j ^ y| having, by an inseparable connexion, joined virtue and public happiness to- V gether, and made the practice thereof necessaiy to the preservation of society, ^^^ S.^ ' and visibly beneficial to all with whom the virtuous man has to do, it is no ^ .' V) wonder that every one should not only allow, but recommend and magnify, ^ ^i those rules to others, from whose observance of them he is sure to reap ad- ^ Cjl vantage to himself. He may, out of interest as well as conviction, cry up v]_ that for sacred, which, if once trampled on and profaned, he himself cannot f , be safe nor secure. This, thougli it takes nothing from the moral and eter- I Ij^ nal obligation which these rules evidently have, yet it shows that the out- I |^ " ward acknowledgment men pay to them in their words, proves not that I i'^ they are innate principles; nay, it proves not so much as that men as- !^ sent to them inwardly in their own minds, as the inviolable rules of tlieir own '^ • ^i practice ; since we find tliat self-interest, and the conveniences of this life, \Jj make many men own an outward profession and approbation of them, whose y ^' actions sufficiently prove that they very little consider the lawgiver that I y prescribed these rules, nor the hell that he has ordained for the punishment f J ' . of those that transgress them. ^ <\ Sect. 7. Men's actions convince us that the rule of virtue is not their \ n)^ internal principle. — For if we will not in civility allow too much sincerity $ . to professions of most men, but think their actions to be the interpreters of \ their thoughts, we shall find that they have no such internal veneration for (., r tji^se rules, nor so fiiU a persuasion of their certainty and obligation. The ^\-^ J great principle of morality, "to do as one woidd be done to," is more com- '^M\^ mended than practised. But the breach of this rule cannot be a greater v\ vice than to teach others that it is no moral rule, nor obligatory, would be ft »>K A «\ vice man uo leacn orncrs rnai it is no moral rule, nor oDUgatory, wouiaoe \ ^- thought madness, and contrary to that interest men sacrjAe to, when they ' )n-eak it themselves. Perhaps conscience will be urgedw checking us for \ ' I such breaches, and so the internal obligation and establishment of the rule v \J be preserved. V^ I* Sect. 8. (Jonscienre no proof of any innate moral rale. — To which I V^ ^ 1 54 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. answer, that I doubt not but, without being written on their hearts, many men may, by tlie same way that they come to the knowledge of other things, come to assent to several moral rules, and be convinced of their obligation. Others also may come to be of the same mind, from their education, com- pany, and customs of their country ; wJiicli persuasion, however got, will serve to set conscience on work, which is nothing else but our own opinion or judgment of the moral rectitude or pravity of our own actions. And if conscience be a proof of innate principles, contraries may be innate princi- ples ; since some men, with the same bent of conscience, prosecute what others avoid. Sect. 9. Instances of enormities practised without remorse. — But I cannot see how any men should ever transgress those moral rules, with conlldence and serenity, were they innate, and stamped upon their minds. View but an army at the sacking of a town, and see what observation or sense of moral principles, or what touch of conscience for all the out- rages they do. Robberies, murders, rapes, are the sports of men set at liberty from punishment and censure. Ilave there not been whole nations, and those of the most civilized people, amongst whom the exposing their childi'en, and leaving them in the fields to perish by want or wild beasts, has been the practice, as little condemned or scrupled, as the begetting them] Do they not still, in some countries, put tliem into the same graves with their mothers, if they die in childbirth ; or despatch them, if a pretended astrologer declares them to have unhappy stars! And are there not places where, at a certain age, they kill or expose their parents without any re- morse at all! In a part of Asia, the sick, when their case comes to bo thought desperate, are carried out and laid on the earth, before they are dead ; and left there, exposed to wind and weather, to perish without as- sistance or pity(a). It is familiar among the Mingrelians, a people professing Christianity, to bury their children alive without scruple(i). There are places where they geld their children(c). The Caribbees were wont to geld their children, on purpose to fat and eat them(d). And GarcOcisso de la Vega tells us of a people in Peru which were wont to fat and eat the children they got on their female captives, whom they kept as concubines for that purpose ; and when they were past breeding, the mothers them- selves were killed, too, and eaten(e). The virtues whereby the Tououpin- ambos believed they merited paradise were revenge, and eating abundance of their enemies. They have not so much as the name of God(/), and havei no religion, no worsliip. The saints who are canonized amongst the Turks lead lives which one cannot with modesty relate. A remarkable passage •to this purpose, out of the voyage of Baumgarten, which is a book not every day to be met with, I shall set down at large in the language it is published in. Ibi (sc. prope Belbes in iEgypto) vidimus sanctum unura Saracenicum inter arenarum cumulos, ita ut ex utero matris prodiit, nudum sedentem. Mos est, ut didicimus, Mahometistis, ut eos, qui amentes et sine ratione sunt, pro Sanctis colant et venerentur. Insuper et eos, qui cum diu vitamegerint inquinatissimam, voluntariam demum pcenitentiam et pau- pertatem, sanctitate venerandos deputant. Ejusmodi vero genus horninum libertatem quandam effriBnem liabent, domes quas volunt intrandi, edendi, bibendi, et quod majus est, concumbendi ; ex quo concubitu si proles secuta fuerit, sancta similiter habetur. His ergo hominibus dum vivunt, mag- nos exhibent honores; mortuis vero vel templa vel moiiumenta extruunt amplissima, eosque contingere ac sepelire maxima; fortunse ducunt loco. Audivimus hjec dicta et dicenda per interpretem aMucrelo nostro. Insuper sanctum ilium, ajem eo loco vidimus, publicitus apprime commendari, eum (a) Griiber apud Thevenot, part 4, p. 13. {b) Lambert apud Thevenot, p. 38. (<■) Vossiiis de Xili Origine, c. IS, 19. {d) P. Mart Dec. 1. (e) Hist. or doubt of the law, hopes to escape the knowledge or power of the law- ^ maker, or the like, may malce men give way to a present appetite ; but '.> let any one see the fault, and the rod by it, and with the transgression a f.]^ fire .ready to punish it ; a pleasure tempting, and the hand of the Almighty .^' visibly held up, and prepared to take vengeance (for this must be the case, ^^ where any duty is imprinted on the mind ;) and then tell me whether it be } possible for people, with such a prospect, such a certain knowledge as this, " wantonly, and without scruple, to offend against a law which they carry • "^ about them in indelible characters, and that stares them in the face whilst they are breaking it ] Whether men, at the same time that they feel in them- selves the imprinted edicts of an omnipotent lawmaker, can with assurance and gaiety slight and trample under foot his most sacred injunctions? And lastly, whether it be possible, that whilst a man thus openly bids defiance to this innate law and supreme lawgiver, all the by-standers, yea, even the governors and riders of the people, full of the same sense both of the law and law-maker, should silently connive, without testifying their dislike, or laying the least blame on if! Principles of actions indeed there are lodged in men's appetites, but these are so far from being innate moral principles, that, if they uere left to their full swing, they woidd carry men to the over- turniug of all morality. Moral laws are set as a curb and restraint to these exorbitant desires, which they cannot be but by rewards and punishments, that Ch. 3. NO INNATE PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES. 57 will overbalance the satisfaction any one shall propose to himself in the breach of the law. If, therefore, any thing be imprinted on the mind of all men as a law, all men must have a certain and unavoidable knowledge that certain and unavoidable punishment will attend the breach of it. For if men can be ignorant or doubtful of what is innate, innate principles are in- sisted on and urged to no purpose ; truth and certainty (the things pretended) are not at all secured by them ; but men are in the same uncertain floating estate with as withoutthem. An evident indubitable knowledge of unavoida- ble punislmient, great enough to make the transgression very uneligible, must accompany an innate law ; unless, with an innate law, they can suppose an innate gospel too. 1 would not be here mistaken, as if, because I deny an innate law, I thought there were none but positive laws. There is a great deal of difference between an innate law, and a law of nature ; between sometliing imprinted on our minds in their very original, and something that we being ignorant of, may attain to the knowledge of by the use and due application of our natural faculties. And I think they equally forsake the truth, who, running into contrary extremes, either ailirm an innate law, or deny that there is a law knowable by the light of nature, i. e. without the help of positive revelation. Sect. 14. Those who maintain innate jwaciical principles, tell us not what they are. — The difterence there is among men in their practical prin- ciples is so evident, that, I think, I need say no more to evince that it will be impossible to find any innate moral rules by this mark of general assent: and it is enough to make one suspect that the supposition of such innate principles is but an opinion taken up at pleasure; since those who talk so confidently of t!icm are so sparing to tell us whicli they are. This might with justice be expected from those men who lay stress upon this opinion; and it gives occasion to distrust either their knowledge or charity, who, declaring that God has imprinted on the minds of men the foundations of knowledge, and the rules of living, are yet so little favourable to the infor- mation of their neighbours, or the quiet of mankind, as not to point out to them which they are, in the variety men are distracted with. But, in truth, were there any such innate principles, there would be no need to teach them. Did men find such innate propositions stamped on their minds, they would easily be able to distinguish them from other trutlis, that they afterwards learned and deduced from them ; and there would be nothing more easy than to know what, and how many, they were. There could be no more doubt about their number than there is about the number of our fingers ; and it is like then every system would be ready to give them us by tale. But since nobody, that I know, has yet ventured to give a cata- logue of them, they cannot blame those who doubt of these innate principles; since even they v/ho require men to believe that there are such innate propositions, do not tell us what they are. It is easy to foresee, that if different men of different sects should go about to give us a list of those innate practical principles, they would set down only such as suited their distinct hypotheses, and were fit to support the doctrines of their particu- lar schools or churches ; a plain evidence that there are no such innate truths. Nay, a great part of men are so far from finding any such innate moral principles in themselves, that by denying freedom to mankind, and thereby making men no other than bare machines, they take away not only j innate, but all moral rules whatsoever, and leave not a possibility to believe j any such, to those who cannot conceive how any thing can be capable of i a law that is not a free agent ; and, upon that gi'ound, they must necessa- .' rily reject all principles of virtue, who cannot put morality and mechanism together ; which are not very easy to be reconciled or made consistent. Sect. 15. Lord Herbert's innate principles examined. — When I had writ this, being informed that my lord Herbert had, in his book De Veritate, assigned these innate principles, I presently coa: ulted him, hoping to find, H 58 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. in a man of so great parts, something that might satisfy me in this point, and put an end to my inquiry. In his cliapter oe Instinctu Naturali, p. 7ii, edit. 165G, I met with these six marlis of his Notitiic Communes : 1. Prioritas. 2. Independentia. 3. Universahtas. 4. Certitudo. 5. Ncccssitas, i. e. as he explains it, faciunt ad liominis conservationem. 6. Modus conforma- tionis, i. e. Assensus imlla interposita mora. And at the latter end of his little treatise, De Religione Laici, lie says this of these innate principles : Adeo ut non uniuscujusvis roligionis confinio arctcntur que ubique vigcnt veritates. Sunt enim in ipsa mente ccclitus dcscriptcc, nullisquetraditioni- bus, sive scriptis, sive non scri])tis, obnoxifc, p. 3. And " Veritates nostra) catholicjB quffi tanquam indubia Dei effata in foro interiori descriptse. Thus having given the marks of the innate principles, or common notions, and asserted their being imprinted on the minds of men by the hand of God, he proceeds to set them down, and they are these : 1. Esse aliquod supremum numen. 2. Numen illud coli debere. 3. Virtutem cum pietate conjunc- tam optiman esse rationem cultus divini. 4. Ilesipiscendum esse a pecca- tis. 5. Dari prajmimii vel poenam post hanc vitam transactam. Though I allow these to be clear truths, and such as, if rightly explained, a rational creature can hardly avoid giving his assent to ; yet I think he is far from proving them innate impressions " in foro interiori descriptae." For I must take leave to observe, Sect. 10. First, that these five propositions are either not all, or more than all, those common notions writ on our minds by the finger of God, if it were reasonable to believe any at all to be so written : since there are other propositions, which, even by his own rules, have as just a pretence to such an original, and may be as well admitted for innate principles, as at least some of these five he enumerates, viz. " do as thou wouldst be done unto;" and perhaps some hundreds of others, when well considered. Sect. 17. Secondly, that all his marks are not to be found in each of liis five propositions, viz. his first, second, and third marks agree perfectly to neither of them ; and the first, second, third, fourth, and sixth marks agree but ill to his third, fourth, and fifth propositions. For besides that we are assured firom history of many men, nay, whole nations, who doubt or disbelieve some or all of them, I cannot see how the third, viz. " that virtue joined with piety is the best worship of God," can be an innate prin- ciple, when the name or sound, virtue, is so hard to be understood ; liable to so much uncertainty in its signification ; and the thing it stands for so much contended about, and difficult to be known. And therefore this can be but a very uncertain rule of human practice, and serve but very little to the conduct of our lives, and is therefore very unfit to be assign- ed as an innate practical principle. Sect. 18. For let us consider this proposition as to its meaning (for it is the sense, and not sound, that is and must be the principle or common notion,) viz. " virtue is the best worship of God;" i. e. is most acceptable to him ; which, if virtue be taken, as most commonly it is, for those actions which, according to the different opinions of several countries, are accoun- ted laudable, will be a proposition so far from being certain, that it will not be true. If virtue be taken for actions conformable to God's will, or to the rule prescribed by God, which is the true and only measure of virtue, when virtue is used to signify what is in its own nature right and good : then this proposition, " that virtue is the best worship of God," will be most true and certain, but of very little use m human life : since it will amount to no more but this, viz. " that God is pleased with the doing of what he commands;" which a man may certainly know to be true, with- out knowing what it is that God doth command ; and so be as far from any rule or principle of liis actions as he was before. And I think very few will take a proposition which amounts to no more than this, viz. " that God is pleased with tlie doing of what he himself commands," for Ch. 3. NO INNATE PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES. 59 an innate moral principle writ on the minds of all men (however true and certain it may be,) since it teaches so little. Whosoever does so, will have reason to think hundreds of propositions innate principles ; since there are many which have as good a title to be received for such, which nobody yet ever put into that rank of innate principles. Sect. 19. Nor is the fourth proposition (viz. " men must repent of their sins") much more instructive, till what those actions are that are meant by sins be set down. For the word peccata, or sins, being put, as it usually is, to signify in general ill actions, that will draw punishment upon the doers, what great principle of morality can that be, to tell us we should be sorry, and cease to do that which will bring mischief upon us, without knowing what those particular actions are, that will do so I Indeed, this is a very true proposition, and lit to be inculcated on, and received by those, who are supposed to have been taught, what actions in all kinds are sins ; but neither this nor the former can be imagined to be innate principles, nor to be of any use, if they were innate, unless the particular measures and bounds of all virtues and vices were engraven in men's minds, and were innate principles also ; which I tliink is very much to be doubted. And, therefore, I imagine it will scarce seem possible that God should en- grave principles in men's minds, in words of uncertain signification, such as virtues and sins, which, among different men, stand for different things ; nay, it cannot be supposed to be in words at all ; which, being in most of these principles very general names, cannot be understood, but by knowing the particulars comprehended under them. And, in tlie practical instances, the measures must be taken from the knowledge of the actions themselves, and the rules of them, abstracted fi'om words, and antecedent to the know- ledge of names ; v/hich rules a man must know, what language soever he chance to learn, whether English or Japanese, or if he should learn no lan- guage at all, or never should understand the use of words, as happens in the case of dumb and deaf men. When it shall be made out that men ignorant of words, or untaught by the laws and customs of their country, know that it is part of the worship of God not to kill another man ; not to know more women than one ; not to procure abortion ; not to ex- pose their childi-en ; not to take fi-om another what is his, though we want it ourselves, but, on the contrary, relieve and supply his wants ; and whenever we have done the contrary we ought to repent, be sorry, and resolve to do so no more : when, I say, all men shall be proved actually to know and allow all these, and a thousand other such rules, all which come under these two general words made use of above, viz. " virtues et peccata," virtues and sins, there will be more reason for admitting these and the like for common notions and practical principles. Yet, after all, universal consent (were there any in moral principles) to truths, the know- ledge whereof may be attained otherwise, would scarce prove them innate ; which is all I contend for. Sect. 20. Obj. — innate princifles may he comipted, answered. — Nor wUl it be of much moment here to offer that very ready, but not very ma- terial answer, (viz.) that the innate principles of morality may, by education and custom, and the general opinion of those among whom we converse, be darkened, and at last quite worn out of the minds of men. Which as- sertion of theirs, if true, quite takes away the argument of universal consent, by which this opinion of innate principles is endeavoured to be proved ; un- less those men will tliink it reasonable that their private persuasions, or that of their party, should pass for universal consent : a thing not unfrequently done, when men, presuming themselves to be the only masters of right rea- son, cast by the votes and opinions of the rest of mankind as not worthy the reckoning. And then their argument stands tiuis: "the principles which all mankind allow for true are innate ; those that men of right reason admit, are the principles allowed by all maukiud ; we, and tho.se of our mind, are 60 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. men of roason; therefore, we agreeing, our principles are innate ;" which is a very pretty way of arguing, and a short cut to infallibility. For other- wise it will be hard to understand, how there be some principles which all men do acknowledge and agree in; and yet there are none of those princi- ples, which are not by depraved custom and ill education blotted out of the minds of many men ; which is to say, that all men admit, but yet many men do deny and dissent from them. And indeed the supposition of such first principles will serve us to very litle purpose ; and we shall be as much at a loss with as without them, if they may, by any human power, such as the will of our teachers, or opinions of our companions, be altered or lost in us . and notwithstanding all this boast of first principles and innate light, we shall be as much in the dark and uncertainty, as if there were no such thing at all : it being all one, to have no rule, and one that will warp any way ; or, among various and contrary rules, not to know which is the right. But concerning innate principles, I desire these men to say, whether they can, or cannot, by education and custom, be blurred and blotted out: if they can- not, we must find them in all mankind alike, and they must be clear in every body : and if they may suifer variation irom adventitious notions, we must then find them clearest and most perspicuous nearest the fountain, in chil- dren and illiterate people, who have received least impressions from foreign opinions. Let them take which side they please, they will certainly find it inconsistent with visible matter of fact and daily observation. Sect. 21. Contrary principles in the world. — I easily grant that there are great numbers of opinions, which by men of different countries, educa- tions, and tempers, are received and embraced as first and unquestionable principles; many whereof, both for their absurdity, as well as oppositions to one another, it is impossible should be true. But yet all those proposi- tions, how remote soever from reason, are so sacred somewhere or other, that men, even of good understanding in other matters, will sooner part with their lives, and whatever is dearest to them, than suffer themselves to doubt, or others to question, the truth of them. • ■ Sect. 22. How men commonly come by their principles. — Tliis, however strange it may seem, is that which every day's experience confirms ; and will not, perhaps, appear so wonderfiil, if we consider the ways and steps by which it is brought about ; and how really it may come to pass, that doc- trines that have been derived firom no better original than the superstition of a nurse, or the authority of an old woman, may, by length of time and consent of neighbours, grow up to the dignity of principles in religion or morality. For such who are carefiil (as they call it) to principle children well (and few there be who have not a set of those principles for them, which they believe in) instil into the imwary, and as yet unprejudiced im- derstanding (for white paper receives any characters,) those doctrines they would have them retain and profess. These being taught them as soon as they have any apprehension, and still as they grow up confirmed to them, either by the open profession, or tacit consent, of all they have to do with : or at least by those of whose wisdom, knowledge, and piety, they have an opinion, who never suffer those propositions to be otherwise mentioned, but as the basis and foundation on which they build their religion and man- ners ; come, by these means, to have the reputation of unquestionable, self- evident, and innate truths. Sect. 23. To which we may add, that when men, so instructed, are grown up, and reflect on their own minds, they cannot find any thing more ancient there than those opinions which were taught them before their me- mory began to keep a register of their actions, or date the time when any new thing appeared to them ; and therefore make no scruple to conclude, that those propositions, of whose knowledge they can find in themselves no ori- ginal, were certainly the impress of God and nature upon their minds, and not taught them by any one else. These they entertain and submit to, as Ch. 3. NO INNATE PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES. 61 many do to their parents, with veneration ; not because it is natural ; nor do children do it where they are not so taught ; bat because, having been always so educated, and having no remembrance of the beginning of this respect, they think it is natural. Sect. 24. This will appear very likely, and almost unavoidably to come to pass, if we consider the nature of mankind, and the constitution of hu- man affairs ; wherein most men cannot live without employing their time in the daUy labours of their calling; nor be at quiet in their minds without some foundation or principle to rest their thoughts on. There is scarce any one so floating and superficial in his understanding, who hath not some reverenced propositions, which are to him the principles on which he bot- toms his reasonings ; and by which he judgeth of truth and falsehood, right and wrong : which some, wanting skiU and leisure, and others the inclina- tion, and some being taught that they ought not to examine, there are few to be found who are not exposed by their ignorance, laziness, education, or precipitancy, to take them upon trust. Sect. 25. This is evidently the case of all children and yoimgfolk , and cuBtopi, a greater power than nature, seldom failing to make them worship for divine what she hath inured thera to bow their minds and submit their understandings to, it is no wonder that grown men, either perplexed in the necessary affairs of life, or hot in the pursuit of pleasures, should not seriously sit down to examine their own tenets ; especially when one of their principles is, that principles ought not to be questioned. And had men leisure, parts, and will, who is there almost that dare shake the fomi- dations of all his past thoughts and actions, and endure to bring upon him- self the shame of having been a long time wholly in mistake and error? Who is there hardy enough to contend with the reproach which is every where prepared for those who dare venture to dissent from the received opinions of their country or party I And where is the man to be found that can patiently prepare himself to bear the name of whimsical, skeptical, or atheist, which he is sure to meet with, who does in the least scruple any of the common opinions f And he will be much more afraid to question those principles, when he shall think them, as most men do, the standards set up by God in his mind, to be the rule and touchstone of all other opin- ions. And what can hinder him from thinking them sacred, when he finds them the earliest of his own thoughts, and the most reverenced by others? Sect. 26. It is easy to imagine how by these means it comes to pass that men worship the idols that have been set up in their minds ; grow fond of the notions they have long been acquainted with there ; and stamp the characters of divinity upon absurdities and errors ; become zealous votaries to bulls and monkeys ; and contend too, fight and die, in defence of their opinions ;•' Dum solos credit habendos esse deos, quoa ipse colit." For since the reasoning faculties of the soul, which are almost constantly, though not always warily nor wisely ^ employed, would not know how to move, for want of a foundatian and footing, in most men ; who, through laziness or avocation, do not, or for want of time, or true helps, or for other causes, cannot penetrate into the principles of knowledge, and trace truth to its fountain and original ; it is natural for them, and almost unavoidable, to take up with some borrowed principles : which being reputed and pre- sumed to be the evident proofs of other things, are thought not to need any other proof themselves. Whoever shall receive any of these into his mind, and entertain them there, with the reverence usually paid to prin- ciples, never venturing to examine them, but accustoming himself to believe them, because they are to be believed, may take up from his education, and the fashions of his country, any absurdity for innate principles ; and by long poring on the same objects, to dim his sight, as to take monsters lodged in his own brain for the images of the Deity, and the workmanship of his hands. 62 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Bookl. Sect. 27. Principles must be examined. — By this progress now many there are who arrive at principles wiiich they believe innate may be easily observ- ed, in the variety of opposite principles held and contended for by all sorts and degrees of men. And he that shall deny this to be the method where- in most men proceed to the assurance they have of the truth and evidence of their principles, will perhaps find it a hard matter any other way to ac- count for the contrary tenets which are firmly believed, confidently asserted, and which great numbers are ready at any time to seal with their blood. And, indeed, if it be the privilege of innate principles to be received upon their own authority, without examination, I know not what may not be believ- ed, or how any one's principles can be questioned. If they may and ought to be examined, and tried, I desire to know how first and innate principles can be tried ; or at least it is reasonable to demand the marks and charac- ters, whereby the genuine innate principles may be distinguished from others ; that so, amidst the great variety of pretenders, I may be kept from mistakes in so material a point as tliis. When this is done, I shall be ready to embrace such welcome and useful propositions ; and till then, I may with modesty doubt, since I fear nniversal consent, which is the only one produced, will scarce prove a sufficient mark to direct my choice and as- sure me of any innate principles. From what has been said, I think it past doubt that there are no practical principles wherein all men agree, and therefore none innate. CHAPTER IV. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING INNATE PRINCIPLES, BOTH SPECULATIVE AND PRACTICAL. Sect. 1. Principles not innate, unless their ideas he innate. — Had those who would persuade us that there are innate principles, not taken them together in gross, but considered separately the parts out of which those propositions are made, they would not, perhaps, have been so for- ward to believe they were innate: since, if the ideas which made up those truths were not, it was impossible that the propositions made up of them should be innate, or the knowledge of them be born with us. For if the ideas be not innate, there was a time when the mind was without those principles ; and then they will not be innate, but be derived from some other original. For where the ideas themselves are not, there can be no knowledge, no assent, no mental or verbal propositions about them. Sect. 2. Ideas, especially those belonging to principles, not born with children. — If we will attentively consider new-born children, we shall have little reason to think that they bring many ideas into the world with them. For bating perhaps some faint ideas of hunger and thirst, and warmth, and some pains which they may have felt in the womb, there is not the least appearance of any settled ideas at all in them ; especially of ideas answering the terms which make up those universal propositions that are esteemed innate principles. One may perceive how, by degrees, after- ward, ideas come into their minds ; and that they get no more, nor no other than what experience, and the observation of things that come in their way, furnish them with : which might be enough to satisfy us that they are not original characters stamped on the mind. Sect. 8. " It is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be," is certainly (if there be any such) an innate principle. But can any one think, or will any one say, that impossibility and identity are two innate ideas? Are they such as all mankind have, and bring into the world with Ch. 4. _^ NO INNATE PRINCIPLES. 63 them 1 And are^hose which are the first in children, and antecedent to all acquired ones? If they are innate, they must needs be so. Hath a child an idea of impossibility and identity before it has of white or black, sweet or bitter ? And is it from the knowledge of this principle that it concludes, that wormwood rubbed on the nipple hath not the same taste that it used to receive from thence] Is it the actual knowledge of" im- possibiJe est idem esse, et non esse," that makes a child distinguish between its mother and a stranger? or that makes it fond of the one and flee the other? Or does the mindregidate itself and its assent by ideas that it never yet had? or the understanding draw conclusions from principles which it never yet knew nor understood? The names impossibility and identity stand for two ideas, so far from being innate, or born with us, that I think it requires great care and attention to form them right in our understanding. They are so far from being brought into the world with us, so remote from the thoughts of infancy and childhood, that I believe, upon examination, it will be found that many grown men want them. Sect. 4. Identity, an idea not innate. — If identity (to instance in that alone) be a native impression, and consequently so clear and obvious to us, that we must needs know it even from our cradles, I would gladly be re- solved by one of seven, or seventy years old, whether a man, being a crea- ture, consisting of soul and body, be the same man when his body is chan- ged? Whether Euphorbus and Pythagoras, having had the same soul, were the same men, though they lived several ages asunder? Nay, whether the cock too, which had the same soul, were not the same with both of them? Whereby, perhaps, it will appear that our idea of sameness is not so settled and clear as to deserve to be thought innate in us. For if those innate ideas are not clear and distinct, so as to be universally known, and naturally agreed on, they cannot be subjects of universal and undoubted truths ; but will be the unavoidable occasion of perpetual un- certainty. For, I suppose, every one's idea of identity wiU not be the same that Pythagoras and others of his followers have : and which then shall be true ? Which innate ? Or are there two diflferent ideas of identity, both innate?" Sect. 5. Nor let any one think that the questions I have here proposed about the identity of man, are bare empty speculations ; which, if they were, would be enough to show that there was in the understandings of men no innate idea of identity. He that shall, with a little attention, reflect on the resurrection, and consider tliat divine justice will bring to judgment, at the last day, the very same persons, to be happy or miserable in the other, who did well or ill in this life, will find it perhaps not easy to resolve with himself what makes the same man, or wherein identity consists : and will not be forward to think he, and every one, even children themselves, have naturally a clear idea of it. Sect. 6. Whole and part not innate ideas. — Let us examine that prin- ciple of mathematics, viz. " that a whole is bigger than a part." This, I take it, is reckoned among innate principles. I am sure it has as good a title as any to be thought so ; which yet nobody can think it to be, when he considers the ideas it comprehends in it, " whole and part," are perfect- ly relative ; but the positive ideas, to which they properly and immediately belong, are extension and number, of wliich alone whole and part are re- lations. So that if whole and part are innate ideas, extension and number must be so too ; it being impossible to have an idea of a relation without having any at all of the thing to which it belongs, and in which it is found- ed. Now, whether the minds of men have naturally imprinted on them the ideas of extension and number, I leave to be considered by those who are the patrons of innate principles. Sect. 7. Ideas of worship not innate. — " That God is to be worshipped," is, without doubt as great a truth as any can enter into the mind of man, 64 OF IIUALAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. and (It'scrvco the first place among all practical principles. But yet it caji by no means be thought innate, unless the ideas of God and worship are innate. That the idea tiieterin worship stands for is not in the understand- ing of children, and a character stamped on the mind in its first original, I think, will be easily granted by any one that considers how few there be, among grown men, wlio have a clear and distinct notion of it. And, I suppose, there cannot be any thing more ridiculous than to say that children have this practical ])rinciple innate, "that God is to be worship- ped:" and yet that they know not what that worship of God is, which is their duty. But to pass by this : Skot. 8. Idea of God not innate. — If any idea can be imagined innate, the idea of God may, of all others, for many reasons, be thought so ; since it is hard to conceive how there should be innate moral principles without an innate idea of a Deity: without a notion of a lawmaker, it is impossible to have a notion of a law, and an obligation to observe it. Besides the atheists taken notice of among the ancients, and left branded upon the re- cords of history, hath not navigation discovered, in these later ages, whole nations, at the bay of SoldaniaCff)» ^ Brazil(i), in Boranday(c), and in the I Caribee islands, &c. among whom there was to be found no notion of a God, I no religion "J Nicholaus del Techo in literis ex Paraquaria de Caaiguarum conversione, has these words((Z): " Reperi eam gentem nullum nomen habere, quod Deum et hominis animam significet, nulla sacra habet, nulla idola." These are instances of nations where imcultivated nature has been left to itself, without the help of letters and discipline, and the im- provement of arts and sciences. But there are others to be found, who have enjoyed these in a very great measure, who yet, for want of a due application of their thoughts this way, want the idea and knowledge of God. It will, I doubt not, be a surprise to others, as it was to me, to find the Siamites of this number. But for this let them consult the king of France's late envoy thither(e), who gives no better account of the Chinese themselves(y*). And if we will not believe La Loubere, the missionaries of China, even the Jesuits themselves, the great encomiasts of the Chinese, do all, to a man, agree, and will convince us that the sect of the literati, or learned, keeping to the old religion of China, and the ruling party there, are all of them atheists. [Vid. Navarette, in the collection of voyages, vol. i. and Historia cultus Sinensium.] And perhaps if we should, with attention, mind the lives and discourse of people not so far oflf", we should have too much reason to fear, that many in more civilized countries have no very strong and clear impressions of a Deity upon their minds; and that the com- plaints of atheism, made from the pulpit, are not without reason. And though only some profligate wretches own it too barefacedly now ; yet per- haps we should hear more than we do of it from others, did not the fear of the magistrate's sword, or their neighbour's censure, tie up people's tongues ; which, were the apprehensions of punishment or shame taken away, would as openly proclaim their atheism, as their lives do (g). (a) Roe apud Thevenot, p. 2. {b) Jo. de Lery, c. 16. c) Martiniere 2 01 Terry JJL. and 2J_. Ovington 4P. (d) Relatio triplex de rebus Indicis Caaiguarum ±3_ (e) La Loubere du Royaume du Siara, t. 1, c. 9, sect. 15, and c. 20, sect. 22, and c. 22, sect. 6. (/) lb. t. 1. c. 20, sect. 4, and c. 23. (o) ^'* ^^'^ reasoning of the author against innate ideas, great blame hath been laid ; because it seems to invalidate an argument commonly used to prove the being of a God, viz. universal consent : to which our author answers*, I think that the universal consent of mankind, as to the being of a God, amounts to thus much, that the vastly greater majority of mankind have, in all ages of the world, * In his third letter to the nisho[i of Worcester. Cb. 4. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES/-^ 65 ^ Sect. 9. But had all mankind, every where, a notion of a God, (whereof ' yet history tells us the contrary) it would not from thence follow that the : idea of him was innate. For though no nation were to be found without a name, and some few dark notions of him, yet that would not prove them to be natural impressions on the mind, any more than the names of tire, or the i sun, heat, or number, do prove the ideas they stand for to be innate, be- cause the names of those things, and the ideas of them, are so universally received and known among mankind. Nor, on the contrary, is the want of sucli a name, or the absencel)fliu,fh a notion, out of men's minds, any argument against the being of a God; any more than it would be a proof that there was no loadstone in the world, because a great part of mankind had neither a notion of any such thing, nor a name for it; or bjf%ny show of argument to prove, that there are no distinct and various species of angels or intelligent beings above us, because we have no ideas of such dis- tinct species, or names for them: for men being furnished with words, by the common language of their own countries, can scarce avoid having some kind of ideas of those things, whose names those they converse with have occasion frequently to mention to them. And if they carry with it the notion of excellency, greatness, or something extraordinary; if ap- prehension and concernment accompany it; if the fear of absolute and ir- resistible power set it on upon the mind, the idea is likely to sink the deeper, and spread the farther: especially if it be sucli an idea as is agreeable to the common light of reason, and naturally deducible from every part of our knowledge, as that of a God is. For the visible marks of extraordinary wisdom and power appear so plainly in all the works of the creation, that a rational creature, who will but seriously reflect on them, cannot miss the discovery of a Deity. And the influence that the discovery of such a being must necessarily have on the minds of all, that have but once heard of it, is so great, and carries such a weight of thought and communication with it, that it seems strange to me that a whole nation of men should be any actually believed a God ; that the majority of the remaining part have not actually disbelieved it; and consequently those who have actually opposed the belief of a God have truly been very few. So that comparing those that have actually disljelieved, with those who have actually believed a God, their number is so inconsiderable, that in respect ofthis incomparably greater majority, of those who have owned the belief of a God, it may be said to be the universal consent of mankind. This is all the universal consent which truth or matter of fact will allow ; and therefore all that can he made use of to prove a God. But if any one would ex- tend it farther, and speak deceitfully for God ; if this universality should be urged in a strict sense, not for much the majority, but for a general consent of every one, even to a man, in all ages and countries, this would make it either no argument, or a perfectly useless and unnecessary one. For if any one deny a God, such an universality of consent is destroyed \ and if nobody does deny a God, what need of arguments to convince atheists ? I would crave leave to ask you lordship, were there ever in the world any atheists or no ? If there were not, what need is there of raising a question about the being of a God, when nobody questions it ? What need of provisional argu- ments against a fault, from which mankind are so wholly free, and which by an universal consent, they may be presumed to be secure from ? If you say (as I doubt not but you will) that there have been atheists in the world, then your lordship's universal consent reduces itself to only a great majority ; and then make that majority as great as you will, whac I have said in the place quoted by your lordship leaves it in its full force ; and I have not said one word that does in the least invalidate this argument for a God. The argument I was upon there, was to show, that the idea of God was not innate ; and to my purpose it was sufficient, if there were but a less number found in the world, who bad no idea of God, than your lordship will allow there have been of professed atheists ; for I 06 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book I. where found so brutish as to want the notion of a God, than that they should be without any notion of numbers or tire. - Sect. 10. Tlic Jianie of God being once mentioned in any part of the world, to express a superior, powerful, wise, invisible being-, the suitable- ness of such a notion to the principles of common reason, and the interest men will always have to mention it otlen, must necessarily spread it far and wide, and continue it down to all generations; though yet the general re- ception of this name, and some imperfect and unsteady notions conveyed thereby to the unthinking part of mankind, prove not the idea to be innate ; but only that they who made the'discovery had made a right use of their reason, thought maturely of the causes of things, and traced them to their original; from whom other less considering people, having once received so important a notion, it could not easily be lost again. Sect. 11. This is all could be inferred from the notion of a God, were it to be found universally in all the tribes of mankind, and generally acknowledged by men grown to maturity in all countries. For the generality of the acknowledging of a God, as I imagine, is extended no farther than that ; which if it be sufficient to prove the idea of God innate, will as well prove the idea of fire innate ; since, I think, it may be truly said, that there is not a person in the world, who has a notion of a God, who has not also the idea of fire. I doubt not, but if a colony of yomig children should be placed in an island where no fire was, they would certainly neither have any notion of such a thing, nor name for it ; how generally soever it were received and known in all the world besides : and perhaps too their apprehensions would be as far removed from any name or notion of a God, till some one among them had employed his thoughts to inquire into the constitution and causes of things, which would easily lead him to the notion of a God; which having once taught to others, rea- son, and the natural propensity of their own thoughts, would afterward pro- pagate and continue among them. ^, ■whatsoever is innate must be universal in the strictest sense. One exception is a sufficient proof against it. So that all that I said, and which was quite to ano- ther purpose, did not at all tend, nor can be made use of, to invalidate tlie argu- ment for a Deity, grounded on such an universal consent, as your lordship, and all that build on it, must own ; which is only a very disproportionate majority ; •such an universal consent my argument there neither affirms nor requires to be less than you will be pleased to allow it. Your lordship therefore might, with- out any prejudice to those declarations of good-will and favour you have for the author of the "Essay of Human Understanding," have spared the mentioning his quoting authors tliat are in print, for matters of fact to quite another purpose, ' "as going about to invalidate the argument for a Deity, from the universal con- sent of mankind; since he leaves that universal consent as entire and as large as you yourself do, or can own, or suppose it. But here I liave no reason to be sorry that your lordship has given me this occasion for tlie vindication of this passage of my' book ; if there should be any one besides your lordship, who should so far mistake it, as to think it in the least invalidates the argument for a God, from the universal consent of mankind. But because you question the credibility of those authors Ihave quoted, which you say were very ill-chosen, I will cr.ive leave to say, that he whom I relied on for his testimony concerning the Hottentots of Soldania, was no less a man than an ambassador from the king of England to the Great Mogul ; of whose rela- tion. Monsieur Tlievenot, no ill judge in the case, had so great an esteem, that he was at the pains to translate into French and publisli it in his (which is counted no injudicious) Collection of Travels. But to intercede with your lordship for a little more favourable allowance of credit to Sir Thomas Roe's relation ; Coore, an inhabitant of the country, who could speak English, assured Mr Terry*, tliat they of Soldania had no God. But if he, too, have the * Terry's Voyage, p. 17, 23. Ch. 4. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES. 67 Sect. 12. Suitable to God's goodness, that all men should /lare^an' iiV*]^I^/^ idea of him, therefore naturally imprinted by him, ajisujered.— ^Indeed '<^*^ it is urged, that it is suitable to the' goodness of God to imprint upon the minds of mey characters and notions of himself, and not to leave them in the dark and doubt in so grand a concernment; and also by that means to secure to himself the homage and veneration due from so intelligent a creature as man ; and therefore he has done it. This argument, if it be of any force, will prove much more than those who use it in this case expect from it. For if we may conclude that God . hath done for men all that men shall judge is best for them, because it is suitable to his goodness so to do ; it will prove not only that God has im- printed on the minds of men an idea of himself, but that he hath plainly . ,. stamped there, in fair characters, all that men ought to know or believe of i. • him, all that they ought to do in obedience to his will ; and that he hath given them a will and affections conformable to it. This, no doubt, every one will think better for men, than that they should in the dark grope after ' -l. knowledge, as St Paul tells us all nations did after God, Acts xvii. 27, '' than that their wills should clash Vv'ith their understandings, and their ap- petites cross their duty. The Romanists say, it is best for men, and so suitable to the goodness of God, that there should be an infallible judge of ^^, controversies on earth; and therefore there is one. And I, by the same reason say, it is better for men that every man himself should be infallible. I leave them to consider, whether by the force of this argument they shall think that every man is so. I think it a very good argument to say, the infinitely wise God hath made it so ; and therefore it is best. But it ill luck to find no credit with you, I hope you will be a little more favoui-able to ^ a divine of the church of England, now living, and admit of his testimony in '•' confirmation of Sir Thomas Roe's. This worthy gentleman, in the relation -*- of >j|is voyage to Surat, printed but two years since, speaking of the same -i people, has these words*: "They are sunk even below idolatry, are desti- ■~^ tute of both priest and temple, and, saving a little show of rejoicing, which ,^- is made at the full and new moon, have lost all kind of religious devotion. '!* Nature has so richly provided for their convenience in this life, that they have ^ drowned all sense of the God of it, and are grown quite careless of the next." '3 But to provide against the clearest evidence of atheism in these people, you say, " that the account given of them makes them not fit to be a standard ^ — for the sense of mankind." This, I think, may pass for nothing, till some- < , body be found that makes them to be a standard for the sense of mankind. ^ All the use I made of them was to show, that there were men in the world — that had no innate idea of a God. But to keep something like an argument ^^ going, (for what will not that do ?) you go near denying those Cafers to be men. What else do these words signify? "A people so strangely bereft of common sense, that they can hardly be reckoned among mankind, as appears by the best accounts of the Cafers of Soldania, Sec." I hope, if any of them were called Peter, James, or John, it would be past scruple that they were men : however, Courwee, Wewena, and Cowsheda, and those others wlio had names, that had no places in your nomenclator, v/ould hardly pass muster with your _ lordship. X My Lord, I should not mention this, but that what you yourself say here, ^ may be a motive to you to consider, that what you have laid such sti-ess .on J*" concerning the general nature of man, as a real being, and the subject of proper- ties, amounts to nothing for the distinguishing of species ; since y oil yourself own, that there may be individuals, wherein there is a common nature witli a parti- cular subsistence proper to each of them ; whereby you are so little ahle to know of which of the ranks or sorts they are, into which you say God has ordered be- ings, and which he hath distinguished, by essential properties, that you are in doubt whether they ought to be reckoned among mankind or no. * Mr Ovington, p. 489. 68 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book i. seems to mc a little too nuicli confidence of our own wisdom to say, " I think it best, and tlierciure God hath made it so;" and, in the matter in hand, it will be in vain to argue from such a topic that God Jiath done so, when certain experience shows us that he hath not. But the goodness of God hath not been wanting to men witliout such original impressions of knowledge, or ideas stamped on the mind : since he hath furnished man with those faculties, which will serve for the sufficient discovery of all things requisite to the end of such a being. And I doubt not but to show that a man, by the right use of his natural abilities, may, without any innate principles, attain a knowledge of a God, and other things that concern him. God having endued man with those faculties of knowing which he hath, was no more obliged by his goodness to plant those innate notions in his mind, than that, having given him reason, hands, and materials, he should build him bridges or houses ; which some people in the world, however of good parts, do either totally want, or are but ill provided of, as well as others are wholly without ideas of God, and principles of morality ; or at least \. ^^*^'''' have _but very ill ones. The reason in both cases being, that they never <*\'U\ \"^ositions can be innate, since no ideas are innate. — Whatever then we talk of innate, either speculative or practical, principles, it may, with as much probability, be said, that a man hath lOOZ. sterlmg in his pocket, and yet denied that he hath either penny, shilling, crown, or any other coin out of which the sum is to be made up, as to think that certain propositions are innate, when the ideas about which they are, can by no means be supposed to be so. The general reception and assent that is given doth not at all prove that the ideas expressed in them are innate : for in many cases, however the ideas came there, the assent to words, expressing the agreement or disagreement of such ideas, will necessarily follow. Every one, that hath a true idea of God and worship, will assent to this proposition, " that God is to be worshipped," when expressed in a language he understands : and every rational man, that hath not thought on it to-day, may be ready to assent to this. proposition to-morrow; and yet millions of men jnay be well supposed to want one or both those ideas to-day. For if "we will allow savages and most country pecfple to have ideas of God and worship, (which conversation with them will not make one forward to believe,) yet I think few children can be supposed to have those ideas, which therefore they must begin to have some time or other; and then they will begin to assent to that proposition, and make very lit- tle question of it ever after. But such an assent upon hearing, no more proves the ideas to be innate, than it does that one born blind (with cataracts, which will be couched to-morrow) had the innate ideas of the sim, or liqht, or saffron, or yellow; because, when his sight is cleared, he will cer- tnmly assent to this proposition, " that the sun is lucid, or that saffron is yollow;" and, therefore, if such an assent upon hearing cannot prove the Ch. 4, NO INNATE PRINCIPLES. 71 ideas innate, it can much less tlie propositions made up of those ideas. If they have any innate ideas, I would be glad to be told what, and how many, they are. Sect. 20. No innate ideas in the memory. — To which let me add: if there be any innate ideas, any ideas in the mind, which the mind does not actually tliink on, they must be lodged in the memory, and from thence must be brought into view by remembrance : i. e. must be laiown, when they are remembered to have been perceptions in the mind before, unless remem- brajice can be without remembrance. For to remember is to perceive any thing with memory, or with a consciousness that it was known or perceived before : without tliis, whatever idea comes into the mind is new, and not re- membered ; this consciousness of its havingbeen in the mind before, being that which distinguishes remembering from all other ways of tliinking. What- ever idea was never perceived by the mind was never in the mind. What- ever idea is in the mind, is either an actual perception, or else, having been an actual preception, is so in the mind, that by the memory it can be made an actual perception again. Whenever there is the actual perception of an idea without memory, the idea appears perfectly new and unknown before to the understanding. Whenever the memory brings any idea into actual view, it is with a consciousness that it had been there before, and was not wholly a stranger to the mind. Whether this be not so, I appeal to every one's observation ; and then I desire an instance of an idea, pre- tended to be innate, which (before any impression of it, by ways hereafter to be mentioned) any one could revive and remember as an idea he had formerly known; without which consciousness of a former perception there is no remembrance ; and whatever idea comes into the mind without that consciousness, is not remembered, or comes not out of the memory, nor can be said to be in the mind before that appearance : for what is not either actually in view, or in the memory, is in the mind no way at all, and is all one as jf it had never been there. Suppose a child had the use of his eyes, till he knows and distinguishes colours ; but then cataracts slmt the windows, and he is forty or fifty years perfectly in the dark, and in that time per- fectly loses all memory of the ideas of colours he once had. This was the case of a blind man I once talked with, who lost his sight by the small-pox when he was a child, and had no more notion of colours than one born blind. I ask, whether any one can say this man had then any ideas of colours in his mind, any more than one born blind'? And I think nobody will say that either of them had in his mind any idea of colours at all. His cataracts are couched, and then he has the ideas (which he remembers not) of colours, de novo, by his restored sight, conveyed to his mind, and that without any consciousness of a former acquaintance : and these now he can revive and call to mind in the dark. In this case all these ideas of colours, which when out of view can be revived with a consciousness of a former acquain- tance, being thus in the memory, are said to be in the mind. The use I make of this is, that whatever idea, being not actually in view, is in the mind, is there only by being in the memory; and if it be not in the memory, it is not in the mind ; and if it be in the memory, it cannot by the memory be brought into actual view, without a perception that it comes out of the memory ; which is this, that it had been known before, and is now remembered. If, therefore, there be any innate ideas, they must be in the memory, or else no where in the mind; and if they be in the memory, they can be revived without any impression from without ; and whenever they are brought into the mind, they are remembered, i. e. they bring with them a perception of their not being wholly new to it. This being a con- stant and distinguishing difference between what is, and what is not in the memory, or in the mind ; that what is not in the memory, whenever it appears there, appears perfectly new and unknown before ; and what is in the memory, or in the mind, wheneverit is suggested by the memory, appears not 73 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1. to be new, but the mind finds it in itself, and knows it was there before. By this it may be tried, whetlier there be any innate ideas in the mind, be- fore impression from Bcnsation or reflection. I would fain meet with the man who, when he came to tlie use of reason, or at any other time, re- membered any one of them; and to whom, atler he was born, they were never new. If any one will say, there are ideas in tiie mind that are not in the memory, I desire him to explain himself, and make what lie says intelligible. Sect. 21. Principles not innate, because of little tise, or little cer- tainty.— Besides what I have already said, there is another reason why I doubt that neither these nor any other princi))les are innate. I that am fully persuaded tliat the infinitely wise God made all tilings in perfect wisdom, cannot satisfy myself why he should be supposed to print upon the minds of men some universal principles; whereof those that are pretended innate, and concern speculation, are of no great use; and tliose that con- cern practice not self evident: and neither of tliem distinguishable from some other truths, not allowed to be innate. For to what purpose should characters be graven on the mind by the finger of God, which are not clearer there than those which are afterwards introduced, or cannot be distin- guished from them] If any one thinks there are such innate ideas and pro- positions, which by their clearness and usefulness are distinguishable from all that is adventitious in the mind, and acquired, it will not be a hard matter for him to tell us which they are, and then every one will be a fit judge whether they be so or no; since if there be such innate ideas and im- pressions, i)lainly different from all other perceptions and knowledge, every one will find it true in himself. Of the evidence of these supposed innate maxims I have spoken already ; of their usefulness I shall have oc- casion to speak more hereafter. Sect. 22. Difference of men^s discoveries depends upon the different application of their faculties. — To conclude : some ideas forwardly offer themselves to all men's understandings ; some sorts of truth result from any ideas, as soon as the mind puts them into propositions; other truths require a train of ideas placed in order, a due comparing of them, and deductions made with attention, before they can be discovered and assented to. Some of the first sort, because of their general and easy reception, have been mistaken for innate ; but the truth is, ideas and notions are no more born with us than arts and sciences, though some of them indeed offer themselves to our faculties more readily than others, and therefore are more generally received; though that too be according as the organs of our bodies and powers of our minds happen to be employed: God having fitted men with faculties and means to discover, receive, and retain truths, ac- cording as they are employed. The great diiference that is to be found in the notions of mankind is from the different use they put their faculties to ; whilst some (and those the most) taking things upon trust, misem- ploy their power of assent, by lazily enslaving their minds to the dictates and dominion of otliers in doctrines, which it is their duty carefiilly to e.x- amine, and not blindly, with an implicit faith, to swallow ; others, employ- ing their thouglits only about some few things, grow acquainted sufficiently with them, attain great degrees of knowledge in them, and are ignorant of all other, having never let their thoughts loose in the search of other in- quiries. Thus, tliaL the three angles of a triangle are equal to two right ones, is a truth as certain as any thing can be, and I think more evident than many of those propositions that go for principles ; and yet there are millions, liowever expert in other tilings, who know not this at all, because they never set their thoughts on work about such angles ; and he that certainly knows this proposition, may yet be utterly ignorant of the truth of other pro- positions, in mathematics itself, which are as clear and evident as tliis, be- cause, in his search of those mathematical truths, he stopped his thoughts Ch. 4. NO INNATE PRINCIPLES. 73 short, and went not so far. The same may happen concerning the notions we have of the being of a Deity ; for though there be no truth which a man may more evidently make out to himself than the existence of a God, yet he that shall content himself with things as he finds them, in this world, as they minister to his pleasures and passions, and not make inquiry a little farther into the causes, ends, and admirable contrivances, and pursue the thoughts thereof v/ith diligence and attention, may live long without any notion of such a being. And if any person hath by talk put such a notion into his head, he may perhaps believe it ; but if he hath never examined it, his knowledge of it will be no perfecter than his, who having been told that the three angles of a triangle are equal to two right ones, takes it upon trust, without examining the demonstration ; and may yield his assent as a probable opinion, but hath no knowledge of the truth of it; which yet his faculties, if carefully employed, were able to make clear and evident to him. But this only by the by, to show how much our knowledge depends upon the right use of those powers nature, hath bestov/ed upon us, and how little upon such innate principles, as are in vain supposed to be in all man- kind for their direction ; which all men could not but know, if they were there, or else they would be there to no purpose ; and which, since all men do not know, nor can distinguish from other adventitious truths, we may well conclude there are no such. Sect. 23. i][c7i must think and knoio for themsehes.-^What censure, doubting thus of innate principles, may deserve from men, who will be apt to call it pidling up the old foundations of knowledge and certainty, I can- not tell ; I persuade myself, at least, that the way I have pursued, being conformable to trutli, lays those foundations surer. This, I am certain, I have not made it my business either to quit or follow any authority m the ensuing discourse : truth has been my only aim, and wherever that has ap- peared to lead, my thoughts have impartially followed, without minding whether the footsteps of any other lay that way or no. Not that I want a due respect to other men's opinions ; but after all, the greatest reverence is due to truth : and I hope it will not be thought arrogance to say that per- haps we should make gi'eater progress in the discovery of rational and con- templative knowledge if we soug-ht it in the fountain, in the considei'ation of things themselves, and made use rather of our own thoughts than other men's to find it; for I think we may as rationally hope to see with other . men's eyes, as to know by other men's understandings. So much as we ourselves consider and comprehend of truth and reason, so much we pos- sess of real and true knowledge. The floating of other men's opinions in oiir brains makes us not one jot the more knowing, though they happen to be true. What in them was science, is in us but opiniatrety ; whilst we give up our assent only to reverend names, and do not, as they did, employ our own reason to understand those truths which gave them reputation. Aristotle was certainly a knowing man, but nobody ever thought him so, because he blindly embraced, and confidently vented, the opinions of another. And if the taking up of another's principles, without examining them, made not him a philosopher, I suppose it will hardly make any body else so. In the sciences, every one has so much as lie really knows and comprehends ; what he believes only, and takes upon trust, are but shreds ; which, how- ever well in the whole piece, make no considerable addition to his stock who gathers them. Such borrowed wealth, like fairy-money, though it were gold in the hand from which he received it, will be but leaves and dust when it comes to use. Sect. 24. Whence the opinion of innate principles. — When men have found some general propositions, that could not be doubted of as soon as understood, it was, I know, a short and easy way to conclude them innate. This being once received, it oased the lazy from the pains of search, and stopped the inquiry of the doubtful concerning all that was once styled in- K 74 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 1 nate. And it was of no email advantage to tliose wlio afFected to be masters and teachers, to make this tlie principle of princi])los, " that princi- ples must not be questioned:" for havintr once establislied this tenet, tliat there are innate principles, it put their followers upon a necessity of receiv- ing some doctrines as such; which was to take them off from the use of their own reason and judgment, and put tliem upon believing and taking them upon trust, without farther examination: in which posture of blind credulity they might be more easily governed by, and made useful to, some Bort of men, who had the skill and office to principle and guide them. Nor is it a small power it gives one man over another, to liave the authority to be the dictator of principles, and teacher of unquestionable truths ; and to make a man swallow tiiat for an innate principle which may serve to his purpose who teacheth them; whereas, had they examined the ways where- by men came to tlie liuowledge of many universal trutjis, they would have found them to result in the minds of men, from the being of things them- selves, when duly considered; and that they were discovered by the appli- cation of those faculties that were fitted by nature to receive and judge of them, when duly employed about them. Sect. 25. Conclusion. — To show how the understanding proceeds here- in, is the design of the following discourse ; which I shall proceed to, when I have first premised, that hitherto, to clear my way to those foundations which I conceive are the only true ones whereon to establish those notions we can have of our own knowledge, it hath been necessary for me to give an account of the reasons I had to doubt of innate principles. And since the arguments which are against them do some of them rise from common received opinions, I have been forced to take several things for granted, which is hardly avoidable to any one, whose task it is to show the false- hood or improbability of any tenet : it happening in controversial discourses as it does in assaulting of towns, where, if the ground be but firm whereon the batteries are erected, there is no farther inquiry of whom it is borrow- ed, nor whom it belongs to, so it affords but a fit rise for the present pur- pose. But in the future part of this discourse, designing to raise an edifice uniform and consistent with itself, as far as my own experience and obser- vation will assist me, I hope to erect it on such a basis, that I shall not need to shore it up with props and buttresses, leaning on borrowed or begged foundations ; or at least, if mine prove a castle in the aij, I will endeavour it shall be all of a piece, and hang together. Wherein I warn the reader not to expect undeniable cogent demonstrations, unless I may be allowed the privilege, not seldom assumed by others, to take my princi- ciples for granted; and then, I doubt not, but I can demonstrate too. All that I shall say for the principles I proceed on, is, that I can only appeal to men's own unprejudiced experience and observation, whether they be true or no ; and this is enough for a man who professes no more than to lay down candidly and freely his own conjectures concerning a subject lying somewhat in the darjc, without any other design than an unbiassed inquiry after truth. Ch. 1. OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. 75 BOOK II. OF IDEAS. CHAPTER I. OF IDEAS IN GENERAL, AND THEIR ORIGINAL. Sect. 1. Idea is the object of thinking. — Every man being conscious to himself that he thinks, and that which his mind is applied about whilst thinking, being the ideas that are there, it is past doubt, that men have in their minds several ideas, such as are those expressed by the words wliite- ness, hardness, sweetness, thinking, motion, man, elephant, army, drun- kenness, and others. It is in the tirst place then to be inquired, how he comes by them. I know it is a received doctrine, that men have native ideas and original characters stamped upon their minds in their very first being. Tills opinion I have, at large, examined already ; and I suppose, what I have said, in the foregoing book, will be much more easily admitted, when I have shown whence the understanding may get all the ideas it has, and by what ways and degrees they may come into the mind ; for which I shall appeal to every one's own observation and experience. Sect. 2. All ideas come from sensation or reflection. — Let us then suppose the mind to be, as \ve say, wliite paper, void of all characters, without any ideas ; how comes it to be furnished 1 Whence comes it by that vast store which the busy and boundless fancy of man has painted on it, with an almost endless variety? Whence has it all the materials of reason and knowledge 1 To this I answer in one word, from experience ; in that all our knowledge is founded, and from that it ultimately derives itself. Our observation employed either about external sensible objects, or about the internal operations of our minds, perceived and reflected on by ourselves, is that which supphes our understandings with all the materials of thinking. These two are the fountains of knowledge, from whence all the ideas we have, or can naturally have, do spring. Sect. 3. The objects of sensation one source of ideas. — First, Our senses, conversant about particular sensible objects, do convey into the mind several distinct perceptions of things, according to those various ways wherein those objects do affect them : and tlms we come by those ideas we have of yellov/, white, heat, cold, soft, hard, bitter, sweet, and all those which we call sensible qualities ; which, when I say the senses con- vey into the mind, I mean, they, from external objects, convey into the mind what produces there those perceptions. This great source of most of the ideas we have, depending wholly upon our senses, and derived by them to the understanding, I call sensation. Sect. 4. The operations of our minds the other source of them. — Secondly, The other fountain from which experience furnisheth the un- derstanding with ideas, is the perception of the operations of our own mind- within us, as it is employed about the ideas it has got, which operations, when the soid comes to reflect on and consider, do furnish tlie under- standing with another set of idea, which could not be had from tilings with- out ; and such are preception, thinking, doubting, believing, reasoning, knowing, willing, and all the different actings of our own minds ; which we being conscious of and observingin ourselves, do from these receive into our understandings as distinct ideas, aa we do from bodies affecting our senses. 76 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. This source of ideas every man has wholly in himself; and though it be not sense, as havinsr nothing to do with external objects, yet it is very like it, and might properly enough be called internal sense. But as I call the other sensation, so I call this, reflection, the ideas it affords being such only as the mind gets by reflecting on its own operations within itself. By reflection, then, in the following part of this discourse, I would be under- stood to mean that notice wliich the mind takes of its own operations, and the manner of them ; by reason whereof there come to be ideas of these operations in the understanding. These two, I say, viz. external material things, as the objects of sensation and the operations of our own minds with- in, as the objects of reflection ; are to me the only originals from whence all our ideas take their beginnings. The term operations here 1 use in a large sense, as comprehending not barely the actions of the mind about its ideas, but some sort of passions arising sometimes from them, such as is the satisfaction or uneasiness arising from any thought. Sect. 5. All our ideas are of the one or the other of these. — The un- derstanding seems to me not to have the least glimmering of any ideas, which it doth not receive from one of these two. External objects furnish the mind with the ideas of sensible qualities, which are all those different perceptions they produce in us : and the mind furnishes the understand- ing with ideas of its own operations. These, when we have taken a full survey of them and their several modes, combinations, and relations, we shall find to contain all our whole stock of ideas ; and that we have nothing in our minds which did not come in one of these two ways. Let any one examine his own thoughts, and thoroughly search into his understanding ; and then let him tell me, whe- ther all the original ideas he has there are any other than of the objects of his senses, or of the operations of his mind, considered as objects of his re- flection ; and how great a mass of knowledge soever he imagines to be lodg- ed there, he will, upon taking a strict view, see that he has not any idea in his mind, but what one of these two have imprinted ; though perhaps with infinite variety compounded and enlarged by the understanding, as we shall see hereafter. Sect. 6. Observable in children. — He that attentively considers the state of a child, at his first coming into the world, will have little reason to think him stored with plenty of ideas, that are to be the matter of his future knowledge: it is by degrees he comes to be furnished with them. And though the ideas of obvious and familiar qualities imprint themselves before the memory begins to keep a register of time or order, yetitis oflen so late before some unusual qualities come in the way, that there are few men that cannot recollect the beginning of their acquaintance with them ; and if it were worth while, no doubt a child might be so ordered as to have but a very few even of the ordinary ideas, till he were grown up to a man. But all that are born into the world being surrounded with bodies that per- petually and diversely affect them, variety of ideas, whether care be taken of it or no, are imprinted on the minds of children. Light and colours are busy at hand every where, when the eye is but open ; sounds and some tangible qualities ftiil not to solicit tlieir proper senses, and force an entrance to the mind ; but yet, I think, it will be granted easily, that if a child were kept in a place where he never saw any other but black and white till he were a man, he would have no more ideas of scarlet or green, than he that from his childhood never tasted an oyster or a pine-apple has of those par- ticular relishes. Sect. 7. Men are differently furnished with these, according to the different objects they converse with. — Men then come to be furnished with fewer or more simple ideas from without, according as the objects they converse with afford greater or less variety ; and from the operations of their minds within, according as they more or less reflect on them. Foi Ch. 1. THE ORIGINAL OF OUR IDEAS. 77 thouo-h he that contemplates the operations of his mind cannot but have plain and clear ideas of them ; yet, unless he turns his thoughts that way, and con- siders them attentively, he will no more have clear and distinct ideas of all the operations of his mind, and all that may be observed therein, than he will have all the particular ideas of any landscape, or of the parts and motions of a clock, who will not turn his eyes to it, and with attention heed all the parts of it. The picture or clock may be so placed, that they may come in his way every day ; but yet he will have but a confused idea of all the parts they are made up of, till he applies himself with attention to consider them each in particular. Sect. 8. Ideas of reflection later, because they need attention. — And hence we see the reason, why it is pretty late befoi-e most children get ideas of the operations of their own minds : and some have not any very clear or perfect ideas of the gi-eatest part of them all their lives : because, though they pass there continually, yet, like floating visions, they make not deep impres- sions enough to leave in the mind clear, distinct, lasting ideas, till the un- derstanding turns inward upon itself, reflects on its own operations, and makes them the objects ofits own contemplation. Children, when they come first into it, are surrounded with a world of new things, which, by a con- stant solicitation of their senses, draw the mind constantly to them, forward to take notice of new, and apt to be delighted with the variety of changing objects. Thus the first years are usually employed and diverted in looking / abroad. Men's business in them is to acquaint themselves with what is to be found without: and so growing up in a constant attention to outward sensation, seldom make any considerable reflection on what passes within them, until they come to be of riper years ; and some scarce ever at all. Sect. 9. The soul begins to have ideas, when it begins to perceive. — To asli at what time a man has first any ideas, is to ask when he begins to perceive ? having ideas, and perception, being the same thing. I know it is an opinion, that the soul always thinks, and that it has the actual per- ception of ideas in itself constantly, as long as it exists ; and that actual thinking is as inseparable from the soul as actual extension is from the Dody ; which, if true, to inquire after the beginning of a man's ideas is the same as to inquire after the beginning of his soul : for by tliis account soul and its ideas, as body and its extension, wiH begin to exist both at the same time. Sect. 10. The soul thinks not always, for this wants proof . — But whether the soul be supposed to exist antecedent to, or coeval with, or some time after the first rudiments of organization, or the beginnings of life in the body, I leave to be disputed by those who have better thought of that matter. I confess myself to have one of those duU souls, that doth not per- ceive itself always to contemplate ideas, nor can conceive it any more ne- cessary for the soul always to tliink, than for the body always to move ; the perception of ideas being (as I conceive) to the soul, what motion is to the body, not its essence, but one of its operations. And, therefore, though thinking be supposed ever so much the proper action of the soul, yet it is not necessary to suppose that it should be always thinking, always in ac- tion. That, perhaps, is the privilege of the infinite Author and Preserver of things, who never slumbers nor sleeps ; but is not competent to any finite being, at least not to the soul of man. We know certainly, by experience, that we sometimes think, and thence draw this infallible consequence, that there is something in us that has a power to think : but whether that sub- stance perpetually thinks or no, we can be no farther assured than experi- ence informs us. For to say that actual thinking is essential to the soul, and inseparable fi-om it, is to beg what is in question, and not to prove it by reason ; which is necessary to be done, if it be not a self-e\'ident proposition. But whether this, "that the soul always thinks," be a self-evident proposi- tion, that every body assents to at first hearing, I appeal to mankind. It 78 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. is doubted whether I thought ot all last niglit or no ; the question being about a matter of fact, it is begging it to bring, as a proof for it, an hypothesis, whicii is the very thing in dispute ; by which way one may prove any thing ; and it is but supposing that all watches, whilst the balance beats, think ; and it is sufficiently proved, and past doubt, that my watch thought all last night. But he that would not deceive himself, ought to build his hypothesis on matter of fact, and make it out by sensible experience, and not presume on matter of fact, because of liis hypothesis: that is, because he supposes it to be so: which way of proving amounts to this, that I must necessarily think all last night, because another supposes I always think, though I my- self cannot perceive that I always do so. But men in love with their opinions may not only suppose what is in question, but allege wrong matter of fact. How else could any one make it an inference of mine, " that a thing is not, because we are not sensible of it in our sleep?" I do not say there is no soul in a man, because he is not sensible of it in his sleep : but I do say, he cannot think at any time, waking or sleeping, without being sensible of it. Our being sensible of it, is not necessary to any thing, but to our thoughts : and to them it is, and to them it will always be necessary, till we can think without being conscious of it. Sect. 11. It is not always conscious of it. — I grant that the soul in a waking man is never without thought, because it is the condition of being awake : but whether sleeping without dreaming be not an affection of the whole man, mind as well as body, may be worth a waking man's considera- tion ; it being hard to conceive that any thing should think, and not be con- scious of it. If the sold doth think in a sleeping man without being con- scious of it, I ask, whether, during such thinking, it has any pleasure or pain, or is capable of happiness or misery 1 I am sure the man is not, any more than the bed or earth he lies on. For to be happy or miserable, without being conscious of it, seems to me utterly inconsistent and impossible. Or if it be possible that the soul can, whilst the body is sleeping, have its thinking, en- joyments and concerns, its pleasure or pain apart, which the man is not conscious of, nor partakes in ; it is certain that Socrates asleep, and So- crates awake, is not the same person ; but his soul when he sleeps, and So- rates the man, consisting of body and soul when he is waking, are two per- sons ; since waking Socrates has no knowledge of, or concernment for, that happiness or misery of his soul which it enjoys alone by itself whilst he sleeps, without perceiving any thing of it, any more than lie has for the happiness or misery of a man in the Indies, whom he knows not. For if we take wholly away all consciousness of our actions and sensations, especially of pleasure and pain, and the concernment that accompanies it, it will be hard to know wherein to place personal identity. Sect. 12. If a sleeping man thinks without knowing it, the sleeping and waking man are two persons. — "The soul, during sound sleep, thinks," say these men. Whilst it thinks and perceives, it is capable certainly of those of delight or trouble, as well as any other perceptions ; and it must necessarily be conscious of its own perceptions. But it has all this apart ; the sleeping man, it is plain, is conscious of nothing of all this. Lotus suppose then that the soul of Castor, while he is sleeping, retired from his body, which is no impossible supposition for the men I have here to do with, who so liberally allow life, without a thinking soul, to all other animals. These men cannot then judge it impossible or a contradiction, that the body should live without the soul ; nor that the soul should subsist and think, or have perception, even perception of happiness or misery, without the body. Let us then, as I say, suppose the soul of Castor separated, during his sleep, from his body, to think apart. Let us suppose, too, that it chooses for its scene of thinking, the body of another man, v. g. Pollux, who is sleeping without a soul : for if Castor's soul can think, whilst Castor is asleep, what Caetor is never conscious of, it is no matter what place he chooses to think in. Ch. 1. THE ORIGINAL OF OUR IDEAS. 79 We have here, then, the bodies of two men with only one soul between them, which we will suppose to sleep and wake by turns ; and the soul still think- ing in the waking man, whereof the sleeping man is never conscious, has never the least perception. I u,Sk, then, whether Castor and Pollux, thus, with only one soul between them, which thinks and perceives in one what the other is never conscious of, nor is concerned for, are not two distinct persons, as Castor and Hercules, or as Socrates and Plato were 1 And whether one of them might not be very happy, and the other very miser- able 1 Just by the same reason they make the soul and the man two per- sons, who make the soul think apart what the man is not conscious of. For I suppose nobody will make identity of person to consist in the soul's being united to the very same numerical particles of matter ; for if that be necessary to identity, it will be impossible in that constant flux of the par- ticles of our bodies, that any man should be the same person two days, or two moments, together. Sect. 13. Im-possible to convince those that sleep without dreaming, that they think. — Thus, methinks, every drowsy nod shakes their doctrine, who teach, that the soul is always thinking. Those, at least, who do at any time sleep without dreaming, can never be convinced that their thoughts are sometimes for four hours busy without their knowing of it ; and if they are taken in the very act, waked in the middle of that sleeping contempla- tion, can give no manner of account of it. Sect. 14. That men dream without remembering it, in vain urged. — It will perhaps be said, " that the soul thinks even in the somadest sleep, but the memory retains it not." That the soul in a sleeping man should be this moment busy a thinking, and the next moment in a waking man, not remember nor be able to recollect one jot of all those thoughts, i^ very hard to be conceived, and would need some better proof than bare assertion to make it be believed. For who can, without any more ado, but being barely told so, imagine that the greatest part of men do, during all their lives, for several hours every day, think of something, which if they were asked, even in the middle of these thoughts, they could remember nothing at all of! Most men, I think, pass a great part of their sleep without dreaming. I once knew a man that was bred a scholar, and had no bad memory, who told me he had never dreamed in his life till he had that fever he was then newly recovered of, which was about the five or six and twentieth year of his age. I suppose the world affords more such instances : at least every one's acquaintance will furnish him with examples enough of such as pass most of their nights without dreaming. Sect. 15. Upon this hypothesis the thoughts of a sleeping man ought to be most rational. — To think often, and never to retain it so much as one moment, is a very useless sort of thinking ; and the soul, in such a state of thinking, does very little, if at all, excel that of a looking-glass, which constantly receives a variety of images, or ideas, but retains none ; they disappear and vanish, and there remain no footsteps of them ; the looking- glass is never the better for such ideas, nor the soul for such thoughts. Perhaps it will be said, " that in a waking man the materials of the body are employed and made use of in thinking; and that the memory of thoughts is retained by the impressions that are made on the brain, and the traces there left after such thinking; but that in the thinking o|'the soul, which is not perceived in a sleeping man, there the soul thinks apart, and making no use of the organs ofthe body, leaves no impression on it, and consequently no memory of such thoughts." Not to mention again the absurdity of two distinct persons, which follows from this supposition, I answer farther, that what- everideas the mirxd can receive and contemplate without the help ofthe body, it is reasonable to conclude it can retain without the help of the body too ; or else the soul, or any separate spirit, will have but little advantage by thinking. If it has no memory of its own thoughts ; if it cannot lay them 80 OF IIU:.L\N UNDERSTANDING. BjBok 2. up for its own use, and be able to recall them upon occasion; if it cannot reflect ujjon what is pa^^t, and make use o^' its Ibrnier experiences, rea- sonings, and cunteinjjlutions, to, wliat purpose does it think ? Tlioy, who make the soul a thinking tiii!ij>-, at this rate, will not make it a much more noble being, than those do, whom they condehin for allowing it to be noth- ing but the subtilest parts of matter. Characters drawn on dust, that the first breath of wind cfl'accs ; or impressions made on a heap of adorns, or ani- mal spirits, are altogether as useful, and render the subject as noble, as the thoughts of a soul that perish in thinking; that once out of sight arc gone for ever, and leave no memory of themselves behind them. Nature never makes excellent things for mean or no uses : and it is hardly to be conceived, that our infinitely wise Creator should make so admirable a faculty as the power of thinking, that faculty which comes nearest the ex- cellency of his own incomprehensible being, to be so idly and uselessly employed, at least a fourth part of its time here, as to think constantly, without remembering any of those thoughts, without doing any good to itself or others, or being any way useful to any other part of the creation. If we will examine it, we shall not find, I suppose, the motion of dull and senseless matter, any where in the universe, made so little use of, and so wholly thrown away. Sect. 16. On this hypothesis the soul must have ideas not derived from sensation or reflection, of which there is no appearance. — It is true, we have sometimes instances of perception whilst we are asleep, and re- tain the memory of those thoughts ; but how extravagant and incoherent for the most part they are, how little conformable to the perfection and order of a rational being, those who are acquainted with dreams need not be told. This I would willingly be satisfied in, whether the soul, when it thinks thus apart, and as it were separate from the body, acts less ration- ally than when conjointly with it or no. If its separate thoughts be less ra- tional, then these men must say, that the soul owes the perfection of rational thinking to the body : if it does not, it is a wonder that our dreams should be, for the most part, so frivolous and irrational; and that the soul should retain none of its more rational soliloquies and meditations. Sect. 17. If I think when I know it not, nobody else can know it. — Those who so confidently tell us that "the soul always actually thinks," I would they would also tell us what those ideas are that are in the soul of a child before, or just at the union with the body, before it hath received any by sensation. The dreams of sleeping men are, as I take it, all made up of the waking man's ideas, though for the most part, oddly put together. It is strange, if the soul has ideas of its own, that it derived not from sensation or reflection (as it must have if it thought before it recei- ved any impressions from the body) that it should never in its private thinking (so private that the man himself perceives it not) retain any of them, the very moment it wakes out of them, and then make the man glad with new discoveries. Who can find it reasonable that the soul should, in its retirement, during sleep, have so many hours' thoughts, and yet never light on any one of those ideas it borrowed not from sensation or reflection ; or, at least, preserve the memory of none but such, which, being occasioned fi-om the body, must needs be less natural to a spirit .' It is strange the soul should never once in a man's whole life recall over any of its pure native thoughts, and those ideas it had before it borrowed any thing from the body ; never bring into the waking man's view any other ideas but what have a tang of the cask, and manifestly derive their ori- ginal from that union. If it always thinks, and so had ideas before it was united, or before it received any from the body, it is not to be supposed but that during sleep it recollects its native ideas ; and during that retirement from communicating wdth the body, whilst it thinks by itself, the ideas it is busied about shnuld be, sometimes at least,, those more naturd and con- Ch. 1. THE ORIGINAL OF OUR IDEAS. 81 genial ones wliich it had in itself, under! ved from the body, or its own operations about them ; which, since the waking- man never remembers, we must from this hypothesis conclude, either that the soul remembers something tiiat the man does not, or else that memory belongs only to such ideas as are derived from the body, or the mind's operations about them. Sect. 18. Howknows any one that the soul always thinks? for if it be not a self-evident froposition, it needs proof. — I would be glad also to learn from these men, who so confidently pronounce that the human soul, or, which is all one, that a man always tliinks, how they come to know if! nay, how they come to know that they themselves think, when they them- selves do not perceive it 1 This, I am afraid, is to be sure without proofs ; and to know, without perceiving: it is, I suspect, a confused notion, taken up to serve an hypothesis ; and none of those clear truths, that either their own evidence forces us to admit, or common experience makes it impudence to deny. For the most that can be said of it is, that it is possible the soul may always think, but not always retain it in jiemory : and I say, it is as possible that tlie soul may not always think, and much more probable that it should sometimes not tliink, than that it should often think, and that a long while togetlier, and not be conscious to itself the next moment after that it had thought. Sect. 19. That a man should be busy in thinking, and yet not retain it the next moment, very improbable. — To suppose the soul to think, and the man not to perceive it, is, as has been said, to make two persons in one man; and if one considers well tliese men's way of speaking, one should be led into a suspicion that they do so. For they who tell us that the soul always thinks, do never, that I remember, say tliat a man always thinks. Can the soul think, and not the man? or a man think, and not be conscious of it'.' This, perhaps, would be suspected of jargon in others. If they say the man tliinks always, but is not always conscious of it, they may as well say his body is extended without having parts : for it is altogether as in- telligible to say, that a body is extended without parts, as that any thing thinks witliout being conscious of it, or perceiving that it does so. They who talk thus may, with as much reason, if it be necessary to their hypo- thesis, say, that a man is always hungry, but that he does not always feel it : whereas hunger consists in that very sensation, as thinking consists in being conscious that one thinks. If they say that a man is always conscious to himself of thinking ; I ask how they know it. Consciousness is the perception of what passes in a man's own mind. Can another man per- ceive that I am conscious of any thing, when I perceive it not myself J No man's knowledge here can go beyond his experience. Wake a man out of a sound sleep, and ask him what he was that moment thinking of? If he himself be conscious of nothing he then thought on, he must be a notable diviner of thoughts that can assure him that he was thinking; may he not with more reason assure him he was not asleep? This is something beyond philosophy ; and it cannot be less than revelation, that discovers to another thoughts in my mind, when I can find none there myself: and they must needs have a penetrating sight, who can certainly see that I think, when .1 cannot perceive it myself, and when I declare that I do not : and yet can see that dogs or elephants do not think, when they give all the demon- stration of it imaginable, except only telling us that they do so. This some may suspect to be a step beyond the Rosicrucians ; it seeming easier to make one's self invisible to others, than to make another's thoughts visible to nic, which are not visible to himself But it is but defining the suul to be " a substance that always tliinks, "-and the business is done. If such a definition be of any authority, I know not what it can serve for, but to make many men suspect that they have no souls at all, since they find a good part oF their lives pass away without thinking. For no defi- L 82 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book. 2. nitions that I know, no suppositions of any sect, arc of force enough to destroy constant experience ; and perhaps it is the affectation of knowing beyond what we perceive, that makes so much useless dispute and noise in the world. Sect. 20. No ideas but from sensation or reflection evident, if we ob- serve children. — I see no reason, therefore, to believe that the soul thinks before the senses have furnislied it with ideas to think on ; and as those are increased and retained, so it comes, by exercise, to improve its faculty of thinking, in the several partsofit, as well as afterward, by compounding those ideas, and reflecting on its own operations; it increases its stock as well as facility in remembering, imagining, reasoning, and other modes of thinking. Sect. 21. He that will suffer himself to be informed by observation and experience, and not make his own hypothesis the rule of nature, will find few signs of a soul accustomed to much thinking in a new-born child, and much fewer of any reasoning at all. And yet it is hard to imagine, that the rational soul should think so much, and not reason at all. And he that wiU consider that infants newly come into the world, spend the great- est part of their time in sleep, and are seldom awake, but when either hunger calls for the teat, or some pain (the most importunate of all sensations), or some other violent impression upon the body, forces the mind to perceive and attend to it : he, I say, who considers this, will, perhaps, find reason to imagine, that a foetus in the mother's womb differs not much fi-om the state of a vegetable ; but passes the greatest part of its time without percep- tion or thought, doing very little in a place where it needs not seek for food, and is surrounded with liquor, always equally soft, and near of the same temper; where the eyes have no light, and the ears, so shut up, arc not very susceptible of sounds ; and where there is little or no variety, or change of objects to move the senses. Sect. 22. Follow a child from its birth, and observe the alterations that time makes, and you shall find, as the mind by the senses comes more and more to be furnished with ideas, it comes to be more and more awake ; thinks more, the more it has matter to think on. After some time it be- gins to know the objects, which, being most familiar with it, have made lasting impressions. Thus it comes by degrees to know the persons it daily converses with, and distinguish them from strangers ; which are in- stances and effects of its coming to retain and distinguish the ideas the senses convey to it. And so we may observe how the mind, by degrees, improves in these, and advances to the exercise of those other faculties of enlarging, compounding, and abstracting its ideas, and of reasoning about them, and reflecting upon all these, of which I shall have occasion to speak more hereafter. Sect. 23. If it shall be demanded, then, when a man begins to have any ideas ■? I tliink the true answer is, when he first has any sensation. For since there appear not to be any ideas in the mind, before the senses have conveyed any in, I conceive that ideas in the understanding are coeval with sensation ; which is such an impression or motion, made in some part of the body, as produces some perception in the understanding. It is about these impressions made on our senses by outward objects, that the mind seems first to employ itself in such operations as we call perception, re- membering, consideration, reasoning, &c. Sect. 24. The original of all our knowledge. — In time the mind comes to reflect on its own operations, about the ideas got by sensation, and there- by stores itself with a new set of ideas, which I call ideas of reflection. These are the impressions that are made on our senses by outward objects, that are extrinsical to the mind, and its own operations, proceeding from powers intrinsical and proper to itself: which, when reflected on by itself, becoming also objects of its contemplation, are, as I have said, the original of all knowledge. Thus, the first capacity of human intellect is that the mind Ch. 1. THE ORIGINAL OF OUR IDEAS. 83 is fitted to receive the impressions made on it, either through the senses, by outward objects, or by its own operations, when it reflects on them. Tliis is the first step a man makes towards the discovery of any thing, and tlie ground work whereon to build all those notions which ever he shall have naturally in this world. All those sublime thoughts which tower above the clouds, and reach as high as heaven itself, take their rise and footing here : in all that good extent wherein the mind wanders, in those remote speculations it may seem to be elevated with, it stirs not one jot beyond those ideas which sense or reflection have offered for its contemplation. Sect. 25. In the reception of simple ideas, the understanding is for the most part passive. — In this part the understanding is merely passive ; and whether or no it will have these beginnings, and, as it were, materials of knowledge, is not in its own power. For the objects of our senses do, many of them, obtrude their particular ideas upon our minds, whether we will or no : and the operations of our minds will not let us be without, at least, some obscure notions of them. No man can be wholly ignorant of what he does when he thinks. These simple ideas, when offered to the mind, the understanding can no more refuse to have, nor alter, when they are imprinted, nor blot them out, and make new ones itself, than a mirror can refuse, alter, or obliterate the images or ideas which the objects set before it do therein produce. As the bodies that surround us do diversely affect our organs, the mind is forced to receive the impressions, and can- not avoid the perception of those ideas that are annexed to them. CHAPTER II. OF SIjVIPLE ideas. Sect. 1. Uncompounded appearances. — The better to understand the nature, manner, and extent of our knowledge, one thing is careftdly to be observed concerning the ideas we have: and that is, that some of them are simple, and some complex. Though the qualities that affect our senses are, in the things themselves, so united and blended, that there is no separation, no distance between them ; yet it is plain the ideas they produce in the mind enter by the senses simple and unmixed : for though the sight and touch often take in from the same object, at the same time, different ideas, as a man sees at once mo- tion and colour, the hand feels softness and warmth in the same piece of virax; yet the simple ideas, thus united in the same subject, are as perfectly distinct as those that come in by different senses : the coldness and hard- ness which a man feels in a piece of ice being as distinct ideas in the mind as the smell and whiteness of a lily ; or as the taste of sugar and smell of a rose. And there is nothing can be plainer to a man than the clear and distinct perceptions he has of those simple ideas ; which, being each in itself uncompounded, contains in it nothing but one uniform ap- pearance C conception in the mind, and is not distinguishable into differ- ent ideas. Sect. 2. The mind can neither make nor destroy them. — These simple ideas, the materials of all our knowledge, are suggested and furnished to the mind only by those two ways above mentioned, viz. sensation and re- flection(l). When the understanding is once stored with these simple (1) Against this, that the materials of all our knowledge are suggested, and furnished to the mind only by sensation and reflection, the Bishop of Worcester makes use of the idea of substance in these words: " If the idea of substance be grounded upon plain and evident reason, then we must allow an idea of substance. 84 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book. I. ideas, it has the power to repeat, compare, and unite them, even to on al- most infinite variety ; and so can make at pleasure new complex ideas. But it is not in the power of the most exalted wit or enlarged understand- ing, by any quickness or variety of thought, to invent or frame one new eiinple idea in the mind, not taken in by the ways aforementioned : nor c£ui any force of the understanding destroy those that are there. The dominion or man in this little world of his own understanding, being much- what the ■which comes not in by sensation or reflection 5 and so we may be certain of some- thing which we have not by these ideas." To which our author answers*: These words of yonr lordship's contain nothing as I see in them against me: for I never said that the general idea of substance comes in by sensation and reflection; or that it is a simple idea of sensation or reflection, though it be ultimately founded in tlieni; for it is a complex idea, made up of the general idea of something, or being with the relation of a support to accidents. For general ideas come not into the mind by sensation or reflection, but are the creatures or inventions of the understanding, as I think I liave shownt; and also how the mind makes them from ideas which it has got by sensation and reflection: and as to tlae ideas of relation, how the mind forms them, and how they are derived from, and ultimately terminate in, ideas of sensation and reflec- tion, I have likewise shown. But that I may not be mistaken, what I mean, when I speak of ideas of sensa- tion and reflection, as the materials of all our knowledge; give me leave, my lord, to set down here a place or two, out of my book, to explain myself; as I thus speak of ideas of sensation and reflection: "That these, when we have taken a full survey of them, and their several modes, and the compositions made out of them, we shall And to contain all our ■whole stock of ideas, and we liave nothing in our minds which did not come in one of these two ways:):." This thought, in anotlier place, I express thus: " Tliese are the most considerable of those simple ideas which the mind has, and out of which is made all its other knowledge ; all whicli it receives by the two forementioned ways of sensation and reflcction§." And, " Thus 1 have, in a short draught, given a view of our original ideas, from whence all the rest are derived, and of which they are made up|l." This, and the like, said in other places, is what I have thought concerning ideas of sensation and reflection, as the foundation and materials of all our ideas, and consequently of all our knowledge : 1 have set down these particulars out of my book, that the i-eader, having a full view of my opinion herein, may the better see what in it is liable to your lordship's reprehension. For that your lordship is not very well satisfied with it, appears not only by the words under consider- ation, but by these also: " But we are still told, that our understanding can have no other ideas, but either from sensation or reflection." Your lordship's argument, in the passage we are upon, stands thus : if the gene- ral idea of substance be grounded upon plain and evident reason, then ■we must allow an idea of substance, which comes not in by sensation or reflection. This is a consequence which, with submission, I think will not hold, because it is founded upon a supposition ■\>hich I think will not hold, viz. That reason and ideas are inconsistent ; for if that supposition be not true, then the general idea of substance may be grounded on plain and evident reason ; and yet it will not follow from thence, that it is not ultimately grounded on, and derived from, ideas which come in by sensation or reflection, and so cannot be said to come in by sensation or reflection. To explain myself, and clear my meaning in this matter. All the ideas of all the sensible qualities of a cherry come into my mind by sensation ; tlie ideas of perceiving, thinking, reasoning, knowing, &c. come into my mind by reflection. The ideas of these qualities and actions, or powers, are perceived by the mind to be by themselves inconsistent with existence : or as your lordship well expresses • In his first letter to the Bishop of Worcester. t B. 3. c. 3. B. 2. c. 25, &c. 28. sect. 18. t B. 2. c. 1. sect. 5. § B. 2. c. 7. sect. 10. |1 B. 2. c. 21. sect 73. Ch. 2. OF SIMPLE mEAS. 85 same as it is in the great worM of nsible things ; wherein his power, hovr- ever managed by art and skill, reaches no farther than to compound and divide the materials that are made to his hand ; but can do nothing towards the making the least particle of new matter, or destroying one atom of what is alreadv in being. The same inability will every one lind in him- self, who shall go about to fashion in his understanding any simple idea, not received in by his senses from external objects, or by reflection from the operations of his own mind about them. I would have any one try to fancy any taste which had never affected his palate ; or frame the idea of a scent he had never smelt : and when he can do this, I will also conclude that a blind man hath ideas of colours, and a deaf man true distinct notions of sounds. Sect. 3. This is the reason why, though we cannot believe it impossi- ble to God to make a creature with other organs, and more ways to con- vey into the understanding the notice of those corporeal things than those five, as they are usually counted, which he has given to man : yet I think it is not possible for any one to imagine any other qualities in bodies, how- soever constituted, whereby they can be taken notice of, besides sounds, tastes, smells, visible and tangible qualities. And had mankind been made but with four senses, the qualities then which are the object of the fifth it, we find that we can have no true conception of any modes or accidents, but we must conceive a substratum, or subject, wherein they are, /. e. that they cannot exist or subsist of themselves. Hence the mind perceives their necessaiy con- nexion with inherence, or being supported ; which being a relative idea, super- added to the red colour in a cherry, or to thinking in a man, the mind f£"ames the correlative idea of a support. For I never denied tliat the mind could frame to itself ideas of relation, but have showed the quite contrary in my chapters about relation. But because a relation cannot be founded in nothing, or be the relation of nothing, and the thing here related as a supporter, or a support, is not represented to the mind by any clear and distinct idea; therefore the obscure and indistinct vague idea of thing, or something, is all that is left to be the positive idea, which lias the relation of a support or substi-atum, to modes or accidents ; and that general indetermined idea of something is, by the abstraction of the mind, derived also from the simple ideas of sensation and reflection; and thus the mind, from the positive, simple ideas got by sensation and reflection, comes to the gene- i-hI relative idea of substance, which, without these positive simple ideas, it would never have. This your lordship (without giving by detail all the particular steps of the mind in_ this business) has well expressed in this more familiar way: we find we can have no true conception of any modes or accidents but we must conceive a substratum, or subject, wherein they are ; since it is a repugnancy to our con- ceptions of things, that modes or accidents should subsist by themselves. Hence your lordship calls it the rational idea of substance : and rays, " I grant, that by sensation and reflection we come to know the powers and properties of things ; but our reason is satisfied that there must be something beyond these, be- cause it is impossible that they should subsist by themselves:" so that if this be that which your lordship means bv the rational idea of substance, I see nothing there is in it against what I have said, that it is founded on simple ideas of sensa- tion or reflection, and that it is a very obscure idea. Your lordship's conclusion from your foregoing words is, "and so we may be certain of some things which we have not by those ideas ;" which is a propo- sition, whose precise meaning your lordship will forgive me, if I profess, as it stands there, I do not understand. For it is uncertain to me whether your lord- ship means, we may certainly know the existence of something, which we liave not by those ideas ; or certainly know the distinct properties of sometlxing, which we have not by those ideas: or certainly know the truth of some proposition which we have not by those ideas : for to be certain of something m.iy signify either of tliese. But in which soever of these it be meant, I do not see how I am concerned in it. 86 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. sense, had been as far from our notice, imagination, and conception, as now any belonging to a sixtli, seventh, or eiglith sense, can possibly be : which, whetlier yet some otlier creatures, in some otlier parts of this vast and Btupendous universe, may not have, will be a great presuuiption to deny. He that will not set himself proudly at the top of all things, but will con- sider tlie immensity of this fabric, and the great variety that is to be found in this little and inconsiderable part of it which he has to do with, may be apt to think, that in other mansions of it there may be other and different intelligent being:;, of whose faculties he has as little knowledge or appre- hension, as a worm shut up in one drawer of a cabinet hath of the senses or understanding of a man : such variety and excellency being suitable to the wisdom and power of the Maker. 1 have here followed the common opinion of man's having but five senses ; though, perhaps, there may be justly counted more : but either supposition serves equally to my present purpose. CHAPTER III. OF roEAS OF ONE SENSE. Sect. 1. Division of simple ideas. — The better to conceive the ideas we receive from sensation, it may not be amiss for us to consider them in reference to the different ways whereby they make their approaches to our minds, and make themselves perceivable by us. First, then, There axe some which come into our minds by one sense only. Secondly, There are others, that convey themselves into the mind by more senses than one. Thirdly, Others that are had from reflection only. Fourthly, There are some that make themselves way, and are suggested to the mind by all the ways of sensation and reflection. We shall consider them apart under their several heads. First, There are some ideas which have admittance only through one sense, which is peculiarly adapted to receive them. Thus light and colours, as white, red, yellow, blue, with their several degrees or shades, and mix- tures, as green, scarlet, purple, sea-green, and the rest, come in only by the eyes: all kinds of noises, sounds, and tones, only by the ears: the se- veral tastes and smells, by the nose and palate. And if these organs, or the nerves, which are the conduits to convey them from W'ithout to their audience in the brain, the mind's presence room (as I may so call it), are any of them so disordered, as not to perform their functions, they have no postern to be admitted by ; no other way to bring themselves into view, and be perceived by the understanding. The most considerable of those belonging to the touch are heat and cold, and solidity ; all the rest, consisting almost wholly in the sensible configu- ration, as smooth and rough, or else more or less firm adhesion of the parts, as hard and soft, tough and brittle, are obvious enough. Sect. 2. Few simple ideas have names. — I think it will be needless to enumerate all the particular simple ideas belonging to each sense. Nor indeed is it possible, if we would; there being a great many more of them belonging to most of the senses than we hav3 names for. The variety of smells, which are as many almost, if not more, than species of bodies in the world, do most of them want names. Sweet and stinking commonly serve our turn for these ideas, which in effect is little more than to call them pleasing or displeasing; though the smell of a rose and violet, both sweet, are certainly very distinct ideas. Nor are the different tastes, that by our 1 Ch. 3. OF IDEAS OF ONE SENSE. 87 palates we receive ideas of, mucli better provided with names. Sweet, bitter, sour, harsh, and salt, are almost all the epithets we have to denomi- nate that numberless variety of relishes which are to be found distinct, not only in almost every sort of creatures, but in the different parts of the same plant, fruit, or animal. The same may be said of colours and sounds. I shall, therefore, in the account of simple ideas I am here giving, content myself to set down only such as are most material to our present purpose, or are in themselves less apt to be taken notice of, though they are very frequently the ingredients of our complex ideas, among which, I think, I may well account solidity ; which, therefore, I shall treat of in the next chap- ter. CHAPTER IV. OF SOLIDITY. Sect. 1. We receive this idea from touch. — The idea of solidity were- «eive by our touch ; and it arises from the resistance which we find in body, to the entrance of any other body into the place it possesses, till it has left it. Thbre is no idea which we receive more constantly from sensation than solidity. Whether we move or rest, in what posture soever we are, we always feel something under us that supports us, and hinders our far- ther sinking downward : and the bodies which we daily handle make us perceive, that, whilst they remain between them, they do by an insurmount- able force hinder the approach of the parts of our hands that press them. That which thus hinders the approach of two bodies, when they are moved one toward another, I call solidity. I will not dispute whether this ac- ceptation of the word solid be nearer to its original signification than that which mathematicians use it in : it suffices, that I think the common notion of solidity will allow, if not justify, this use of it; but, if any one think it, better to call it impenetrability, he has my consent. Only I have thought the term solidity the more proper to express this idea, not only because of its vulgar use in that sense, but also because it carries something more of positive in it than impenetrability, which is negative, and is, perhaps, more a consequence of solidity than solidity itself. This, of all others, seems the idea most intimately connected with, and essential to, body, so as nowhere else to be found or imagined, but only in matter. And though our senses take no notice of it, but in masses of matter, of a bulk sufficient to cause a sensation in us; yet the mind, having once got this idea from such grosser sensible bodies, traces it farther ; and considers it, as well as figure, in the minutest particle of matter that can exist; and finds it inseparably inherent in body, wherever or however modified. Sect. 2. Solidity fills space. — This is the idea which belongs to body, whereby we conceive it to fill space. The idea of which filling of space is, that, where we imagine any space taken up by a solid substance, we con- ceive it so to possess it, that it excludes all other solid substances ; and will for ever hinder any other two bodies, that move toward one another in a straight line, from coming to touch one another, unless it removes from between them, in a line not parallel to that which they move in. This idea of it the bodies which we ordinarily handle sufficiently furnish us with. Sect. 3. Distinct from space. — This resistance, whereby it keeps other bodies out of the space which it possesses, is so great, that no force, how great soever, can surmount it. All the bodies in the world, pressing a drop of water on all sides, will never be able to overcome the resistance which it will make, soft as it is, to their approaching one another, till it be re- 88 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 3. moved out of their way : whereby our idea of solidity is distingiiished both from ])urc space, which is capable neither of resistance nor motion, and from the ordinary idea of hardness. For a man may conceive two bodies at a distance, so as tlicy may approach one another, without touching- or dis- placing any solid tliino-, till tlieir superficios come to meet : wliercby I think we have tlie clear idea of s])aci! without solidity. For (not to go so far as annihilatio!) of any particular body) I ask, whether a man cannot have the idea of the motion of one single body alone, without any other succeeding immediately into its place ] I think it is evident he can : the idea of mo- tion in one body no more including the idea of motion in another, than the idea of a square figure in one body includes the idea of a square figure in another. I do not ask, whether bodies do so exist that the motion of one body cannot be really without the motion of another! To determine this either way, is to beg the question for or against a vacuum. But my ques- tion is, whether one cannot have the idea of one body moved whilst others are at rest? And I think this no one will deny. If so, then the place it deserted gives us the the idea of pure space without solidity, whereinto any other body may enter, without either resistance or protrusion of any thing. When the sucker in a pump is drawn, the space it filled in the tube is certainly the same whether any other body follows the motion of the sucker or not: nor does it imply a contradiction that, upon the motion of one body, another that is only contiguous to it should not follow it. The necessity of such a motion is built only on the supposition that ti.e world is full, but not on the distinct ideas of space and solidity ; which are as different as resistance and not resistance ; protrusion and not protrusion. And that men have ideas of space without a body, their very disputes about a vacuum plainly demonstrate, as is showed in another place. Sect. 4. From hardness. — Solidity is hereby also differenced from hard- ness, in that solidity consists in repletion, and so an utter exclusion of other bodies out of the space it possesses; but hardness, in a firm cohesion of the parts of matter, making up masses of a sensible bulk, so that the whole does not easily change its figure. And, indeed, hard and sofl are names that we give to things only in relation to the constitutions of our own bodies ; that being generally called hard by us which will put us to pain sooner than change figure by the pressure of any part of our bodies ; and that on the contrary soft, which changes the situation of its parts upon an easy and unpainful touch. But this difficulty of changing the situation of the sensible parts among themselves, or of the figure of the whole, gives no more solidity to the hardest body in the world, than to the softest ; nor is an adamant one jot more solid than water. For though the two flat sides of two pieces of marble will more easily approach each other, between which there is noth- ing but water or air, than if there be a diamond between them ; yet it is not that the parts of the diamond are more solid than those of water, or resist more ; but because, the parts of water being more easily separable from each other, they will, by a side-motion, be more easily removed, and give way to the approach of the two pieces of marble. But if they could be kept from making place by that side-motion, they would eternally hinder the approach of these two pieces of marble as much as the diamond; and it would be as impossible by any force to surmount their resistaiioe, as to surmount the resistance of the parts of a diamond. The soflest body in the world will as invincibly resist the coming together of any other two bodies if it be not put out of the way, but remain between them, as the hardest that can be found or imagined. He that shall fill the yielding soft body well with air or water, will quickly find its resistance: and ho that tliinks that nothing but bodies that are hard can keep his hands from approach- ing one another, will be pleased to make a trial with the air enclosed in a football. The experiment, I have been told, was made at Florence with a Ch. 4. OF SOLIDITY, SO hollow globe of gold filled with water, and exactly closed, which farther shows the solidity of so sotl a body as water. For the golden globe thus fill- ed being put into a press which was driven by the extreme force of screws, the water made itself way through the pores of that very close metal ; and, finding no room for a near approach of its particles within, got to the out- side, where it rose like a dew, and so fell in drops, before the sides of the globe could be made to yield to the violent compression of the engine that squeezed it. Sect. 5. On solidity depend impulse, resistance, and protrusion. — By this idea of solidity, is the extension of body distinguished from the exten- sion of space : tlie extension of body being nothing but 1;he cohesion or con- , tinuity of solid, separable, moveable parts; and the extension of space, the \ continuity of unsolid, inseparable, and iminoveable parts. Upon the soli- \ dity of bodies also depend their mutual impulse, resistance, and protrusion. Of pure space then, and solidity, there are several, (among which I confess myself one) who persuade themselves they have clear and distinct ideas ; and that they can think on space, without any thing in it that resists or is protruded by body. This is the idea of pure space, which they think they have as clear as any idea they can have of the extension of body ; the idea of the distance between tlie opposite parts of a concave superficies being equally as clear without as with the idea of any solid parts between : and on the other side they persuade themselves, that they have, distinct from that of pure sp:ice, the idea of something that fills space, that can be pro- truded by the impulse of other bodies, or resist their motion. If there be others that have not these two ideas distinct, but confound them, and make but one of them, I know not how men, who have the same idea under different names, or different ideas under the same name, can in that case talk with one another ; any more than a man, who, not being blind or deaf, has distinct ideas of the colovir of scarlet, and the sound of a trumpet, could discourse concerning scarlet colour with the blind man I mentioned in another place, who fancied that the idea of scarlet was like the sound of a trumpet. Sect. 6. What it is. — If any one ask me what this solidity is? I send him to his senses to inform him ; let him put a flint or a football between his hands and then endeavour to join them, and he will know. If he tliinks this not a sufficient explication of solidity, what it is, and wherein it con- sists, I promise to tell him what it is, and wherein it consists, when he teUs me what thinking is, or wherein it consists : or explains to me what extension or motion is, which perhaps seems much easier. The simple ideas we have are such as experience teaches them us : but if, beyond that, we endeavour by words to make them clearer in the mind, we shall suc- ceed no better than if we went about to clear up the darkness of a blind man's mind by talking ; and to discourse into him the ideas of light and colours. The reason of this I shall show in another place. CHAPTER V. OF SIMPLE IDEAS OF DIVERS SENSES. The ideas we get by more than one sense are of space, or extension, figure, rest, and motion ; for these make perceivable impressions, both on the eyes and touch : and we can receive and convey into our minds the ideas of the extension, figure, motion, and rest of bodies, both by seeing and feeling. But having occasion to speak more at large of these in ano- ther place, I here only onnmcratc them. M 90 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. CHAPTER VI. OF SIMPLE IDEAS OF REFLECTION. Sect. 1. Simple ideas are the operations of the mind about its other ideas. — Tlie mind, receiving the idoas, mentioned in tlie foregoing chapters, from witiiout, when it turns its view inward upon itself, and observes its own actions about those idoas it has, takes from thence other ideas, which are as capable to be the objects of its contemplation as any of those it re- ceived from foreign things. Sect. 2. The idea of perception, and idea of willing, we have from re- flection.— The two great and principal actions of the mind, which are most frequently considered, and whicR are so frequent, that every one that pleases may take notice of them in himself, are these two : perception or thinking; and volition or willing. The power of thinking is called the un- derstanding, and the power of volition is called the will ; and these two powers or abilities in the mind are denominated faculties. Of some of the modes of these simple ideas of reflection, such as are remembrance, dis- cerning, reasoning, judging, knowledge, faith, &c., I shall have occasion to speak liearafter. CHAPTER Vn. OF SIMPLE IDEAS OF BOTH SENSATION AND REFLECTION. Sect. 1. Pleasure and pain. — There be other simple ideas which con- vey themselves into the mind by all the ways of sensation and reflection, viz. pleasure or delight, and its opposite, pain or uneasiness, power, ex- istence, unity. Sect. 2. — Delight or uneasiness, one or other of them, join themselves to almost all our ideas, both of sensation and reflection : and there is scarce any aSection of our senses from without, any retired thought of our mind within, which is not able to produce in us pleasure or pain. By pleasure and pain I would be understood to signify whatsoever delights or molests us most ; whether it arises from the thoughts of our minds, or any thing operating on our bodies. For whether we call it satisfaction, delight, plea- sure, happiness, &c. on the one side ; or uneasiness, trouble, pain, torment, anguish, misery, &c. on the other; they are still but different degrees of the same thing, and belong to the ideas of pleasure and pain, delight or un- easiness ; which are the names I shall most commonly use for those two sorts of ideas. Sect. 3. The infinitely wise Author of our being, having given us the power over several parts of our bodies, to move or keep them at rest as we tliink fit; and also, by tlie motion of them, to move ourselves and other contiguous bodies in which consist all the actions of our body; having also given a power to our minds, in several instances, to choose among its ideas, which it will think on, and to pursue the inquiry of this or that subject with consideration and attention, to excite us to these actions of thinking and motion that we are capable of; has been pleased to join to several thoughts, and several sensations, a perception of delight. If this were wholly sepa- rated from all our outward sensations and inward thoughts, we should Ijave no reason to prefer one thought or action to another ; negligence to attention, or motion to rest. And so we should neither stir our bodies, Ch. 7. IDEAS OF SENSATION AND REFLECTION. 91 nor employ our minds, bnt lot our thoughts (if I may so call it) run adrift, without any direction or design; and sutfer the ideas of oiu- minds, like vm- regarded shadows, to make their appearances there, as it happened, without attending to them. In which state, man, however furnished with the facul- ties of understanding and will, would be a very idle inactive creature, and pass his time only in a lazy, lethargic dream. It has therefore pleased our wise Creator to annex to several objects, and the ideas which we receive from them, as also to several of our thoughts, a concomitant pleasure, and that in several objects, to several degrees : that those faculties which he had endowed us with miglit not remain wholly idle and unemployed by us. Sect. 4. Pain has the same efficacy and use to set us on work that' pleasure has, we being as ready to employ our faculties to avoid that, as to pursue this ; only this is worth our consideration, that pain is often produ- ced by the same objects and ideas that produce pleasure in us. This their near conjunction, which makes us often feel pain in the sensations where we expected pleasure, gives us new occasion of admiring the wisdom and goodness of our Maker; who, designing the preservation of our being, has annexed pain to the application of many things to our bodies, to warn us of the harm that they will do, and as advices to withdraw from them. But he, not designing our preservation barely, but the preservation of every part and organ in its perfection, hath, in many cases, annexed pain to those very ideas which delight us. Thus heat, that is very agTeeable to us in one degree, by a little greater increase of it, proves no ordinary torment; and the most pleasant of all sensible objects, light itself, if there be too much of it, if increased beyond a due proportion to our eyes, causes a very pain- ful sensation ; which is wisely and favourablj^ so ordered by nature, that when any object does by the vehemency of its operation disorder the in- struments of seneation, whose structures cannot but be very nice and delicate, we might, by the pain, be warned to withdraw before the organ be quite put out of order, and so be unfitted for its proper function for the future. The consideration of those objects that produce it may well per- suade us, that this is the end or use of pain. For though great light be insufferable to our eyes, yet the highest degree of darkness does not at all disease them ; because that causing no disorderly motion in it, leaves that ciirious organ unharmed, in its natural state. But yet excess of cold as well as heat pains us, because it is equally destructive to that temper which is necessary to tlie preservation of life, and the exercise of the several func- tions of the body, and which consists in a moderate degree of warmth; or, if you please, a motion of the insensible parts of our bodies confined within certain bounds. Sect. 5. Beyond all this we may find another reason, why God hath scattered up and down several degrees of pleasure and pain, in all the things that environ and affect us, and blended them together in almost all that our thoughts and senses have to do with ; that we finding imperfection, dis- satisfaction, and want of complete happiness, in all the enjoyments which the creatures can afford us, might be led to seek it in the enjoyment of Him, " with whom there is fulness of joy, and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore." Sect. 6. Pleasure and pain. — Though what I have here said may not perhaps make the ideas of pleasure and pain clearer to us than our own experience does, which is the only way that we are capable of having them ; yet the consideration of the reason why they are annexed to so many other ideas, serving to give us due sentiments of the wisdom and goodness ofthe Sovereign Disposer of all things, may not be unsuitable to the main end of these inquiries; the knowledge and veneration of him being the chief end of all our thoughts, and the proper business of all understandings. Sect. 7. Existence and unity. — Existence and unity are two other ideas that are suggested to the understanding by every object without, and every 93 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. idea witliin. Wlicn ideas are in oiir minds, we consider tlicm as being ac- tually there, as well as we consider tliing-s to be actually without us : which is, that tliey exist, or have existence ; and whatever we can consider as one thing, whether a real being or idea, suggests to the understanding the idea of unity. Sect. 8. Power. — Power also is another of those simple ideas which we receive from sensation and reflection. For observing in ourselves, that we can at pleasure move several parts of our bodies which were at rest, the effects also that natural bodies are able to produce in one another occur- ing every moment to our senses, we both these ways get the idea of power. Sect. 9. Succession. — Besides these there is another idea, which, though suggested by our senses, yet is more constantly offered to us by what passes in our minds ; and that is the idea of succession. For if we look immediately into ourselves, and reflect on what is observable there, we shall find our ideas always, whilst we are awake, or have any thought, passing in train, one going and another coming without intermission. Sect. 10. Simple ideas the materials of all our knoioledge. — These, if they are not all, are at least (as I think) the most considerable of those simple ideas which the mind has, and out of which is made all its other knowledge ; all which it receives only by the two forementioned ways of sen- sation and reflection. • Nor let any one think these too narrow bounds for the capacious mind of man to expatiate in, wliich takes its flight farther than the stars, and cannot be confined by the limits of the world ; that extends its thoughts often even beyond the utmost expansion of matter, and makes incursions into that incomprehensible inane. I grant all this, but desire any one to assign any simple idea which is not received from one of those inlets before mention- ed, or any complex idea not made out of those simple ones. Nor will it be so strange to think these few simple ideas sufficient to employ the quick- est thought or largest capacity, and to furnish the materials of all that va- rious knowledge, and more various fancies and opinions of all mankind, if we consider how many words may be made out of the various composition of twenty-four letters, or if, going one step farther, we will but reflect on the variety of combinations that maybe made with barely one of the above- mentioned ideas, viz . number, whose stock is inexliaustible and truly infinite ; and what a large and immense field doth extension alone afford the mathe- maticians ! CHAPTER VIII. SOME FARTHER CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING OIJR SIMPLE IDEAS. Sect. 1. Positive ideas from frivative causes. — Concerning the simple ideas of sensation it is to be considered, that whatsoever is so constituted in nature as to be able, by affecting our senses, to cause any perception in the mind, doth thereby produce in the imderstanding a simple idea, which, whatever be the external cause of it, when it comes to be taken notice of by our discerning faculty, it is by the mind looked on and considered there to be a real positive idea in the understanding, as much as any other whatso- ever, though perhaps the cause of it be but privation of the subject. Sect. 2. Thus the ideas of heat and cold, light and darkness, white and black, motion and rest, arc equally clear and positive ideas in the mind, though perhaps some of the causes which produce them arc barely priva- tions in subjects, from whence our senses derive those ideas. These the Ch. 8. SIMPLE IDEAS. 93 understanding, in its view of them, considers all as distinct positive ideas, without taking' notice of the causes that produce them ; which is an inquiry not belonging to the idea, as it is in the understanding, but to the nature of the things existing without us. These are two very different things, and careftdly to be distinguished ; it being one thing to perceive and know the idea of white or black, and quite another to examine what kind of particles they must be, and how ranged in the superficies, to make any object ap- pear white or black. Sect. 3. A painter or dyer, who never inquired into their causes, hath the ideas of white and black, and other colours, as clearly, perfectly, and distinctly in liis imderstanding, and perhaps more distinctly, than the philo- sopher, who hath busied himself in considering their natures, and thinks he knows how far either of them is in its cause positive or privative ; and the idea of black is no less positive in liis mind than that of white, however the cause of that colour in the external object may be only a privation. Sect. 4. If it were the design of my present midertaking to inquire into the natural causes and manner of perception, I sliould offer this as a reason why a privative cause might, in some cases at least, produce a positive idea, viz. t]iat all sensation being produced in us, only by different degrees and modes of motion in our animal spirits, variously agitated by external objects, the abatement of any former motion must as necessarily produce a new sensa- tion, as the variation or increase of it ; and so introduce a new idea, wliich depends only on a different motion of the animal spirits in that organ. Sect. 5. But whether this be so or no, I wiU not here determine, but appeal to every one's own experience, whether the shadow of a man, though it consist of nothing but the absence of light (and the more the absence of light is, the more discernible is the shadow) does not, when a man looks on it, cause as clear and positive idea in his mind, as a man himself, though covered over with a clear sunshine 1 and the picture of a shadow is a posi- tive thing. Indeed, we have negative names, which stand not directly for positive ideas, but for their absence, such as insipid, silence, nihU, &c. which words denote positive ideas; v. g. taste, sound, being, with a sig- nification of their absence 1 Secp. 6. Positive ideas from privative causes. — And thus one may truly be said to see darloiess. For supposing a hole perfectly dark, from whence no light is reflected, it is certain one may see the figure of it, or it may be painted ; or whether the inli I write with makes any other idea, is a question. The privative causes I have here assigned of positive ideas are according to the common opinion : but in tnath it will be hard to deter- mine whether there be really any ideas from a privative cause, tiU it be de- termined whether rest be any more a privation than motion. Sect. 7. Ideas in the mind, qualities in bodies. — To discover the nature of our ideas the better, and to discourse of them intelligibly, it will be con- venient to distinguish them as they are ideas or perceptions in our minds, and as they are modifications of matter in the bodies that cause such per- ceptions in us ; that so we may not think (as perhaps usually is done) that , they are exactly the images and resemblances of something inherent in / the subject; most of those of sensation being in the mind no more the like- ness of something existing without us, than the names that stand for them are the likeness of our ideas, which yet, upon hearing, they are apt to ex- cite in us. Sect. 8. Whatsoever tlie mind perceives in itself, or is the immediateW object of perception, thought, or imderstanding, that I callidsaLi and the! / power to produce any idea in our mind I call quality of tlie subject whereinl , that power is. Thus a snowbaU liaving the power to produce in us the ^ ideas orwliite, cold, and round, the powers to produce those ideas in us, as they are in the snowball, I call qualities ; and as tlicy are sensations or perceptions in our miderstandings, I call thcra ideas; which ideas, if I 94 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. speak of sometimes as in the things tliemsclves, I would be understood to wean those qualities in the objects which produce thcni in us. Sect. 9. Primani qualities. — Qualities thus considered in bodies are, first, such as are utterly inseparable from the body, in wliat estate soever it be ; such as in all the alterations and chano;es it suffers, all the force can be used upon it, it constantly keeps ; and such as sense constantly finds in every particle of matter which has bulk enough to be perceived, and the mind finds inseparable from every particle of matter, though less than to make itself singly be perceived by our senses : v. g. take a grain of wheat, divide it into two parts, each part has still solidity, extension, figure, and mobility; divide it again and it retains still the same qualities; and so di- vide it on till the parts become insensible, they must retain still each of them all those qualities : for division (which is all that a mill, or pestle, or any other body does upon another, in reducing it to insensible parts) can never take away either solidity, extension, figure, or mobility from any body, but only makes two or more distinct separate masses of matter of that which was but one before ; all which distinct masses, reckoned as so many distinct bodies, after division, make a certain number. These I call original or primary qualities of body, which I think we may observe to produce simple ideas in us, viz. solidity, extension, figure, motion or rest, ■ and number. Sect. 10. Secondary qualities. — Secondly, such qualities which in truth are nothing in the objects themselves, but powers to produce various sensa- tions in us by their primary qualities, i. e. by the bulk, figure, texture, and motion of their insensible parts, as colours, sounds, tastes, &c. these I call secondary qualities. To these might be added a Ijhir^^ort, which are al- lowed to be barely powers, though they are as mucli real qualities in the subject as those which I, to comply with the common way of speaking, call qualities, but for distinction, secondary qualities. For the power in fire to produce a new colour, or consistency, in wax or clay, by its primary qualities, is as much a quality in fire as the power it has to produce in me a new idea or sensation of warmth or burning, which I felt not before, by the same primary qualities, viz. the bulk, texture, and motion of its insen- sible parts. Sect. 11. How primary qualities produce their ideas. — The next thing to be considered is, how bodies produce ideas in us ; and that is manifestly by impulse, the only way which we can conceive bodies to operate in. Sect. 12. If then external objects be not united to our minds, when they produce ideas therein, and yet we perceive these original qualities in such of them as singly fall under our senses, it is evident that some motion must be thence continued by our nerves or animal spirits, by some parts of our bodies, to the brain, or the seat of sensation, tliere to produce in our minds the particular ideas we have of them. And since the extension, figure, number, and motion of bodies, of an observable bigness, may be per- ceived at a distance by the sight, it is evident some singly imperceptible - bodies must come from them to the eyes, and thereby convey to the brain some motion, which produces these ideas which we have of them in us. Sect. I'S. How secondary. — After the same manner that the ideas of these original qualities are produced in us, we may conceive that the ideas of secondary qualities are also produced, viz. by the operations of insensi- ble particles on our senses. For it being manifest that there are bodies, each whereof are so small that we cannot, by any of our senses, discover either their bulk, figure, or motion, as is evident in the particles of the air and water, and others extremely smaller than those, perhaps as much small- er than the particles of air and water, as the particles of air and water are smaller than peaf, or hailstones ; let us suppose at present, that the different motions and figures, bulk and number of such particles, affecting the se> veral organs of our senses, produce in us those different sensations, which Ch. 8. SIMPLE IDEAS. 95 we have from the colours and smells of bodies ', v. g. that a violet, by the impulse of such insensible particles of matter of peculiar figures and bulks, and in different degrees and modifications of their motions, causes the ideas of the blue colour and sweet scent of that flower to be produced in our minds, it being no more impossible to conceive that God should annex such ideas to such motions, with which they have no similitude, than that he should annex the idea of pain to the motion of a piece of steel dividing our flesh, with which that idea hath no resemblance. Sect. 14. What I have said concerning colours and smells may be un- derstood also of tastes and sounds, and other the like sensible qualities ; which, whatever reality we by mistake attribute to them, are in truth noth- ing in the objects themselves, but powers to produce various sensations in us, and depend on those primary qualities, viz. bulk, figure, texture, and motion of parts, as I have said. Sect. 1.5. Ideas of primary qualities are resemblances ; of secondary, not. — From whence I think it easy to draw this observation, that the ideas of primary quahties of bodies are resemblances of them, and tlieir patterns do really exist in the bodies themselves ; but the ideas produced in us by these secondary qualities have no resemblance of tliem at all. There is nothing like our ideas existing in the bodies themselves. They are in the bodies, we denominate from them, only a power to produce those sen- sations in us ; and what is sweet, blue, or warm in idea, is but the certain bulk, figure, and motion of the insensible parts in the bodies themselves, which we call so. Sect. 16. Flame is denominated hot and light ; snow white and cold ; and manna white and sweet, fi-om the ideas they produce in us : which qualities are commonly thought to be the same in those bodies that those ideas are in us, the one the perfect resemblance of the other, as they are in a mirror ; and it would by most men be judged very extravagant if one should say otherwise. And yet he that will consider that the same fire, that at one distance produces in us the sensation of warmth, does at a nearer approach produce in us the far different sensations of pain, ought to bethink himself what reason he has to say, that his idea of warmth, which was produced in him by the fire, is actually in the fire : and his idea of pain, which the same fire produced in him the same way, is not in the fire. Why are whiteness and coldness in snow, and pain not, when it produces the one and the other idea in us, and can do neither but by the bulk, figure, number, and motion of its solid parts. Sect. 17. The jfarticular bulk, number, figure, and motion of the parts of fire, or snow, are really in them, whether any one's senses perceive them or no ; and therefore they may be called real qualities, because they really exist in those bodies; but light, heat, whiteness, or coldness, are no more really in them than sickness or pain is in manna. Take away the sensa- tion of them ; let not the eyes see light or colours, nor the ears hear sounds ; let the palate not taste, nor the nose smell; and all colours, tastes, odours, and sounds, as they are such particular ideas, vanish and cease, and are reduced to their causes, i. e. bulk, figure, and motion of parts. Sect. 18. A piece of manna of a sensible bulk is able to produce in us the idea of a round or square figure, and, by being removed from one place to another, the idea of motion. This idea of motion represents it as it really is in the manna moving : a circle or square are the same, whether in idea or existence, in the mind or in the manna ; and this both motion and figure are really in the manna, whether we take notice of them or no : this every body is ready to agree to. Besides, manna, by the bulk, figure, texture, and motion of its parts, has a power to produce the sensations of sickness, and sometimes of acute pains or gripings in us. That these ideas of sick- ness and pain are not in the manna, but effects of its operations on us, and are nowhere when we feel them not : this also every one readily agrees to. 96 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. And yet men are hardly to be brought to tliink, tliat sweetness and wliite- ness are not really in manna ; which arc but the effects of the operations of manna, by the motion, size, and figure of its particles on the eyes and palate ; as the pain and sickness caused by manna are confessedly nothing but the effects of its operation on the stomach and guts, by the size, mo- tion, and figure of its insensible parts (for by nothing else can a body operate, as lias been proved;) as if it could not operate on the eyes and palate, and thereby produce in the mind particular distinct ideas, which in itself it has not, as well as we allow it can ojierate on the guts and stom- ach, and thereby produce distinct ideas, which in itself it has not. These ideas being all effects of the operations of manna on several parts of our bodies, by the size, figure, number, and motion of its parts ; why those pro- duced by the eyes and palate, should ratlier be thought to be really in the manna than those produced by the stomach and guts ; or why the pain and sickness, ideas that are the effects of manna, should be thouglit to be no- where when they are not felt ; and yet the sweetness and whiteness, effects of the same manna on other parts of the body, by waj's equally as unknown, should be thought to exist in the manna, when they are not seen or tasted, would need some reason to explain. Sect. 19. Ideas of 'primary qualities are resemblances ; of secondary, not. — Let us consider the red and white colour in porphyry : liinder light from striking on it, and its colours vanish ; it no longer produces any such ideas in us ; upon the return of light it produces these appearances on us again. Can any one think any real alterations are made in the porphyry by the presence or absence ofhght: and that those ideas of whiteness and redness are really in porphyry in the light, when it is plain it has no colour in the dark? It has, indeed, such a configuration of particles, both night and day, as are apt by the rays of light rebounding from some parts of that hard stone, to produce in us the idea of redness, and from others the idea of whiteness ; but whiteness or redness are not in it at any time, but such a texture, that hath the power to produce such a sensation in us. Sect. 20. Pound an almond, and the clear white colour will be altered into a dirty one, and the sweet taste into an oily one. What real altera- tion can the beating of the pestle make m any body, but an alteration of the texture of it 1 Sect. 21. Ideas l)eing thus distinguished and understood, we may be able to give an account how the same water, at the same time, may produce the idea of cold by one hand, and of heat by the other; whereas it is impossible that tlie same water, if those ideas were really in it, .should at the same time be both hot and cold : for if we imagine warmth, as it is in our hands, to be nothing but a certain sort and degree of motion in the minute parti- cles of our nerves or animal spirits, we may understand how it is possible th'at the same water may, at the same time, produce the sensations of heat in one hand, and cold in the other ; which yet figure never does, that never producing the idea of a square by one hand, which has produced the idea of a globe by another. But if the sensation of heat and cold be nothing but the increase or diminution of the motion of the minute parts of our bodies, caused by the corpuscles of any other body, it is easy to be understood, that if that motion be greater in one hand than in the other ; if a body be applied to the two hands, which has in its minute particles a greater motion, than in those of one of the hands, and a less than in those of the other ; it will increase the motion of the one hand, and lessen it in the other, and so cause the different sensations of heat and cold that depend thereon. . Sect. 22. I have in what just goes before been engaged in physical in- quiries a little farther than perhaps I intended. But it being necessary to make the nature of sensation a little understood, and to make the differ- ence between the qualities in bodies and the ideas produced by them in the Ch. 8. SIMPLE IDEAS. 97 mind, to be distinctly conceived, without which it were impossible to dis- course intelligibly of them, I hope I shall be pardoned this little excursion into natural philosophy, it being necessary in our present inquiry to dis- tinoTiish the primary and real qualities of bodies, which are always in them (viz. solidity, extension, figure, number, and motion or rest ; and are sometimes perceived by us, viz. when the bodies they are in are big enough singly to be discerned) from those secondary and imputed qualities, w^hich are but the powers of several combinations of those primary ones, when they operate, without being distinctly discerned; whereby we may also come to know what ideas are, and what are not, resemblances of something really existing in the bodies we denominate from them. ;' Sect. 23. Three sorts of qualities in bodies. — The qualities then that are in bodies, rightly considered, are of three sorts. First, The bulk, figure, number, situation, and motion or rest of their solid parts; those are in them, whether we perceive them or no; and when they are of that size that we can discover them, we have by these an idea of the thing, as it is in itself, as is plain in artificial things. These I call primary qualities. Secondly, The power that is in any body, by reason of its insensible primary qualities, to operate after a peculiar mamier on any of oiu: senses, and thereby produce in us the different ideas of several colours, sounds, smells, tastes, &c. These are usually called sensible qualities. Tlurdly, The power that is in any body, by reason of the particular con- stitution of its primary qualities, to make such a change in the bulk, figure, texture, and motion of another body, as to make it operate on our senses, differently fronr what it did before. Thus the sun has a power to make wax white, and fire to make lead fiuid. These are usually called powers. The first of these, as has been said, I think may be properly called real, original, or primaiy qualities, because they are in the things themselves, whether they are perceived or no ; and upon their different modifications it is, that the secondary qualities depend. The other two are only powers to act differently upon other things, which powers result from the different modifications of those primary qualities. Sect. 24. The first are resemblances. The second thought resem- blances, but are not. The third neither are, nor are thought so. — But though the two latter sorts of qualities are powers barely, and nothing but powers, relating to several other bodies, and resulting fi-om the different modifications of the original qualities, yet they are generally otherwise thought of: for the second sort, viz. the powers to produce several ideas in us by our senses, are looked upon as real qualities, in the things thus affecting us ; but the third sort are called and esteemed barely powers, v. g. the idea of heat or light, which we receive by our eyes or touch from the sun, are commonly thought real qualities, existing in the sun, and some- thing more than mere powers in it. But when we consider the sun, in reference to wax, which it melts or blanches, we look on the whiteness and soflness produced in the wax, not as qualities in the sun, but effects pro- duced by powers in it : w^hereas, if rightly considered, these qualities of light and warmth, which are perceptions in me when I am warmed or en- lightened by the sun, are no othenvise in the sun, than the changes made in the wax, w^hen it is blanched or melted, are in the sun. They are all of them equally powers in the sun, depending on its primary qualities; whereby it is, able, in the one case, so to alter the bulk, figure, texture, or motion of some of the insensible parts of my eyes or hands, as thereby to produce in me the idea of hght or heat ; and in the other, it is able so to alter the bulk, figure, texture, or motion of the insensible parts of the wax, as to make them fit to produce in me the distinct ideas of white and fluid. Sect. 25. The reason why the one are ordinarily taken for real qualities, N 98 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book % and the otlier only for bare powers, seems to be because the ideas we have ot" distinct colours, soniuls, &c. containing nothing at all in them of bulk, figure, or motion, we are not apt to think them the eifects of these primary qualities, which appear not, to our senses, to operate in their production ;' and with which they have not any apparent cong-ruity, or conceivable con- nexion.. Hence it is that we are so forward to imagine, that those ideas are the resemblances of something really existing in the objects themselves ; since sensation discovers nothing of bulk, figure, or motion of parts in their production ; nor can reason show how bodies, by their bulk, figure, and motion, should produce in the mind the ideas of blue or yellow, &c. But in the other case, in the operations of bodies changing the qualities one of another, we plainly discover, that the quality produced hath com- monly no resemblance with any thing in the thing producing it : wherefore we look on it as a bare effect of power. For though receiving the idea of heat or light from the sun, we are apt to think it is a perception and re- semblance of such a quality in the sun ; yet when we see wax, or a fair face, receive change of colour from the sun, we cannot imagine that to be the reception or resemblance of any thing in the sun. because we find not those different colours in the sun itself. For our senses being able to ob- serve a likeness or unlikeness of sensible qualities in two different external objects, we forwardly enough conclude the production of any sensible quality in any subject to be an effect of bare power, and not the communi- cation of any quality, which was really in the efficient, when we find no such sensible quality in the thing that produced it. But our senses not being able to discover any unlikeness between the idea produced in us, and the quality of the object producing it, we are apt to imagine that our ideas are resemblances of something in the objects, and not the effects of certain powers placed in the modification of their primary qualities, with which primary qualities the ideas produced in us have no resemblance. Sect. 26. Secondary qualities twofold ; Jirst, immediately perceivable; secondly, inediately perceivable. — To conclude: beside those before-men- tioned primary qualities in bodies, viz. bulk, figure, extension, number, and motion of their solid parts ; all the rest whereby we take notice of bodies, and distinguish them one from another, are nothing else but several pow- ers in them depending on those primary qualities ; whereby they are fitted, either by immediately operating on our bodies to produce several different ideas in us ; or else, by operating on other bodies, so to change their primary qualities, as to render them capable of producing ideas in us different from what before they did. The former of these, I think, may be called secon- dary qualities, immediately perceivable : the latter, secondary quaUties, mediately perceivable. CHAPTER IX. OF PERCEPTION. Sect. 1. Perception thejirst simple idea of reflection. — Perception, as it is the first faculty of the mind, exercised about our ideas ; so it is the first and simplest idea we have from reflection, and is by some called thinking in general. Though thinking, in the propriety of the English tongue, sig- nifies that sort of operation in the mind about its ideas, wherein the mind is active ; where it, with some degree of voluntary attention, considers any thing. For in bare naked perception, the mind is, for the most part, only passive ; and what it perceives, it cannot avoid perceiving. Sect. 2. Perception is only when the mind receives the impression. — What perception is, every one will know better by reflecting on what he does him- Ch. 9. OF PERCEPTION. 99 self, what he sees, hears, feels, &c. or thinks, than by any discourse of mine. Whoever reflects on what passes in his own mind, cannot miss it, and if he does not reflect, all the words in the world cannot make him have any notion of it. Sect. 3. This is certain, that whatever alterations are made in the body, if they reach not the mind ; whatever impressions are made on the outward parts, if they are not taken notice of within; there is no perception. Fire may burn our bodies, with no other effect than it does a billet, unless the motion be continued to the brain, and there the sense of heat, or idea of pain, be produced in the mind, wherein consists actual perception. Sect. 4. How often may a man observe in himself, that whilst his mind is intently employed in tlie contemplation of some objects, and curiously surveying some ideas that are there, it takes no notice of impressions of sounding- bodies made upon the organ of hearing with the same alteration that uses to be for the producing the idea of sound. A sufficient impulse there may be on the organ ; but if not reaching the observation of the mind, there follows no perception ; and though the motion that uses to produce the idea of sound be made in the ear, yet no sound is heard. Want of- sensation, in this case, is not through any defect in the organ, or that the man's ears are less affected than at other times when he does hear : but that which uses to produce the idea, though conveyed in by the usual or- gan, not being taken notice of in the understanding, and so imprinting no idea in the mind, there follows no sensation. So that wherever there is sense, or perception, there some idea is actually produced and present in the understanding. Sect. 5. Children, though they have ideas in the woirib, have none in- nate.— Therefore, I doubt not but children, by the exercise of their senses about objects that affect them in the womb, receive some few ideas before they are born ; as the unavoidable effects, either of the bodies that environ them, or else of those wants or diseases they suffer : among which (if one may conjecture concerning things not very capable of examination) I think the ideas of hunger and v/armth are two ; which probably are some of the first that children have, and which they scarce ever part with again. Sect. 6. But though it be reasonable to imagine that children receive some ideas before they come into the world, yet those simple ideas are far from those innate principles which some contend for, and we above have rejected. These here mentioned being the effects of sensation, are only from some aflfections of the body, which happen to them there, and so de- pend on something exterior to the mind ; no otherwise differing in their manner of production from other ideas derived from sense, but only in the precedency of time; whereas those innate principles are supposed to be quite of another nature, not coming into the mind by any accidental alter- ations in, or operations on, the body; but, as it were, original characters impressed upon it in the very first moment of its being and constitution. Sect. 7. Which ideas first, is not evident. — As there are some ideas which we may reasonably suppose may be introduced into the minds of children in the womb, subservient to the necessities of their life and being there ; so, after they are born, those ideas are the earliest imprinted which happen to be the sensible qualities which first occur to them : among which light is not the least considerable, nor of the weakest efficacy. And how covetous the mind is to be furnished with all such ideas as have no pain ac- companying them, may be a little guessed by what is observable in chil- dren new-born, who always turn their eyes to that part from whence the light comes, lay them how you please. But the ideas that are most familiar at first being various, according to the divers circumstances of children's first entertainment in the world, the order wherein the several ideas come at first into the mind is very various and uncertain also ; neither is it much materia^ to know it. 100 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. Sect. 8. Ideas of sensation often changed by the judgment. — We ara' further to cot^ . ■ oncerning perception, that the ideas we receive by sen- sation arc -'V .A grown people altered by the judgment, without our taking notice of it. When we set before our eyes a round globe, of any uniform co- lour, V. g. gold, alabaster, or jet, it is certain that the idea tliereby imprinted in our mind is of aflat circle variously shadowed, with several degrees of livht and brightness coming to our eyes ; but we having by use been accus- tomed to perceive w'hat kind of appearance convex bodies are wont to make in us, what alterations are made in the reflections of light by the diflference of the pensible figures of bodies, the judgment presently, by an habitual cus^ tom, alters the appearances into their causes ; so that from that which is truly variety of shadow or colour, collecting the figure it makes it pass for a mark or figure, and frames to itself the perception of a convex figure and a uniform colour : when the idea we receive from thence is only a plane, variously co- loured, as is evident in painting. To which purpose I shall liere insert a pro- blem of that ingeniop ;ind studious promoter of real knowledge, the learn- ed and worthy Mr ' .ineaux, which he was pleased to send me in a letter some months sine. 5 and it is this: suppose a man born blind and now adult, and taught by liis touch to distinguish between a cube and a sphere of the same m&tal, and nighly of the same bigness, so as to tell when he felt one and the other, which is the cube, which the sphere. Suppose then the cube and the sphere placed on a table, and the blind man be made to see : quaere, "whether by his sight, before he touched them, he could now distinguish and tell which is the globe, which the cube !" to which the acute and judicious proposer answers, not. For though ho has obtained the experience of how- a globe, how a cube aflfects his touch ; yet he has not yet obtained the ex- perience, that what affects his touch so or so, must affect his sight so or so ; or that a protuberant angle in the cube that pressed his hand unequally shall appear to his eye as it does in the cube. I agree with this thinking gentleman, whom I am proud to call my friend, in his answer to this his problem ; and am of opinion that the blind man, at first sight, would not be able with certainty to say, which was the globe, which the cube, whilst he only saw them : though he could unerringly name them by his touch, and certainly distinguish them by the difference of their figures felt. This I have set down, and leave with my reader, as an occasion for him to con- sider how much he may be beholden to experience, improvement, and ac- quired notions, where he thinks he had not the least use of, or help from them: and the rather, because this observing gentleman farther adds, that having, upon the occasion of my book, proposed this to divers very inge- nious men, he hardly ever met with one, that at first gave the answer to it which he thinks true, till by hearing his reasons they were convinced. Sect. 9. But this is not, I think, usual in any of our ideas but those/' received by sight : because sight, the most comprehensive of all our sen " ses, conveying to our minds the ideas of light and colours, which are pe- culiar only to that sense ; and also the far different ideas of space, figure, and motion, the several varieties whereof change the appearance of its proper object, viz. light and colours ; we bring ourselves by use to judge of the one by the other. This, in many cases, by a settled habit, in things whereof we have frequent experience, is performed so constantly, and so quick, that we tak^ that for the reception of our sensation which is an idea formed by our judgment : so that one, viz, that of sensation, serves only to excite the other, and is scarce taken notice of itself: as a man who reads or hears with attention and understanding, takes little notice of the char- acters or sounds, but of the ideas that are excited in him by them. Sect. 10. Nor need we wonder that this is done with so little notice, if we consider how very quick the actions of the mind are performed : for as itself is thought to take up no space, to have no extension, so its ac- tions seem to require no time, but many of them seem to be crowded inta Ch. 9. OF PERCEPTION. 101 an instant. I speak this in comparison to the actions of tVe body. Any one may easily observe tiiis in his own thoughts, who v ' i take the pains to reflect on them. How, as it were in an instant, do our minds with one glance see all the parts of a demonstration, which may very well be called a long one, if we consider the time it wiU require to put it into words, and step by step show it another] Secondly, we shall not be so much surprised that this is done in us with so little notice, if we consider how the facilitj' which we get of doing things, by a custom of doing, makes them often pass in us without our notice. Habits, especially such as are begun very early, come at last to produce actions in us which often escape oar observation. How frequently do we, in a day, cover our eyes with our eyelids, without perceiving that we are at all in the dark! Men that by custom have got the use of a by-word, do almost in every sentence pronounce sounds which, though taken notice of by others, they themselves neither liear nor observe; and therefore it is not so strange that our mind should often change the idea of its sensation into that of its judg-ment, and make one serve only to excite the other, without our taking notice of it. Sect. 11. Perception puts the difference between animals and inferior , beings. — This faculty of perception seems to me to be that which puts the distinction betwixt the animal kingdom and the inferior parts of nature. For however vegetables have, many of them, some degrees of motion, and upon the different application of other bodies to them, do very briskly alter their figures and motions, and so have obtained the name of sensitive plants, from a motion which has some resemblance to that which in animals follows upon sensation ; yet I suppose it is all bare mechanism, and no otherwise produced than the turning of a wild oat-beard, by the insinuation of the particles of moisture, or the shortening of a rope by the affusion of water; all which is done without any sensation in the subject, or the having or receiving any ideas. Sect. 12. Perception, I believe, is in some degree in all sorts of animals ; though in some, possibly, the avenues provided by nature for tlie reception of sensations are so few, and the perception they are received with so ob- scure and dull, that it comes extremely short of the quickness and variety of sensation which are in other animals; but yet it is sufficient for, and wisely adapted to, the state and condition of that sort of animals who are thus made; so that the wisdom and goodness of the Maker plainly appear in all the parts of this stupendous fabric, and all the several degrees and i*anks of creatures in it. Sect. 13. We may, I think, from tlie make of an oyster or cockle, reason- ably conclude that it has not so many nor so quick senses as a man, or several other animals; nor if it had, would it, in that state and incapacity of transferring itself from one place to another, be bettered by tJiem. What good would siglit and liearing do to a creature that cannot move itself to or from the objects wherein at a distance it perceives good or evilT And would not quickness of sensation be an inconvenience to an animal that must lie still, where chance has once placed it ; and there receive the afflux of colder or warmer, ciean or foul water, as it happens to come to it? Sect. 14. But yet I cannot but think tliere is some small dull perception whereby they are distinguished from perfect insensibility. And that this may be so, we have plain instances even in mankind itself Take one, in whom decrepit old age has blotted out tlie memory of his past knowledge, and clearly wiped out the ideas his mind was formerly stored with: and has, by destroying his sight, hearing, and smell quite, and his taste to a great degree, stopped up almost all the passages for new ones to enter; or, if there be some of tlie inlets yet half open, the impressions made are scarce perceived, or not at all retained. How far such an one (notwithstanding all that is boasted of innate principles) is in his knowledge and intellectual faculties above the condition of a cockle or an oyster, I leave to be consid- 102 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. ercd. And if a man had passed sixty years in euch a state, as it is possi- ble lie might, as w oil as three days, I wonder what difference there would have been, in any intellectual perfections, between him and the lowest de- gree of animals. Sect. 15. Perception the inlet of hwwledge. — Perception then being the tirst step and degree towards knowledge, and the inlet of all the mate- rials of it, tlie fewer senses any man, as well as any other creature, hath, and tlie fewer and duller the impressions are that are made by them, and the duller the faculties are that are employed about them, the more remote are they from that knowledge which is to be found in some men. But this being in great variety of degrees (as may be perceived among men) cannot certainly be discovered in the several species of animals, much less in their particular individuals. It suffices me only to have remarked liei'e, that per- ception is the first operation of all our intellectual faculties, and tlie inlet of all knowledge in our minds: and Iain apt, too, to imagine that it is perception, in the lowest degree of it, which puts the boundaries between animals and the inferior ranks of creatures. But this I mention only as my conjecture by the by ; it being indifferent to the matter in hand which way the learned shall determine of it. CHAPTER X. OF RETENTION. Sect. 1. Contemplation. — The next faculty of the mind, whereby it makes a farther progress toward knowledge, is that which I call retention, or the keeping of those simple ideas which from sensation or reflection it hath received. This is done two ways ; first by keeping the idea, which is brought into it, for some time actually in view ; which is called con-- templation. Sect. 2. Me7nory. — The other way of retention is the power to revive ^ again in our minds those ideas which, after imprinting, have disappeared, or have been as it wore laid aside out of sight : and thus we do when we conceive heat or light, yellow or sweet, the object being removed. This is memory, which is as it were the store-house of our ideas. For the narrow mind of man not being capable of having many ideas under view and con- sideration at once, it was necessary to have a repository to lay up those ideas, which at another time it might have use of But our ideas be- ing nothing but actual perceptions in the mind, which cease to be any thing when there is no perception of them, this laying up of our ideas in the repository of the memory signifies no more but this, that the mind has a power in many cases to revive perceptions which it once had, with this additional perception annexed to them, that it has had them before. And in this sense it is, that our ideas are said to be in our memories, when indeed i they are actually nowhere, but only there is an ability in the mind when itJ will to revive them again, and as it were paint them anew on itself, though some with more, some with less difficulty; some more lively, and others more obscurely. And thus it is, by the assistance of this faculty, that we are to have all those ideas in our understandings, which, though we do not actually contemplate, yet we can bring in sight, and make appear again, and be the objects of our thoughts, without the help of those sensible qualities which first imprinted them there. Sect. 3. Attention, repetition, pleasure, and pain, fix ideas. — Attention and repetition nelp much to the fixing any ideas in the memory : but those which natually at first make the deepest and most lasting impression are those which are accompanied with pleasure or pain. The great business Ch. 10. OF RETENTION. 103 of the senses being to make us take notice of what hurts or advantages the body, it is wisely ordered by nature (as has been shown) that pain should accompany the reception of several ideas : which supplying the place of consideration and reasoning in children, and acting quicker than considera- tion in grown men, makes both the old and young avoid painful objects with that haste which is necessary for their preservation ; and, in both, settles in the memory a caution for the future. Sect. 4. Ideas fade in the memory. — Concerning the several degrees of lasting, wherewith ideas are imprinted on the memory, we may observe that some of them have been produced in the understanding by an object affecting the senses once only, and no more than once ; others, that have more than once offered themselves to the senses, have yet been little taken notice of: the mind either heedless, as in children, or otherwise employed, as in men, intent only on one thing, not setting the stamp deep into itself: and in some, where they are set on with care and repeated impressions, either through the temper of the body, or some other fault, the memory is very weak. In all these cases, ideas in the mind quickly fade, and often vanish quite out of the understanding, leaving no more footsteps or remain- ing characters of themselves than shadows do flying over fields of corn; and tlie mind is as void of them as if they had never been there. Sect. 5. Thus many of those ideas which were produced in the minds of children, in the beginning of their sensation, (some of which, perhaps, as of some pleasures and pains, were before they were born, and others in their infancy,) if in the future course of their lives they are not repeated again, are quite lost, without the least glimpse remaining of them. This may be observed in those who by some mischance have lost their sight when they were very young", in whom the ideas of colours having been but slightly taken notice of, and ceasing to be repeated, do quite wear out ; so that some years afler there is no more notion nor memory of colours left in their minds than in those of people born blind. The memory of some, it is true, is very tenacious, even to a miracle : but yet there seems to be a constant decay of all our ideas, even of those which are struck deepest, and in minds the most retentive ; so that if they be not sometimes renevv ed by repeated exercises of the senses, or reflection on those kinds of objects which at first occasioned them, the print wears out, and at last there re- mains nothing to be seen. Thus the ideas, as well as children of our youth, often diebefoi'e us: and our minds represent to us those tombs to which we are approaching ; where, though the brass and marble remain, yet the in- scriptions are effaced by time, and the imagery moulders away. The pictures drawn in our minds are laid in fading colours, and if not sometimes refreshed, vanish and disappear. How much the constitution of our bodies and the make of our animal spirits are concerned in this, and whether the temper of the brain makes this difference, that in some it retains the characters draws on it like marble, in others like freestone, and in others little better than sand, I shall not here inquire ; though it may seem pro- bable, that the constitution of the body does sometimes influence the memory ; since we oftentimes find a disease quite strip the mind of all its ideas, and the flames of a fever in a few days calcine all those images to dust and confusion, which seemed to be as lasting as if graved in marble. Sect. 6. Constantly repeated ideas can scarce be lost. — But concerning the ideas themselves, it is easy to remark that those that are oflenest re- freshed (among which are those that are conveyed into the mind by more ways than one) by a frequent return of the objects or actions that produce them, fix themselves best in the memory, and remain clearest and longest there: and therefore those which are of the original qualities of bodies, viz. solidity, extension, figure, motion, and rest; and those that almost con- stantly affect our bodies, as heat and cold : and those which are the affec- tions of all kinds of beings, as existence, duration and number, which 104 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. almost every object that affects our senses, every thought which employs our minds, brintf along with them: these, I say, and the like ideas, are seldom quite lost whilst the mind retains any ideas at all. Sect. 7. In remembering, the mind is often activ£.~ — In this secondary perception, as I may so call it, or viewing again the ideas that are lodged in the memory, tlic mind is ofientimes more than barely passive ; the appear- ance of those dormant pictures depending sometimes on the will. The mind voTy often sets itself on v/orlc in search of some hidden "Tdea, and turns as it were tlie eye of the soul upon it ; though sometimes too they start uj) in our mind:^ of their own accord, and oflcr themselves to the un- derstanding; and very often are roused and tumbled out of their dark cells into open daylight by turbulent and tempestuous passions, our affections bringing ideas to our memory, which had otherwise lain quiet and unre- garded. This farther is to be observed, concerning ideas lodged in the me- mory, and upon occasion revived by the mind, that they are not only (as the word revive imports) none of them new ones : but also that the mind takes notice of them, as of a former impression, and renews its acquaintance with them as with ideas it had known before ; so that though ideas formerly imprinted are not all constantly in view, yet in remembrance they are con- stantly known to be such as have been formerly imprinted, i. e. in view, and taken notice of before by the understanding. Sect. 8. Tico defects in the memory, oblivion and slowness. — Memory, in an intellectual creature, is necessary in the the next degree to perception. It is of so great moment, that where it is wanting, all the rest of our faculties are in a great measure useless ; and we, in our thoughts, reason- ings, and knowledge, could not proceed beyond present objects, were it not for the assistance of our memories, wherein there maybe two defects. First, That it loses the idea quite, and so far it produces perfect igno- rance; for since we can know nothing farther than we have the idea of it, when that is gone, we are in perfect ignorance. Secondly, That it moves slowly, and retrieves not the ideas that it has, and are laid up in store, quick enough to serve the mind upon occasion. This, if it be to a great degree, is stupidity; and he who, through this default in his memory, has not the ideas that are really preserved there ready at hand when need and occasion call for them, were almost as good be without them quite, since they serve him to little purpose. The dull man, who loses the opportunity whilst he is seeking in his mind for those ideas that should serve his turn, is not much more happy in his knowledge than one that is perfectly ignorant. It is the business therefore of the memory to fur- nish to the mind those dormant ideas which it has present occasion for; in the having them ready at hand on all occasions consists that which we call invention, fancy, and quickness of parts. Sect. 9. These are defects, we may observe, in the memory of one man compared with another. There is another defect which we may conceive to be in the memory of man in general, compared with some superior created intellectual beings, which in this faculty may so far e.vccl man, that they may have constantly in view the whole scene of all their former actions, wherein no one of the thoughts they have ever had may slip out of their sight. The omniscience of (iod, who knows all things, past, pre- sent, and to come, and to whom the thoughts of men's hearts always lie open, may satisfy us of the possibility of this. For who can doubt but God may communicate to those glorious spirits, his immediate attendants, any of his perfections, in what proportions he pleases, as far as created finite beings can be capable! It is reported of that prodigy of parts. Monsieur Pascal, that till the decay of his health had impaired his memory, he for- got nothing of what he had done, read, or tiiought, in any part of his rational age. This is a privilege so little known to most men, that it seems almost incredible to those who, after the ordinary way, measure all Ch. 10. OF RETENTION 105 others by themseives : but yet, when considered, may help us to enlarge our thoughts towards greater perfection of it in superior ranks of spirits. For this of Mr Pascal was still with the narrowness that human minds are confined to here, of having great variety of ideas only by succession, not all at once ; whereas the several degrees of angels may probably have ".arger views, and some of them be endowed with capacities able to retain together, and constantly set before them, as in one picture, all their past knowledge at once. This, we may conceive, would be no small advantage to the knowledge of a thinking man, if all his past thoughts and reasonings could be always present to him : and therefore we may suppose it one of those ways wherein the knowledge of separate spirits may exceedingly surpass ours. Sect. 10. Brutes have memory. — This faculty of laying up and retain- ing the ideas that are brought into the mind, several other animals seem to have to a great degree, as well as man : for, to pass by other instances, birds learning of tunes, and tlie endeavours one may observe in them to hit the notes right, put it past doubt with me that they have perception, and retain ideas in their memories, and use them for patterns : for it seems to me impossible that they should endeavour to conform their voices to notes (as it is plain they do) of which they had no ideas. For though I should grant sound may mechanically cause a certain motion of the animals spirits, in the brains of those birds, whilst the tune is actually playing; and that motion may be continued on to the muscles of the wings, and so the bird mechanically be driven away by certain noises, because this may tend to the bird's preservation ; yet thai can nei'er be supposed a reason why it should cause mechanically, either whilst the tune is playing, much less after it has ceased, sucli a motion of the organs in the bird's voice, as should con- form it to tlie note;; of a foreign sound, which imitation can be of no use to the bird's preservation. But, which is more, it cannot with any appear- ance of reason be supposed (much less proved) that birds, without sense and memory, can approach their notes nearer and nearer by degrees to a tune played yesterday, which, if they have no idea of in their memory, is nowhere, nor can be a pattern for them to imitate, or which any repeated essays can bring them nearer to : since there is no reason why the sound of a pipe should leave traces in their brains, which, not at first, but by their after endeavours, should produce the like sounds ; and why the sounds they make themselves should not make traces which they should follow, as well as those of the pipe, is impossible to conceive. CHAPTER XI. OF DISCERNING AND OTHER OPERATIONS OF THE MIND. Sect. 1. No knowledge without discernment. — Another faculty we may take notice of in our minds, is that of discerning and distinguishing between the several ideas it has. It is not enough to have a confused perception of something in general: unless the mind had a distinct perception of differ- ent objects, and their qualities, it would be capable of very little knowledge, 1 hough the bodies that affect us were as busy about us as they are now, and the mind were continually employed in thinking. On this faculty of distin.* guishing one thing from another depends the evidence and certainty of several, even very general propositions, which have passed for innate truths ; because men overlooking the true cause why those propositions find univer- sal assent, impute it wholly to native uniform impressions, whereas in truth it depends upon this clear discerning faculty of the mind, whereby it perceives two ideas to be the same or different. But of this more hereafter. O 106 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. Sect. 2. The difference of wit and judgment. — How much tlie imper- fection of accurately discriniinating ideas one from another hes either in the dulness or faults of the organs of sense, or want of acuteness, exercise, or attention in the imderstanding, or hastiness and precipitancy, natural to some tempers, I will not here examine ; it suffices to take notice, that this is one of the operations that the mind may reflect on and observe in itself It is of that consequence to its other knowledge, that so far as this faculty is in itself dull, or not rightly made use of, for the distinguishing one thing from another, so far our notions are confused, and our reason and judgment disturbed or misled. If in having our ideas in the memory ready at hand consists quickness of parts : in tliisof havingthemunconfused, and being able nicely to distinguish one thing from another, where there is but the least diiference, consists, in a great measure, the exactness of judgment and clearness of reason, which is to be observed in one man above another. And hence perhaps may be given some reason of that common observation, that men who have a great deal of wit, and prompt memories, have not always the clearest judgment or deepest reason : for wit lying / most in the assemblage of ideas, and putting those together with quickness and variety, wherein can be found any resemblance or congruity, thereby to make up pleasant pictures and agreeable visions in the fancy ; judgment, on the contrary, lies quite on the other side, in separating carefully, one ' from another, ideas, wherein can be found the least difference, thereby to avoid being misled by similitude, and by affinity to take one thing for another. This is a way of proceeding quite contrary to metaphor and allusion, wherein for the most part lies that entertainment and pleasantry of wit which strikes so lively on the fancy, and therefore is so acceptable to all people, because its beauty appears at first sight, and there is required no labour of thought to ex- amine what truth or reason there is in it. The mind, without looking any fiirther, rests satisfied with the agreeableness of the picture, and the gayety of the fancy ; and it is a kind of an affront to go about to examine it by the se- vere rules of truth and good reason ; whereby it appears that it consists in something that is not perfectly conformable to them. Sect. 3. Clearness alone hinders confusion. — Tothe welldistinguisliing our ideas, it chiefly contributes that they be clear and determinate ; and where they are so, it will not breed any confusion or mistake about them, though the senses should (as sometimes they do) convey them from the same object differently on different occasions, and so seem to err : for though a man in a fever should from sugar have a bitter taste, which at another time would produce a sweet one, yet the idea of bitter in that man's mind would be as clear and distinct from the idea of sweet as if he liad tasted only gall. Nor does it make any more confusion between the two ideas of sweet and bitter, that the same sort of body produces at one time one, and at another time another idea by the taste, than it makes a confu- sion in two ideas of Vv'hite and sweet, or white and round, that the same piece of sugar produces them both in the mind at the same time. And the ideas of orange colour and azure that are produced in the mind by the same parcel of infijsion of lignum nephriticum, are no less distinct ideas than tho.se of the same colours taken from two very different bodies. Sect. 4. Comparing. — The comparing them one with another, in res- pect of extent, degrees, time, place, or any other circumstances, is another operation of the mind about its ideas, and is that upon which depends all that large tribe of ideas comprehended under relations; which of how vast an extent it is, I shall have occasion to consider hereafter. Sect. 5. Brutes compare hut imperfectlij. — How far brutes partake in this faculty is not easy to determine; I imagine they have it not in any great degree ; for though they probably have several ideas distinct enough, yet it seems to me to be the prerogative of human understanding, when it has sufficiently distinguij;hed any ideas bo as to perceive them to be per- Ch. 11. DISCERNING. 107 fectly different, and so consequently two, to cast about and consider in what circumstances the^^ arc capable to be compared; and, therefore, I think beasts compare not their ideas farther than some sensible circumstances annexed to tiie objects themselves. The other power of comparing, which may be observed in men, belonging to general ideas, and useful only to ab- stract reasonings, we may probably conjecture beasts have not. Sect. 6. Compounding- — The next operation we may obseiwe in the mind about its ideas, is conmositioii, whereby it puts together several of those simple ones it has recMve3"Tfrom sensation and reflection, and combines them into complex ones. Under this of composition may be reckoned also that of enlarging, wherein, though the composition does not so much ap- pear as in more complex ones, yet it is nevertheless a putting several ideas together, though of the same kind. Thus, by adding several units together, we make the idea -of a dozen; and putting together the repeated ideas of several perches, we frame that of a furlong. Sect 7. Brutes compound but little. — In tliis, also, I suppose, brutes come far short of men ; for though they take in and retain together several combinations of simple ideas, as possibly the shape, smell, and voice of his master, make up the complex idea a dog has of him, or rather are so many distinct marks whereby he knov/s him; yet I do not think they do of themselves ever compound them, and make complex ideas. And perhaps, even where we think they have complex ideas, it is only one simple one that directs them in the knowledge of several things, which possibly they distinguish less by their sight than we imagine ; for I have been credibly informed that a bitch will nurse, play with, and be fond of young foxes, as much as, and in place of, her puppies, if you can but get them once to suck her so long that her inilk may go through them. And those animals which have a numerous brood of young ones at once, appear not to have any knowledge of their number; for though they are mightily concerned for any of thfeir young that are taken from them whilst they are in sight or hearing, yet if one or two of them be stolen from them in their absence, or with- out noise, they appear not to miss them, or to have any sense that their number is lessened. Sect. 8. Naming. — When children liave, by repeated sensations, got ideas fixed in their memories, they begin by degrees to learn the use of signs. And when they have got the skill to apply the organs of speech to the framing of articulate sounds, they beg-in to make use of words to signify their ideas to others. These verbal signs they sometimes borrow from others, and sometimes make themselves, as one may observe among the new and un- usual names children often give to things in the fa-st use of language. Sect. 9. Abstraction. — The use of v/ords then being to stand as out- ward marks of our internal ideas, and those ideas being taken from particu- lar things, if every particular idea that we take in should have a distinct name, names must be endless. To prevent this, the mind makes the par- ticular ideas, received from particular objects, to become general ; which is done by considering them as they are in the mind, such appearances, separate from all other existences, and the circumstances of real existence, as time, place, or any other concomitant ideas. This is called abstraction, whereby ideas, taken from particular beings, becomes general representatives of all of the same kind, and their names general names, applicable to what- ever exists conformable to such abstract ideas. Such precise naked appear- ances on the mind, without considering how, whence, or with what others they came there, the understanding lays up (with names commonly annexed to them) as the standard to rank real existences into sorts, as they agree with these patterns, and to denominate them accordingly. Thus the same colour being observed to-day in chalk or snow, which the mind yesterday received from milk, it considers that appearance alone makes it a representative of all of that kind ; and having o-iven it the name whiteness, it bv that sound sig- 103 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. nifies the same quality, wlieresoover to be imagined or met with : and thus universals, wliether ideas or terms, are made. Sect. 10. Brutes abstract not. — If it may be doubted, wlietlier beasts compound and enlarge their ideas that way to any degi-ee ; tliis, I think, I may be positive in, that the power of abstracting is not at all in them; and that the having of general ideas is that which j)nts a perfect distinction be- tween man and brutes, and is an excellency which the faculties of brutes do by no means attain to. For it is evident we observe no footsteps in them of making use of general signs for universal ideas ; from which we have reason to imagine that they have not the faculty of abstracting, or making general ideas, since they have no use of words, or any other general signs. Sect. 11. Nor can it be imputed to their want of fit organs to frame articu- late sounds, that they have no use or knowledge of general words ; since many of tliem, we tiad, can fashion such sounds, and pronounce words dis- tinctly enough, but never with any such application. And, on the other side, men, who, through Gome defect in the organs want words, yet fail not to express their universal ideas by signs, which serve them instead of gen- eral words ; a faculty which we see beasts come short in. And, therefore, I thinlc we may suppose, that it is in tliis that the species of brutes are dis- criminated from man; and it is that proper difference wherein they are wholly separated, and which at last widens to so vast a distance : for if they have any ideas at all, and are not bare machines (as some would have them) we cannot deny them to have some reason. It seems as evident to me, that they do some of them in certain instances reason, as that they have sense : but it is only in particular ideas, just as they received them from their senses. They are the best of them tied, up within those narrow bounds, and have not (as I think) the faculty to enlarge them by any kind of abstraction. Sect. 12. Idiots and madmen. — How far idiots are concerned in the want or weakness of any or all of the foregoing faculties, an exact observa- tion of their several ways of faltering would no doubt discover : for those who either perceive but dully, or retain the ideas that come into their minds but ill, who cannot readily excite or compound them, will have little matter to think on. Those who cannot distinguish, compare, and abstract, would hardly be able to understand and make use of language, or judge, or reason, to any tolerable degree ; but only a little and imperfectly about things pre- sent, and very familiar to their senses. And, indeed, any of the foremen- tioned faculties, if wanting, or out of order, produce suitable effects in men's understandings and knowledge. Sect. 13. In fine, the defect in naturals seems to proceed from want of quickness, activity, and motion in the intellectual faculties, whereby they are deprived of reason; whereas madmen, on the other side, seem to suffer by the other extreme ; for they do not appear to me to have lost the faculty of reasoning; but having joined together some ideas very wrongly, they mistake them for truths, and they err as men do that argue right from wrong principles. For by the violence of their imaginations, having taken their fancies for realities, they make right deductions from them. Thus you shall find a distracted man fancying himself a king, with a right inference require stiitablc attendance, respect, and obedience ; others, who have thought themselves made of glass, have used the caution necessary to pre- serve such brittle bodies. Hence it comes to ])ass that a man, who is very sober, and of a right understanding in all other things, may in one particu- lar be as frantic as any in Bedlam ; if either by any sudden very strong im- pression, or long fixing his fancy upon one sort of thoughts, incoherent ideas have been cemented together so powerfully, as to remain united. But there are degrees of madness, as of folly ; the disorderly jumbling ideas to- gether is in some more, some less. In short, lierein seems to lie the difference between idiots and madmen, that madmen put wrong ideas together, and Ch. 11. DISCERNING. 109 so make wrong propositions, but argue and reason right from them ; but idiots make very few or no propositions, and reason scarce at all. Sect. 14. Method. — These, I think, are the first faculties and operations of the mind, which it makes use of in understanding ; and though they are exercised about all its ideas in general, yet the instances I have hitherto o-iven have been chiefly in simple ideas : and I have subjoined the explica- tion of these faculties of the mind to that of simple ideas, before I come to what I have to say concerning complex ones, for these following reasons : First, Because several of these faculties being exercised at first princi- pally about simple ideas, we might, by following nature in its ordinary method, trace and discover them in their rise, progress, and gradual improve- ments. Secondly, Because observing the faculties of the mind, how they operate about simple ideas, which are usually, in most men's minds, much more clear, precise, and distinct than complex ones ; we may the better examine and learn how the mind abstracts, denominates, compares, and exercises its other operations about those which are complex, wherein we are much more liable to mistake. Thirdly, Because these very operations of the mind about ideas, received from sensations, are themselves, when reflected on, another set of ideas, derived from that other source of our knowledge which I call reflection, and therefore fit to be considered in this place after the simple ideas of sensa- tion. Of compounding, comparing, abstracting, &c., I have but just spoken, having occasion to treat of them more at large in other places. Sect. 15. These are the beginnings of human knowledge. — And thus I have given a short, and, I think, true history of the first beginnings of hu- man knowledge, whence the mind has its first objects, and by what steps it makes its progress to the laying in and storing up those ideas, out of which is to be framed all the knowledge it is capable of; wherein I must appeal to experience and observation, whether I am in the right ; the best way to come to truth being to examine things as really they are, and not to conclude they are, as we fancy of ourselves, or have been taught by others to imagine. Sect. 16. Appeal to experience. — To deal truly, this is the only way that I can discover, whereby the ideas of things are brought into the under- standing : if other men have either innate ideas, or infused principles, they have reason to enjoy them; and if they are sure of it, it is impossible for others to deny them tlie privilege that they have above their neighbours. I can speak but of what I find in myself, and is agi-eeable to those notions ; which, if we will examine the whole course of men in their several ages, countries, and educations, seem to depend on those foundations which I have laid, and to correspond with this method in all the parts and degrees thereof. Sect. 17. Dark room.—^I pretend not to teach, but to inquire, and there- fore cannot but confess here again, that external and internal sensation are the only passages that I can find of knowledge to the understanding. These alone, as far as I can discover, are the windows by which light is let into this dark room : for methinks the understanding is not much unlike a closet wholly shut fi"om light, with only some little opening left, to let in external visible resemblances, or ideas of things without : would the pictures coming into such a dark room but stay there, and lie so orderly as to be found upon occasion, it would very much resemble the understanding of a man, in re- ference to all objects of sight and the ideas of them. These are my guesses concerning the means whereby the understand- ing comes to have and retain simple ideas ; and the modes of them, with some other operations about them. I proceed now to examine some of these simple ideas, and their modes, a little more particularly. 110 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2 CHAPTER XII. ' OF COMPLEX IDEAS, Sect. 1. Made by the mind out of simple ones. — We have hitherto con. sidered those ideas, in the reception whereof tlie mind is only passive , which ^re those simple ones received from sensation and reflection before mentioned, whereof tlie mind cannot make one to itself, nor liave any idea which does not wholly consist of them. But as the mind is wholly passive in the reception of all its simple ideas, so it exerts several acts of its own, whereby, out of its simple ideas, as the materials and foun- dations of the rest, the others are framed. The acts of the mind, wherein it exerts its power over its simple ideas, are chiefly these three : 1. Com- j bining several simple ideas into one compound one, and thus all complex j ideas are made. 2. The second is bringing two ideas, whether simple or i complex, together, and setting them by one another, so as to take a view I of them at once, without uniting them into one; by which way it gets alll its ideas of relations. 3. The third is separating them from all other ideas 1 that accompany them in their real existence ; this is called abstraction : ' and thus all its general ideas are made. This shows man's power, and its way of operation, to be much-what the same in the material and intellec- tual world : for the materials in both being such as he has no power over, either to make or destroy, all that man can do is either to unite them together, or to set them by one another, or wholly separate them. I shall here begin with the first of these, in the consideration of comple.x ideas, and come to the other two in their due places. As simple ideas are observed to exist in several combinations united together, so the mind has a power to con- sider several of thena united together as one idea ; and that not only as they are united in external objects, but as itself has joined them. Ideas thus made up of several simple ones put together, I call complex ; such as are beauty, gratitude, a man, an army, the universe ; which, though complica- ted of various simple ideas, or complex ideas made up of simple ones, yet are, when the mind pleases, considered each by itself as one entire thing, and signified by one name. Sect. 2. Made voluntarily. — In this faculty of repeating and joining together its ideas, the mind has great power in varying and multiplying the objects of its thoughts infinitely beyond what sensation or reflection furnished it with ; but all this still confined to those simple ideas which it received from those two sources, and which are the ultimate materials of all its compositions : for simple ideas are all from things themselves, and of these the mind can have no more nor other than what are suggested to it. It can have no other ideas of sensible qualities than what come from with- out by the senses, nor any ideas of other kind of operations of a thinking substance than what it finds in itself; but when it has once got these simple ideas, it is not confined barely to observation, and what offers itself from without : it can, by its own power, put together those ideas it has, and make new complex ones, which it never received so united. Sect 3. Are either modes, substances, or relations. — Complex ideas, however compounded and decompounded, though their number be infinite, and the variety endless, wherewith they fill and entertain the thoughts of men; yet, I think, they may be all reduced under these three heads: 1. Modes. 2. Substances. 3. Relations. Sect. 4. Modes. — First, Modes I call such complex ideas, which, how- ever compounded, contain not in them the supposition of subsisting by Ch. 12. OF COMPLEX IDEAS. Ill themselves, but are considered as dependencies on, or affections of sub- stances : such as are ideas signified by the words triangle, gratitude, mur- der, &c. And if in this I use the word mode in somewhat a different sense from its ordinary signification, I beg pardon : it being unavoidable in dis- courses, differing fi-om the ordinary received notions, either to make new words, or to use old words in somewhat a new signification : the latter whereof, in our present case, is perhaps the more tolerable of the two. Sect. 5. Simjde and 77iixed7nodes. — Of these modes, there are two sorts which deserve distinct consideration. First, there are some which are only variations, or different combinations of the same simple idea, without the mixture of any other, as a dozen or score ; which are nothing but the ideas of so many distinct units added together ; and these I call simple modes, as being contained within tlie bounds of one simple idea. Secondly, There are others compounded of simple ideas of several kinds, put together to make one complex one ; v. g. beauty, consisting of a cer- tain composition of colour and figure, causing delight in the beholder ; theft, which being the concealed change of the possession of any thing, without the consent of the proprietor, contains, as is visible, a combination of several ideas of several kinds: and these I call mixed modes. Sect. 6. Substances, single or collective. — Secondly, the ideas of sub- stances are such combinations of simple ideas as are taken to represent distinct particular things subsisting by themselves ; in which the supposed or confused idea of substance, such as it is, is always the first and chief. Thus, if to substance be joined the simple idea of a certain dull whitish colour, with certain degrees of weight, hardness, ductility, and fiasibility, we have the idea of lead, and a combination of the ideas of a certain sort of figure, with the powers of motion- TS^hought and reasoning, joined toV substance, make the ordinary idea of a man. Now of substances also there are two sorts of ideas ; one of single substances, as they exist separately, as of a man, or a sheep ; the other of several of those put to- gether, as an army of men, or flock of sheep ; which collective ideas of several substances thus put together, are as much each of them one single idea, as that of a man, or a unit. Sect. 7. Relation. — Thirdly, the last sort of complex ideas is that we call relation, which consists in the consideration and comparing one idea with another. Of these several kinds we shall treat in their order. Sect. 8. The abstrusest ideas from the two sources. — If we trace the progress of our minds, and with attention observe how it repeats, adds to- gether, and unites its simple ideas received fi-om sensation or reflection, it will lead us farther than at first perhaps we should have imagined. And I believe we shall find, if we warily observe the originals of our notions, that ■ even the most abstruse ideas, how remote soever they may seem from sense, or from any operations of our own minds, are yet only such as the under- standing fi-ames to itself by repeating and joining together ideas, that it had either from objects of sense, or from its own operations about them: so that even those large and abstract ideas are derived from sensation or reflection, being no other than what the mind, by the ordinary use of its own faculties, employed about ideas received from objects of sense, or from the opera- tions it observes in itself about them, may and does attain unto'. This I shall endeavour to show in the ideas we have of space, time, and infinity, and some few others, that seem the most remote irom those originals. 112 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. CHAPTER XIII. OF SIMPLE MODES ; AND FIRST, OF THE SIMPLE MODES OF SPACE. Sect. 1. Simple modes. — Though in the foregoing part I have often men- tioned simple ideas, whicli are truly the materials of all our knowledge ; yet having treated of them there rather in the way that they come into the mind, than as distinguished from others more compounded, it will not be perhaps amiss to take a view of some of them again under this con- sideration, and examine those different modifications of the same idea, which the mind either finds in things existing, or is able to make within itself, without the help of any extrinsical object, or any foreign suggestion. Those modifications of any one simple idea (whicli, as has been said, I call simple modes) are as perfectly different and distinct ideas in the mind as those of the greatest distance or contrariety. For the idea of two is as distinct from that of one as blueness from heat, or either of them from any number : and yet it is made up only of that simple idea of a unit repeated ; and repetitions of this kind joined together, make those distinct simple modes, of a dozen, a gross, a million. Sect. 2. Idea of space. — I shall begin with the simple idea of space. I have showed above, chap. 4, that we get the idea of space both by our sight and touch ; which I think is so evident, that it would be as needless to go to prove that men perceive, by their sight, a distance between bodies of different colours, or between the parts of the same body, as that they see colours themselves ; nor is it less obvious that they can do so in the dark by feeling and touch. Sect. 3. Space and extension. — This space, considered barely in length between any two beings, without considering any thing else between them, is called distance ; if considered in length, breadth, and thickness, I think it may be called capacity. The term extension is usually applied to it in what manner soever considered. Sect. 4. Immensity. — Each different distance is a different modification of space : and each idea of any different distance or space is a simple mode of this idea. Men, for the use and by the custom of measuring, settle in their minds the ideas of certain stated lengths, such as are an inch, foot, yard, fathom, mile, diameter of the earth, &c. which are so many distinct ideas made up only of space. When any such stated lengths or measui-es of space are made familiar to men's thoughts, they can in their minds re- peat them as often as they will, without mixing or joining to them the idea of body, or any thing else ; and frame to themselves the ideas of long, square, or cubic, feet, yards, or fathoms, here among the bodies of the universe, or else beyond the utmost bounds of all bodies ; and by adding these still one to another, enlarge their ideas of space as much as they please. The power of repeating or doubling any idea we have of any dis- tance, and adding it to the former as often as we will, without being ever able to come to any stop or stint, let us enlarge it as much as we will, is that which gives us the idea of immensity. Sect. 5. Figure. — There is another modification of this idea, which is nothing but the relation which the parts of the termination of extension or circumscribed space have among themselves. This the touch discovers in sensible bodies, whose extremities come within our reach ; and the eye takes both from bodies and colours, whose boundaries are within its view : where observing how the extremities ten/iii^afe either in straight lines, which meet at discernible angles, or in crooked lines, wherein no angles Ch. 13. SIMPLE MODES OF SPACE. 113 can be perceived, by considering tliese as they relate to one another, in all parts of the extremities of any body or space, it has that idea we call figure, wiiich affords to the mind infinite variety. For besides the vast nmnber of different figures tliat do really exist in the colierent masses of matter, the stock that the mind has in its power, by varying the idea of space, and tliereby making still new compositions, by repeating its own ideas, and joining them as it pleases, is perfectly inexhaustible ; and so it can multi- ply figures in infinitum. StcT. G. Figure. — For the mind having a power to repeat the idea of any length directly stretched out, and join it to another in the same direc- tion, wliich is to double the length of that straiglit line, orelse jom another with what inclination it thinks fit, and so make what sort of angle it pleases ; and being able also to shorten any line it imagines, by taking from it one- half or one-fourth or what part it pleases, without being able to come to an end of any such divitdons, it can make ail angle of any bigness ; so also the lines that are its sides, of what length it pleases, with joining again to other lines of different lengths, and at different angles, till it has wholly inclosed any space, it is evident that it can multiply figures, both in their shape and ca,pacity, in infinitum ; all which are but so many different simple modes of space. The same that it can do with straight lines, it can also do with crooked, or crooked and straight together; and the same it can do in lines it can also in superficies: by which we may be led into farther thoughts of the endless variety of figures, that the mind has a power to make, and thereby to multiply the simple modes of space. Sect. 7. Place. — Another idea coming under this head, and belonging to this tribe, is that we call place. As in simple space we" consider tlie re- lation of distance between any two bodies or points ; so in our idea of place we consider the relation of distance betwixt any tiling and any two or more points, wliich are considered as keeping the same distance one ' with another, and so considered as at rest : for when we find any thing at the same distance now which it was yesterday, from any two or more points, which have not since changed their distance one with another, and with which we then compared it, we say it hath kept the same place : but if it hath sensibly altered its distance with either of those points, we say it hath changed its place : tliough vulgarly speaking, in the common notion of place, we do not always exactly observe the distance from these precise points, but from larger portions of sensible objects, to which we consider the tiling placed to bear relation, and its distance from which we have some reason to observe. Sect. 8. Thus a company of chess-men standing on the same squares of the chess-board where we left them, we say they are all in the same place, or unmoved ; though perhaps the chess-board hath been in the mean time carried out of one room into another ; because we compared them only to the parts of the chess-board which keep the same distance one with another. The chess-board, we also say, is in the same place it was, if it remain in the same part of the cabin, though perhaps the ship which it is in sails all the while : and the ship is said to be in the same place, supposing it kept the same distance with the parts of the neighbouring land, though perhaps the earth hath turned round: and so both chess-men, and board, and ship, have every one changed place, in respect of remoter bodies, which have kept the same distance one with another. But yet the distance from certain parts of the board being that which determines the place of the chess-men : and the distance fi'om the fixed parts of the cabin (with which we made the comparison) being that which determined the place of the chess-board ; and the fixed parts of the earth that by which we determined the place of the ship ; these things may be said to be in the same place in those respects : though their distance from some other things, which in this P 114 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. matter wo did not consider, being varied, they liavc undoubtedly changed place in that rcs])ect: and we ourselves shall think so when we have occa- sion to compare them with those other. Sect. 9. But this modification of distance we call plnce, being made by men for their common use, that by it they might be able to design the par- ticular position of things, where they had occasion for such designation ; men consider and determine of tliis place by reference to those adjacent things which best served to their present purpose, without considering other things, which to answer another purpose would better determine the place of the same thing. Thus, in the chess-board, the use of the designa- tion of the place of each chess-man being determined only within that chequered piece of wood, it would cross that purpose to measure it by any thing else : but when these very chess-men are put up in a bag, if any one should ask where the black king is, it would be proper to determine the place by the parts of the room it was in, and not by the chess-board ; there being another use of designing the place it is now in, than when in play it was on the chess-board, and so must be determined by other bodies. So if any one should ask, in what place are the verses which report the story of Nisus and Euryalus, it would be very improper to determine this place by saying, they were in such a part of the earth, or in Bodley's library : but the right designation of the place would be by the parts of Virgil's works ; and the proper answer would be, that these verses were about the middle of the ninth book of his iEneid ; and that they have been always constantly in the same place ever since Virgil was printed ; which is true, though the book itself hath moved a thousand times ; the use of the idea of place here being to know in what part of the book that story is, that so upon occasion We may know where to find it, and have recourse to it for use. Sect. 10. Place. — ^That our idea of place is notliing else but such a rela- tive position of any thing, as I have before mentioned, I think is plain, and will be easily admitted, when we consider that we can have no idea of the place of the universe, though we can of all the parts of it ; because beyond that we have not the idea of any fixed, distinct, particularbeings, in reference to which we can imagine it to have any relation of distance ; but all beyond it is one uniform space or expansion, wherein the mind finds no variety, no marks. For to say that the world is somewhere, means no more than that it does exist : this, though a phrase borrowed from place, signifying only its existence, not location ; and when one can find out and frame in his mind, clearly and distinctly, the place of the universe, he will be able to tell us whether it moves or stands still in the undistinguishable inane of infinite space: though it be true that the word place has some- times a more confijsed sense, and stands for that space which any body takes up ; and so the universe is in a place. The idea therefore of place we have by the same means that we get the idea of space (whereof this is but a particular limited consideration,) viz. by our sight and touch ; by either of which we receive into our minds the ideas of extension or distance. Sect. 11. Extension and body not the same. — There are some that would persuade us that body and extension are the same thing: who either change the signification of words, which I would not suspect them of, they having so severely condemned the philosophy of others, because it hath been too much placed in the imcertain meaning or deceitfiil ob- scurity of doubtful or insignificant terms. If therefore they mean by body and extension the same tiiat other people do, viz. by body, something that , is solid and extended, whose parts are separable and moveable different ways ; and by extension only the space that lies between the extremities of those solid coherent parts, and which is possessed by them, they con- found very different ideas one with anotlier. For I appeal to every man's own thoughts, whether the idea of space be not as distinct from that of Ch. 13. SIMPLE MODES OF SPACE. 115 solidity as it is from the idea of scarlet colour 1 It is true, solidity cannot exist without extension, neither can scarlet colour exist without extension ; but this hinders not but that they arc distinct ideas. Many ideas require others as necessary to tlieir existence or conception, which yet are very distinct ideas. Motion can neither be, nor be conceived, without space ; and yet motion is not space, nor space motion : space can exist without it, and they are very distinct ideas ; and so, I think, are those of space and solidity. Solidity is so inseparable an idea from body, that upon that depends its fill- , ing of space, its contact, impulse, and communication of motion upon impulse. And if it be a reason to prove that spirit is different from body, because thinidng includes not the idea of extension in it, the same reason will be as valid, I suppose, to prove that space is not body, because it includes not the idea of solidity in it : space and solidity being as dis- tinct ideas as thinking and extension, and as wholly separable in the mind one from another. Body, then, and extension, it is evident, are two dis- tinct ideas. For, Sect. 12. I^-st, Extension includes no solidity, nor resistance to the . motion of body, as body does. Sect. 13. Secondly, The parts of pure space are inseparable one from the other ; so that the continuity cannot be separated, neither really nor mentally. For I demand of any one to remove any part of it from another with which it is continued, even so much as in thought. To divide and separate actually, is, as I think, by removing the parts one from another, to make two superficies, where before there was a continuity ; and to divide mentally, is to make in the mind two superficies, where before there was a continuity, and consider them as removed one from the other ; which can only be done in things considered by the mind as capable of being sepa- rated, and by separation, of acquiring new distinct superficies, which they then have not, but are capable of ; but neither of these ways of separation, whether real or mental, is, as I think, compatible to pure space. It is true, a man may consider so much of such a space as is answerable or commensurate to a foot, without considering the rest ; which is in- deed a partial consideration, but not so much as mental separation or division ; since a man can no more mentally divide, without considering two superficies separate one from the other, than he can actually divide without making two superficies disjoined one fi-om the other : but a partial consideration is not separating. A man may consider light in the sun, without its heat ; or mobility in body, without its extension, without think- ing of their separation. One is only a partial consideration, terminating in one alone; and the other is a consideration of both, as existing separately. Sect. 14. Thirdly, The parts of pure space are immovable, which fol- lows fi-om their inseparability ; motion being nothing but change of distance between any two things ; but this cannot be between parts that are insepa- - rable, which therefore must needs be at perpetual rest one among another. Thus the determined idea of simple space distinguishes it plainly and sufficiently from body; since its parts are inseparable, immovable, and without resistance to the motion of body. Sect. 15. The definition of extension explains it not. — If any one ask me what this space I speak of is] I will tell him, when he tells me what his extension is. For to say, as is usually done, that extension is to have partes extra partes, is to say only that extension is extension : for what am I the better informed in the nature of extension when I am told, that ex- tension is to have parts that are extended exterior to parts that are exten- ded, i. e. extension consists of extended parts 1 As if one asking what a fibre was 1 I should answer him, that it was a thing made up of several fibres : would he thereby be enabled to understand what a fibre was better than he did before 1 Or rather, would he not have reason to think that my desigri was to make sport with him, rather than seriously to instruct him 1 116 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. Sect. 16. Division of beings into bodies and spirits proves not space and body the same. — Those who contend that space and body are the same, bring this dilemma, cither this space is something or nothing ; if nothing be between two bodies, they must necessarily touch ; if it be allowed to be something, they ask whether it be body or spirit 1 To which I answer by another question, who told them that there was or could be nothing but solid beings which could not think, and thinking beings, that were not ex- tended ? which is all they mean by the terms body and spirit. Sect. 17. Substance which we know not, no proof against space with- out body. — If it be demanded (as usually it is) whether this space, void of body, be substance or accident, I shall readily answer, I know not, nor shall be ashamed to own my ignorance, till they that ask show me a clear dis- tinct idea of substance. Sect. 18. I endeavour, as much as I can, to deliver myself from those fallacies which we are apt to put upon ourselves by taking words for things. It helps not our ignorance to feign a knowledge where we have none, by making a noise with sounds, without clear and disthict significations. Names made at pleasure neither alter the nature of things, nor make us understand them, but as they are signs of, and stand for determined ideas : and I desire those who lay so much stress on the sound of these two sylla- bles, substance, to consider whether applying it, as they do, to the infinite, incomprehensible God, to finite spirit, and to bodj'', it be in the same sense ; and whether it stands for the same idea, when each of those three so dif- ferent beings are called substances'? If so, whether it will thence follow that God, spirits, and body, agreeing in the same common nature of sub- stance, differ not any otherwise than in a bare different modification of that substance ; as a tree and a pebble, being in the same sense body, and agree- ing in the common nature of body, differ only in the bare modification of that common matter ; which will be a very harsh doctrine. If they say that they apply it to God, finite spirits, and matter, in three different significa- tions ; and that it stands for one idea, when God is said to be a substance ; for another, when the soul is called subtance ; and for a third, when a body is called so : if the name substance stands for three several distinct ideas, they would do well to make known those distinct ideas, or at least to give three distinct names to them, to prevent, in so important a notion, the con- fusion and errors that will naturally follow from the promiscuous use of so doubtful a term ; which is so far from being suspected to have three distinct, that in ordinary use it has scarce one clear distinct signification ; and if they can thus make three distinct ideas of substance, what hinders why another may not make a fourth? Sect. 19. Substance and accidents, of little use in philosophy* — They who first ran into the notion of accidents, as a sort of real beings that needed something to inhere in, were forced to find out the word substance to sup- port them. Had the poor Indian philosopher (who imagined that the earth also wanted something to bear it up) but thought of this word, substance, he needed not to have been at the trouble to find an elephant to support it, and a tortoise to support his elephant : the word substance would have done it effectually. And he that inquired might have taken it for as good an answer from an Indian philosopher, that substance, without knowing what it is, is that which supports the earth, as we take it for a sufficient answer, and good doctrine, from our European philosophers, that substance, without knowing what it is, is that which supports accidents. So that of substance we have no idea of what it is, but only a confused flbgcure one of what it does. Sect. 20. Whatever a learned man may do here, an intelligent American, who inquired into the nature of things, would scarce take it for a satisfac- tory account, if, desiring to learn our architecture, he should be told that a pillar was a thing supported by a basis, and a basis something that sup- Ch. 13. SIMPLE MODES OF SPACE. 117 ported a pillar. Would he not think himself mocked, instead of taught, with such an account as this ] And a stranger to them would be very lib- erally instructed in the nature of books, and the things they contained, if he should be told, that all learned books consisted of paper and letters, and that letters were things inhering in paper, and paper a thing that held forth letters ; a notable way of having clear ideas of letters and paper ! But were the Latin words inh(Brentia and suhstantia put into the plain English ones that an- swer them, and were called sticking on and underpropping, they would bet- ter discover to us the very great clearness there is in the doctrine of sub- stance and accidents, and show of what use they are in deciding of questions in philosophy. .zi ■' : "~^'---< .-i -- , Sect. 21. A vacuum beyond the titmost bounds of body. — But to return to our idea of space. If body be not supposed infinite, which I think no one will affirm, I would ask, whether, if God placed a man at the extremi- ty of corporeal beings, he could not stretch his hand beyond his body? If he could, then he would put his arm where there vv'as before space with- out body, and if there he spread his fingers, there would still be space be- tween them without body. If he could not stretch out his hand, it must be because of some external hindrance ; (for we suppose him a,live, with such a power of moving the parts of his body that he hath now, which is ^ ot in itself impossible, if God so pleased to have it ; or at least it is not impossi- ble for God so to move him :) and then I ask, whether that which hinders his hand from moving outwards be substance or accident, something or nothing ■? And when they have resolved that, they will be able to resolve themselves what that is, which is or may be between two bodies at a dis- tance, that is not body, and has no solidity. In the mean time, the argu- ment is at least as good, that v/here nothing hinders (as beyond the utmost bounds of all bodies) a body put in motion may move on : as where there is nothing between, there two bodies must necessarily touch : for pure space between is sufficient to take away the necessity of mutual contact ; but bare space in the way is not sufficient to stop motion. The truth is, these men must either own that they think body infinite, though they are loath to speak . it out, or else affirm that space is not body. For I would fain meet with that thinking man, that can in his thoughts set any bounds to space more than he can to duration, or by thinking hope to arrive at the end of either: and, therefore, if his idea of eternity be infinite, so is his idea of immensity : they are both finite or infinite alike. Sect. 22. The power of annihilation proves a vacuum. — Farther, those who assert the impossibility of space existing without matter, must not on- ly make body infinite, but must also deny a power in God to annihilate any part of matter. No one, I suppose, will deny that God can put an end to all motion that is in matter, and fix all the bodies of the universe in a per- fect quiet and rest, and continue them so long as he pleases. Whoever then will allow that God can, during such a general rest, anniliilate either this book, or the body of him that reads it, must necessarily admit the pos- sibility of a vacuum; for it is evident that the space that was filled by the parts of the annihilated body will still remain, and be a space without body : for the circumambient bodies being in perfect rest, are a wall of adamant, and in that state make it a perfect impossibility for any other body to get into that space. And indeed the necessary motion of one particle of mat- ter into the place from whence another particle of matter is removed, is but a consequence from the supposition of plentitude ; which will therefore need some better proof than a supposed matter of fact, which experiment can never make out : our own clear and distinct ideas plainly satisfying us that there is no necessary connexion between space and solidity, since we can conceive the one without the other. And those who dispute for or against a vacuum, do thereby confess they have distinct ideas of vacutuu and plenum, i.e. that they have an idea of extension void of solidity, though theydenyits 118 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. existence, or else they dispute about nothing at all. For they whoso much alter the signification of words as to call extension body, and conse- quently make the whole essence of body to be notliincr but pure extension without solidity, must talk absurdly whenever they speak of vacuum, since it is impossible for extension to be without extension : for vacuum, whether we afiirm or deny its existence, signifies space without body, whose very ex- istence no one can deny to be possible, who will not make matter infinite, and take from God a power to annihilate any particle of it. Sect. 23. MgI ion proves a vacuum. — But not to go so far as beyond the utmost bounds of body in the universe, nor appeal to God's omnipotency to find a vacuum, the motion of bodies that are in our view and neighbour- hood seems to me plainly to evince it. For I desire any one so to divide a solid body, of any dimension he pleases, as to make it possible for the solid parts to move up and down freely every way within the bounds of that superficies, if there be not left in it a void space as big as the least part into which he has divided the said solid body. And if where the least particle of the body divided is as big as a mustard-seed, a void space equal to the bulk of a mustard-seed be requisite to make room for the free motion of the parts of the divided body within the bounds of its superficies, where the particles of matter are 100,000,000 less than a mustard-seed, there must also be a space void of solid matter as big as 100,000,000 part of a mustard-seed ; for if it hold good in one it will hold in the other, and so on in infinitum. And let this void space be as little as it will, it destroys the hypothesis of plentitude : for if there can be a space void of body equal to the smallest separate particle of matter now existing in nature, it is still space without body, and makes as great a difference between space and body, as if it were fj^iya. x^irfxa., a distance as wide as any in nature. And therefore if we suppose not the void space necessary to motion equal to the least parcel of the divided solid matter, but to 1-10 or 1-1000 of it, the same consequence will always follow of space without matter. Sect. 24. The ideas of space and body distinct. — But the question being here, " whether the idea of space or extension be the same with the idea ofbody,"itis not necessary to prove the real existence of a vacuum, but the idea of it ; which it is plain men have, when they inquire and dispute whether there be a vacuum or no : for if they had not the idea of space without body, they could not make a question about its existence ; and if their idea of body did not include in it something more than the bare idea of space, they could have no doubt about the plentitude of the word ; and it would be as absurd to demand whether there were space without body, as whether there were space without space, or body without body, since these were but different names of the same idea. Sect. 25. Extension be ins^ inseparable fro7n body, proves it not the same. — It is true, that the idea of extension joins itself so inseparably with all visible and most tangible qualities, that it suffers us to see no one, or feel very faw external objects, without taking in impressions of extension too. This readiness of extension to make itself be taken notice of so con- stantly with other ideas, has been the occasion, I guess, that some have made the whole essence of body to consist in extension ; which is not much to be wondered at, since some have had their minds, by their eyes and touch (the busiest of all our senses,) so filled with the idea of exten- sion, and as it were wholly possessed with it, that they allowed no exist- ence to anything that hail not extension. I shall not now argue with those men who take the measure and possibility of all being only from their narrow and gross imaginations ; but having here to do only with those who conclude tlie essence of body to be extension, because they say they cannot im- agine any sensible quality of any body without extension, I shall desire them to consider, that had they reflected on their ideas of tastes and smells as much as on those of sight and touch ; nay, had they examined their ideas i Ch. 13. SIIVIPLE MODES OF SPACE. . 119 of hunger and thirst, and several other pains, they would have found that they included in them no idea of extension at all; which is but an affec- tion of body, as well as the rest, discoverable by our senses, which are scarce acute enough to look into the pure essences of things. Sect. 26. If those ideas which are constantly joined to all others must therefore be concluded to be the essence of those things which have con- stantly those ideas joined to them, and are inseparable from them, then unity is, without doubt, the essence of every thing: for there is not any ob- ject of sensation or reflection which does not carry with it the idea of one ; but the weakness of this kind of argument we have already shown suffi- ciently. Sect. 27. Ideas of space and solidity distinct. — To conclude, whatever men shall think concerning the existence of a vacuum, this is plain to me, that we have as clear an idea of space distinct from solidity, as we have of solidity distinct from motion, or motion from space. We have not any two more distinct ideas, and we can as easily conceive space without solidity, as we can conceive body or space without motion, though it be never so certain that neither body nor motion can exist without space. But whether any one will take space to be only a relation resulting from the existence of other beings at a distance, or whether they will think the words of the most knowing king Solomon, "The heaven, and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee," or those more emphatical ones of the in- spired pliilosopher St Paul, " In him we live, move, and have our being," are to be understood in a literal sense, I leave every one to consider : only our idea of space is, I think, such as I have mentioned, and distinct from that of body. For whether we consider in matter itself the distance of its coherent solid parts, and call it, in respect of those solid parts, exten- sion ; or whether, considering it as lying between the extremities of any body in its several dimensions, we caU it length, breadth, and thickness ; or else, considering it as lying between any two bodies or positive beings, without any consideration whether there be any matter or no between, we call it distance : however named or considered, it is always the same uniform simple idea of space, taken from objects about which our senses have been conversant ; whereof having settled ideas in our minds, we can revive, re- peat, and add them one to another as often as we will, and consider the space or distance so imagined either as filled with solid parts, so that another body cannot come there without displacing and thnisting out the body that was there before, or else as void of solidity, so that a body of equal dimensions to that empty or pure space may be placed in it without the removing or expulsion of any thing that was there. But, to avoid con- fusion in discourses concerning this matter, it were possibly to be wislied tliat the name extension were applied only to matter, or the distance of the ex- tremities of particular bodies; and the term expansion to space in general, with or without solid matter possessing it, so as to say space is expanded, and body extended. But in this every one has liberty : I propose it only for the more clear and distinct way of speaking. Sect. 28. Men differ little in clear simple ideas. — The knowing precise- ly what our words stand for, would, I imagine, in this, as well as a great many other cases, quickly end the dispute : for I am apt to think that men, when they come to examine them, find their simple ideas aU generally to agree, though in discourse with one another they perhaps confound one another with different names. I imagine that men who abstract their thoughts, and do well examine the ideas of their own minds, cannot much differ in thinking, however they may perplex themselves with words, according to the way of speaking of the several schools or sects they have been bred up in : though among unthinking men, who examine not scrupulously and care- fidly their own ideas, and strip them not from the marks men use for them, but confound them with words, there must be endless dispute, %vrangling, 120 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. andjaYgon; especially if they be learned hookish men, devoted to some sect, and accustomed to the langiia.f;e of it, and have learned to talk after others. But if it should happen lliat any two thinking men should reallj'' have different ideas, I do not aCc- how they could discourse or argue one with another. Here 1 mu.st r,< \ be mistalscn, to think that every floating imagi- nation in men's brains is ^.-lesently of that sort of ideas I speak of. It is not easy for the mind to put olf those confused notions and prejudices it has imbibed from cu.'it.->m, inadvenency, and connnon conversation: it requires pains and assiduity to examine its ideas, till it resolves them into those clear and distinct simple ones, out of which they are compounded ; and to see which, among its simples ones, have or have not a necessary connexion and dependence one upon another. Till a man doth this in the primary and original notion of things, he builds upon floating and uncertain princi- ples, and will often find himself at a loss. CHAPTER XIV. OF nURATIOiSr, AND ITS SIMPLE MODES. Sect. 1. Duration is fleeting extensicn. — There is another sort of dis- tance or length, the idea whereof we get not from the permanent parts of space, but from the fleeting and perpetually perishing parts of succession. This we call duration, the simple modes whereof are any different lengths of it whereof we have distinct ideas, as hours, days, years, &.c. time and eternity. Sect. 2. Its idea from reflection on the train of our ideas. — The answer of a gi'eat man to or e who asked what time was " Si non rogas intelligo" (which amountL to this, the more I set myself to think of it, the less I understand it) might perhaps persuade one that time, which re- veals all other things, is itself not to be discovered. Duration, time, and eternity, are not without reason thought to have something very abstruse in their nature. But however remote these may seem from our compre- hension, yet if we trace them right to their originals, I doubt not but one of those sources of all our knowledge, viz. sensation and reflection, will be able to ftirnish us with these ideas as clear and distinct as many others which are thought much less obscure ; and we shall find that the idea of eternity itself is derived from the same common original with the rest of our ideas. Sect. 3. To understand time and eternity aright, we ought with atten- tion to consider what idea it is we have of duration, and how we came by it. It is evident to any one, who will but observe what passes in his own mind, that there is a train of ideas which constantly succeed one another in his understanding as long as he is awake. Reflection on these j appearances of several ideas, one after another, in our minds,is that which furnishes us with the idea of succession ; and the distance between any parts of that succession, or between the appearance of any two ideas in our minds, is that we call duration : for whilst we are thinking, or whilst we receive successively several ideas in our minds, we know that we do exist; and so we call the existence, or the continuation of the existence of our- selves, or any thing else, commensurate to the succession of any ideas in our minds, the duration of ourselves, or any other thing co-existent with our thinking. Sect. 4. That we have our notion of succession and duration from this original, viz. from reflection on the train of ideas which we find to appear one after another in our own minds, seems plain to me, in that we have no perception of duration, b'lt by considering the train of ideas that take their Ch. 14. DURATION, AND ITS SIMPLE MODES. 121 turns in our understandings. When that succession of ideas ceases, our perception of duration ceases with it; which every one clearly experiments in himself, whilst he sleeps soundly, whether an hour or a day, a month or a year ; of which duration of things, while he sleeps or thinks not, he has no perception at all, but it is quite lost to him ; and the moment where- in he leaves off to think, till the moment he begins to think again, seems to him to have no distance. And so I doubt not it would be to a waking man, if it were possible for him to keep only one idea in his mind, without va- riation and the succession of others. And we see that one who fixes his thoughts very intently on one thing, so as to take but little notice of the succession of ideas that pass in his mind, whilst he is taken up with that earnest contemplation, lets slip out of his account a good part of that dura- tion, and thinks that time shorter than it is. But if sleep commonly unites the distant parts of duration, it is because during that time we have no suc- cession of ideas in our minds : for if a man, during his sleep, dreams, and vari- ety of ideas make themselves perceptible in his mind one afteranother, he hath then, during such dreaming, a sense of duration, and the length of it : by which it is to me very clear, that men derive their ideas of duration from their reflections on the train of the ideas they observe to succeed one ano- ther in their own understandmgs ; without which observation they can have no notion of duration, whatever may happen in the world. Sect. 5. Tlie idea of duration applicable to things whilst loe sleep. — Indeed a man having, from reflecting on the succession and number of his own thoughts, got the notion or idea of duration, he can apply that notion to things which exist while he does not think ; as he tliat has got the idea " cf extension from bodies by his sight or touch, can apply it to distances where no body is seen or felt. And therefore, though a man has no percep- tion of the length of duration, which passed whilst he slept or thought not, yet having observed the revolution of days and nights, and found the length of their duration to be in appearance regular and constant, he can, upon the supposition that that revolution has proceeded after the same manner whilst he was asleep, or thought not as it used to do at other times : he can, 1 say, imagine and make allowance for the length of duration whilst he slept. But if Adam and Eve (when they were alone in the world,) instead of their ordinary night's sleep, had passed the whole twenty-four hours in one con- tinued sleep, the duration of that twenty-four hours had been irrecoverably lost to them, and been for ever left out of their account of time. Sect. 6. The idea of succession not frommotion. — Thus, by reflecting on the appearing of various ideas one after another in our understandings, we get the notion of succession ; wliich, if any one would think we did rather get from our observation of motion by our senses, he will perhaps be of my mind when he considers, that even motion produces in his mind an idea of succession no otherwise than as it produces there a continued train of distinguishable ideas. For a man looking upon a body i-eally moving, perceives yet no motion at all, unless that motion produces a con- stant train of successive ideas : v. g. du man becalmed at sea, out of sight of land, in a fair day, may look on the sun, or sea, or ship, a whole hour together, and perceive no motion at all in either ; though it be certain that two, and perhaps all of them, have moved during that time a great way. But as soon as he perceives either of them to have changed dis- tance with some other body, as soon as this motion produces any new idea in him, then he perceives that there has been motion. But wherever a man is, with all things at rest about him, without perceiving any motion at all ; if during this hour of quiet he has been thinking, he will perceive the vari- ous ideas of his own thoughts in his own mind, appearing one after another, and thereby observe and find succession where he could observe no motion. Sect. 7. And this, I think, is the reason why motions very slow, though thev are constant, are not perceived bv us ; because, in their remove from Q 122 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. one sensible part toward anotlior, tlieir change of distance is so slow, tliat it causes no new ide^s in us, but a good while one after another : and so not causing a cunslaut train of new ideas to Ibllow one anoliior innnediately in our minds, we have nojjerception of motion ; which consisting in a con- stant succession, we cannot perceive that succession, without a constant succession of varying ideas arising from it. Sect. 8. On tlie contrary, tilings tluit move so swift as not to affect the *' senses distinctly with several distinguishable distances of their motion, and so cause not any train of ideas in the mind, are not also perceived to move ; for any thing that moves round about in a circle in less time than our ideas are wont to succeed one another in our minds, is not perceived to move, but seems to be a perfect entire circle of that matter or colour, and not a part of a circle in motion. Sect. 9. The train of ideas has a certain degree of quickness. — Hence I leave it to others to judge whether it be not probable that our ideas do, whilst we are awake, succeed one another in our minds at certain distances, not much unlike the images in the inside of a lantern turned round by the lieat of a candle. This appearance of theirs in train, though perhaps it may be sometimes faster, and sometime slower, yet I guess, varies not very much in a waking man : there seem to be certain bounds to the quick- ness and slowness of the succession of those ideas one to another in our minds, beyond which they can neither delay nor hasten. Sect. 10. The reason I have for this odd conjecture is from observing, that in the impressions made upon any of our senses we can but to a cer- tain degree perceive any succession ; which, if exceeding quick, the sense of succession is lost, even in cases where it is evident that there is a real succession. Let a cannon-bullet pass through a room, and in its way take with it any limb or fleshy parts of a man ; it is as clear as any demonstra- tion can be, that it must strike successively the two sides of the room. It is also evident, that it must touch one part of the flesh first, and another after, and so in succession : and yet I believe nobody who ever felt the pain of such a shot, or heard the blow against the two distant walls, could perceive any succession either in the pain or sound of so swift a stroke. Such a part of duration as this, wherein we perceive no succession, is that which we may call an instant, and is that which takes up the time of only one idea in our minds without the succession of another, wherein, there- fore, we perceive no succession at all. Sect. 11. This also happens where the motion is so slow as not to sup- ply a constant train of fresh ideas to the senses as fast as the mind is ca- pable of receiving new ones into it ; and so other ideas of our own thoughts, having room to come into our minds between those offered to our senses by the moving body, there the sense of motion is lost ; and the body, though it really moves, yet not changing perceivable distance with some other bo- dies as fast as the ideas of our own minds do naturally follow one another in train, the thing seems to stand still, as is evident in the hands of clocks and shadows of sun-dials, and other constant but slow motions ; where, though after certain intervals, we perceive by the change of distance that it hath moved, yet the motion itself we perceive not. Sect. 12. This train the measure of other successions. — So that to me it seems that the constant and regular succession of ideas in a waking man is, as it were, the measure and standard of all other successions : whereof if any one either exceeds the pace of our ideas, as where two sounds or pains, &c. take up in their succession the duration of but one idea, or else where any motion or succession is so slow as that it keeps not pace with the ideas in our minds, or the quickness in which tliey take their turns; as when any one or more ideas, in their ordinary course, come into our mind between those which are oftered to the sight by the different perceptible distances of a body in motion, or between sounds or smells following one another; Ch. 14. DURATION, AND ITS SIMPLE MODES. 123 there also the sense of a constant continued succession is lost, and we per- ceive it not but with certain gaps of rest between. Sect. 13. The mind cannot fix long on one invariable idea. — If it be so that the ideas of our minds, whilst we have any there, do constantly change and shift in a continual succession, it would be impossible, may any one say, for a man to think long of any one thing. By which, if it be meant that a man may have one self-same single idea a long time alone in his mind, without any variation at all, I think, in matter of fact, it is not pos- sible ; for which (not knowing how the ideas of our minds are framed, of what materials they are made, whence they have their light, and how they come to make their appearances) I can give no other reason but experi- ence : and I would have any one try whether he can keep one unvaried single idea in his mind without any other, for any considerable time to- gether. Sect. 14. For trial, let him take any figure, any degree of light or white- ness, or what other he pleases ; and he will, I suppose, find it difficult to keep all other ideas out of his mind ; but that some, either of another kind, or various consid(^rations of that idea (each of which considerations is a new idea) will constantly succeed one another in his thoughts, let him be as wary as he can. Sect. 15. All that is in a man's power in this case, I think, is only to mind and observe what the ideas are that take their turns in his understand- ing; or else to direct the sort, and call in such as he hath a desire or use of: but hinder the constant succession of fresh ones, I think, he cannot, thougli he may commonly choose whether he will heedfully observe and consider them. Sect. 16. Ideas, however made, include no sense of motion. — Whether these several ideas in a man's mind be made by certain motions, I will not here dispute : but this I am sure, that they include no idea of motion in their ap- pearance ; and if a man had not the idea ofmotion otherwise, I think he would have none at all ; which is enough to my present purpose, and sufficiently shows that the notice we take of the ideas of our own minds appearing there one after another, is that which gives us the idea of succession and duration, without v/hich we should have no such ideas at all. It is not then motion, but the constant train of ideas in our minds, whilst we are waking, that furnishes us with the idea of duration ; whereof motion no otherwise gives us any perception than as it causes in our minds a constant succes- sion of ideas, as I have before showed: and we have as clear an idea of succession and duration, by the train of other ideas succeeding one another in our minds, without the idea of any motion, as by the train of ideas caused by the uninterrupted sensible change of distance between two bodies, which we have from motion ; and therefore we should as well have the idea of duration were there no sense ofmotion at all. Sect. 17. Time is duration set out by measures. — Having thus got the idea of duration, the next thing natural for the mind to do is to get some measure of this common duration, whereby it might judge of its different lengths, and consider the distinct order wherein several things exist, with- out which a gi'eat part of our knowledge would be confused, and a gi'eat part of history be rendered very useless. This consideration of duration, as set out by certain periods, and marked by certain measures or epochs, ig that I think, which most properly we call time. Sect. 18. A good measure of time must divide its whole duration into equal periods. — In the measuring of extension there is nothing more required but the application of the standard or measure we make use of to the thing of whose extension we would be informed. But in the measuring of du- ration this cannot be done, because no two different parts of succession can be put together to measure one another : and nothing being a measure of duration but duration, as nothing is of extension but extension, we cannot 124 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. keep by us any standing nnvanMng measure of duration, whicli consists in a constant fleeting succession, as we can of certain lengths of extension, as inches, feet, yards, &c. marked out in permanent parcels of matter. Nothing, then, could serve well for a convenient measure of time but what has divided the whole length of its duration iirto apparently equal portions, by constantly repeated periods. What portions of duration are not distin- guished, or considered as distinguished and measured by such periods, come not so properly under the notion of time, as appears by such phrases as these, viz. before all time, and when time shall be no more. Sect. 19. The revolutions of the sun and moon, the properest mea- sures of time. — The diurnal and annual revolutio:i3 of the sun, as having been, from the beginning of nature, constant, regular^ and universally ob- servable by all mankind, and supposed equal to one another, have been with reason made use of for the measure of duration. But the distinc- tion of days and years having depended on the motion of the sun, it has brought this mistake with it, that it has been thought that motion and duration were the measure one of another: for men, in the measuring of the length of time, having been accustomed to the ideas of minutes, hours, days, months, years, &.c. which they found themselves upon any mention of time or duration presently to think on, all which portions of time were measured out by the motion of those heavenly bodies ; they were apt to confound time and motion, or at least to think that they had a necessary connexion one with another : whereas any constant periodical appearance or alteration of ideas in seemingly equidistant spaces of duration, if constant- ly and universally observable, would have as well distinguished the intervals of time as those that have been made use of. For supposing the sun, which some have taken to be a fire, had been lighted up at the same distance of time that it now every day comes about to the same meridian, and then gone out again about twelve hours after, and that in the space of an annual revolution it had sensibly increased in brightness and heat, and so decreas- ed again ; would not such regular appearances ser\-e to measure out the distances of duration, to all that could observe it, as well without as with motion? For if the appearances were constant, universally observable, and in equidistant periods, they would serve mankind for measures of time as well, were the motion away. Sect. 20. But not by their motion, but periodical appearances. — For the freezing of water, or the blowing of a plant, returning at equidistant periods in all parts of the earth, would as well serve men to reckon their years by, as the motions of the sun: and in effect we see that some people in America counted their years by the coming of certain birds among them at their certain seasons, and leaving them at others. For a fit of an ague, the sense of hunger or thirst, a smell, or a taste, or any other idea return- ing constantly at equidistant periods, and making itself universally be taken notice of, would not fail to measure out the course of succession, and dis- tinguish the distance of time. Thus, we see that men born blind count time well enough by years, whose revolutions yet they cannot distinguish by motions that they perceive not : and I ask whether a blind man, who distinguished liis years either by the heat of summer or cold of winter ; by the smell of any flower of the spring, or taste of any fruit of tlie autumn ; would not have a better measure of time than the Romans had before the reformation of their calendar by Julius CjBsar, or many other people, whose years, notwithstanding the motion of the sun, which they pretend to make use of, are very irregular? And it adds no small difficulty to chronolog\% that the exact lengths of the years tliat several nations counted by are hard to be known, they differing very much one from another, and I think T may say all of them from the precise motion of the sun. And if the sun moved from the creation to the flood, constantly in the equator, and so equally dispersed its light and lioat to all habitable parts of the earth, in days all of the same Ch. 14. DURATION, AND ITS SIMPLE MODES. 125 length, without its annual variations to the tropics, as a late ingenious author supposes(«) : I do not think it very easy to imagine that (notwithstanding the motion of the sun) men should, in the antediluvian world, from the be- ginning-, count by years, or measure their time by periods, that had no sen- sible marks very obvious to distinguish them by. Sect. 21. No two parts of duration can be certainly known to be equal. — But perhaps it will be said, without a regular motion, such as of the sun or some other, how could it ever be known that such periods were equal 1 To which I answer, the equality of. any other returning appearances might be known by the same way that that of days was known or presumed to be so at first ; which was only by judging of them by the train of ideas which had passed in men's mind, in the intervals : by which train of ideas discovering inequality in the natural days, but none in the artificial days, the artificial days, or v!j;!^Q;,juii>-x, were guessed to be equal, which was suf- ficient to make them serve for a measure : though exacter search has since discovered inequality in the diurnal revolutions of the sun, and we know not whether the annual also be not unequal. These yet, by their presumed and apparent equality, serve as well to reckon time by (though not to mea- sure the parts of duration exactly) as if they could be proved to be exactly equal. We must therefore carefully distinguish betwixt duration itself and the measures we make use of to judge of its length. Duration in itself is to be considered as going on in one constant, equal, uniform, course : but none of the measures of it, which we make use of, can be known to do so ; nor can we be assured that their assigned parts or periods are equal in duration one to another ; for two successive lengths of duration, however measured, can never be demonstrated to be equal. The motion of the sun, which the world used so long and so confidently for an exact measure of duration, has, as I said, been found in its several parts unequal: and though men have of late made use of a pendulum, as a more steady and regular motion than that of the sun, or (to speak more truly) of the earth; yet if any one should be asked how he cjrtainly knows that the two successive swings of a pendulum are equal, it would be very hard to satisfy him that they are infallibly so : since we cannot be sure that the cause of that motion, which is unknown to us, shall always operate equally: and we are sure that the medium in which the pendulum moves is not constantly the same : either of which varying, may alter the equality of such periods, and thereby destroy the certainty and exactness of the measure by motion^ , as well as any other periods of other appearances ; the notion of duration still remaining clear, though our measures of it cannot any of them be de- monstrated to be exact. Since then no two portions of succession can be brought together, it is impossible ever certainly to know their equality. All that we can do for a measure of time, is to take such as have continual successive appearances at seemingly equidistant periods ; of which seeming equality we have no other measure but such as the train of our own ideas have lodged in our memories, with the concurrence of other probable rea- sons, to persuade us of their equality. Sect. 22. Time not the measure of motion. — One thing seems strange to me, that whilst all men manifestly measured time by the motion of the great and visible bodies of the world, time yet should be defined to be the " measure of motion ;" whereas it is obvious to every one who reflects ever so little on it, that, to measure motion, space is as necessary to be consid- ered as time ; and those who look a little farther, will find also the bulk of the thing moved necessary to be taken into the computation by any one who will estimate or measure motion, so as to judge right of it. Nor indeed does motion any otherwise conduce to the measuring of duration, than as it con- stantly brings about the return of certain sensible ideas in seeming equidis- (a) Dr Burnet's Theory of the Earth. 126 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. tant periods. For if tlio motion of the sun were as unequal as of a sliip driven by unsteady winds, sometimes very slow, and at otliers irregularly very switl; or if, being constantly equally swift, it yet was not circular, and producediiot the same appearances, it would not at all help us to measure time, any more than the seeming unequal motion of a comet does. Sect. 23. Minutes, hours, days, and years, not necessary meastires of duration. — Minutes, hours, days, and years, are then no more necessary to time or duration, than inches, feet, yards, and miles, marked out in any matter, are to extension: for though we in this part of the universe, by the constant use of them, as of periods set out by the revolutions of the sun, or as known parts 6f such periods, have fi.xed the ideas of such lengths of dura- tion in our minds, which we apply to all parts of time, whose lengths we would consider; yet there may be other parts of the universe, Avhere they no more use these measures of ours, than in Japan they do our inches, feet, or miles ; but yej[ something analogous to them there nuist be. For without some regular periodical returns, we could not measure ourselves, or signify to others the length of any duration, though at the same time the world were as full of motion as it is now, but no part of it disposed into regular and apparently equidistant revolutions. But the different measures that may be made use of for the account of time do not at all alter the notion of dura- tion, which is the thing to be measured, no more than the different stand- ards of a foot and a cubit alter the notion of extension to those who make use of those different measures. Sect. 24. Our vieasure of time applicable to duration before time. — The mind having once got such a measure of time as the annual revolution of the sun, can apply that measure to duration, wherein that measure itself did not exist, and with which, in the reality of its being, it had nothing to do : for should one say, that Abraham was born in the two thousand seven hundred and twelfth year of the Julian period, it is altogether as intelligible as reck- oning from the beginning of the world, though there were so far back no motion of the sun, nor any motion at all. For though the Julian period be supposed to begin several hundred years before there were really either days, nights, or years, marked out by any revolutions of the sun ; yet we reckon as right, and thereby measure durations as well, as if really at that time the sun had existed, and kept the same ordinary motion it doth now. The idea of duration equal to an annual revolution of the sun is as easily applicable in our thoughts to duration, where no sun nor motion was, as the idea of a foot or yard, taken from bodies here, can be applied in our thoughts to distances beyond the confines of the world, where are no bodies at all. Sect. 25. For supposing it were five thousand six hundred and thirty- nine miles, or millions of miles, from this place to the remotest body of the universe (for, being finite, it must be at a certain distance) as we suppose it to be five thousand six hundred and thirty nine years from this time to the first existence of any body in the beginning of the world ; we can in our thoughts, apply this measure of a year to duration before the creation, or beyond the duration of bodies or motion, as we can this measure of a mile to space beyond the utmost bodies ; and by the one measure duration where there was no motion, as well as by the other measure space in our thoughts where there is no body. Sect. 26. If it be objected to me here, that, in this way of explaining of time, I have begged what I should not, viz. that the world is neither eternal nor infinite ; I answer, that to my present purpose it is not needful, in this place, to make use of arguments to evince the world to be finite, both in duration and extension ; but it being at least as conceivable as the contrary, I have certainly the liberty to suppose it, as well as any one hath to suppose the contrary ; and I doubt not but that every one that will go about it, may easily conceive in his mind the beginning of motion, though Ch. 14. DURATION, AND ITS SIMPLE MODES. 127 not of all duration, and so may come to a stop and non ultra in his con- sideration of motion. So also in his thoughts he may set limits to bodv and the extension belonging to it, but not to space where no body is ; the utmost bounds of space and duration being beyond the reach of thought, as well as the utmost bounds of number are beyond the largest comprehen- sion of the mind ; and all for the same reason, as we shall see in another place. Sect. 27. Eternity. — By the same means, therefore, and from the same original that we come to have the idea of time, we have also that idea which we call eternity; viz. having got the idea of succession and duration, by re- flecting on^THe train of our own ideas, caused in us either by the natural appearances of those ideas coming constantly of themselves into our waking thoughts, or else caused by external objects successively affecting our sen- ses ; and having from the revolutions of the sun got the ideas of certain lengths of duration, we can in our thoughts add such lengths of duration to one another, as often as we please, and apply them, so added, to durations past or to come : and this we can continue to do on, without bounds or limits, and proceed in infinitum, and apply thus the length of the annual motion of the sun to duration, supposed before the sun's, or any other motion had its being ; which is no more difficult or absurd, than to apply the notion I have of the moving of a shadow one hour to-day upon tlie sun dial to the duration of sometliing last night, v. g. the burning of a candle; which is now absolutely separate from all actual motion : and it is as impos- sible for the duration of that flame for an hour last night to coexist with any motion that now is, or for ever shall be, as for any part of duration, that was before the beginning of the world to coexist with the motion of the sun now. But yet this hinders not, but that having the idea of the length of the motion of the shadow on a dial between the marks of two hours, I can as distinctly measure in my thoughts the duration of that candlelight last night, as I can the duration of any thing that does now exist : and it is no more than to think, that had the sun shone then on the dial, and moved after the same rate it doth now, the shadow on the dial would have passed from one hour line to another, whilst that flame of the candle lasted. Sect. 28. The notion of an hour, day, or year, being only the idea I have of the length of certain periodical regular motions, neither of which motions do ever all at once exist, but only in the ideas I have of them in my memory, derived from my senses or reflection ; I can with the same ease, and for the same reason, apply it in my thoughts to duration antecedent to all manner of motion, as well as to any thing that is but a minute, or a day, antecedent to the motion, that at this very moment the sun is in. All things past are equally and perfectly at rest ; and to this way of consider- ation of them are all one, whether they were before the beginning of the world, or but yesterday : the measuring of any duration by some motion depending not at all on the real coexistence of that thing to that motion, or any other periods of revolution, but the having a clear idea of the length of some periodical known motion, or other intervals of duration in my mind, and applying that to the duration of the thing I would measure. Sect. 29. Hence we see, that some men imagine the duration of the world, from its first existence to this present year 1689, to have been five thousand six hundred and thirty-nine years, or equal to five thousand six hundred and thirty-nine annual revolutions of the sun, and others a great deal more ; as the Egyptians of old, who in the time of Alexander counted twenty-three thousand years from the reign of the sun ; and the Chinese now, who account the world three millions two hundred and sixty-nine thousand years old or more: which longer duration of the world, according to their computation, though I should not believe it to be true, yet I can equally imagine it with them, and as truly understand, and say one is lon- ger than the other, as I understand that Methusalem'a life was longer than 128 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. Enoch's. And if the common reckoning of five tiiousand six hundred and thirty-nine should be true (as it may bo as well as any other assigned,) It hinders not at all my imagining what others mean when they make the world one thousand years older, since every one may with the same facility imagine (I do not say believe) the world to be fifty thousand years old, as five thousand six hundred and thirty-nine ; and may as well conceive the duration of fifty thousand years as five thousand six hundred and thirty- nine. Whereby it appears, that to the measuring the duration of any thing by time, it is not requisite that that tiling should be coexistent to the mo- tion we measure by, or any other periodical revolution; but it suffices to this purpose, tiiat we have the idea of the length of any regular periodical appearances, which we can in our minds apply to duration, with wliich the motion or appearance never coexisted. Sect. 30. For as in the history of the creation, delivered by Moses, I can imagine tliat light existed three days before the sun was, or had any motion, barely by thinking, that the duration of light, before the sun was created, was so long as (if the sun had moved then, as it doth now) would have been equal to three of his diurnal revolutions ; so by the same way I can have an idea of the chaos, or angels being created before there was either light, or any continued motion, a minute, an hour, a day, a year, or one thousand years. For if I can but consider duration equal to one mi- nute, before either the being or motion of any body, I can add one minute more till I come to sixty ; and by the same way of adding minutes, hours, or years, (/. e. such or such parts of the sun's revolutions, or any other pe- riod whereof I have the idea) proceed in infinitum, and suppose a duration exceeding as many such periods as I can reckon, let me add whilst I will ; which I think is the notion we have of eternity, of whose infinity we have no other notion than we have of the infinity of number, to which we can add for ever Vv'ithout end. Sect. 31. And thus I think it is plain, that from those two fountains of all Imowledge before mentioned, viz. reflection and sensation, we get ideas of duration, and the measures of it. For, first. By observing what passes in our minds, how our ideas there in train constantly some vanish, and others begin to appear, we come by the idea of succession. Secondly, By observing a distance in the parts of this succession, we get the idea of duration. Thirdly, By sensation observing certain appearances, at certain regular and seeming equidistant periods, we get the ideas of certain lengths or measures of duration, as minutes, hours, days, years, &c. Fourthly, By being able to repeat those measures of time or ideas of stated length of duration in our minds, as often as we will, we can come to imagine duration, where nothing does really endure or exist ; and thus we imagine to-morrow, next year, or seven years hence. Fifthly, By being able to repeat ideas of any length of time, as of a mi- nute, a year, or an age, as often as we will, in our own thoughts, and ad- ding them one to another, without ever coming to the end of such addition any nearer than we can to the end of number, to which we can always add ; we come by the idea of eternity, as the future eternal duration of our souls, as well as the eternity of that infinite Being, which must necessarily have always existed. Sixthly, By considering any part of infinite duration, as set out by pe- riodical measures, we come by the idea of what we call time in general. CI). 15. DURATION AND EXPANSION CONSIDERED. 129 CHAPTER XV OF DURATION AND EXPANSION CONSIDERED TOGETHER, Sect. 1. Both capable of greater and less. — Though we have in the precedent chapters dwelt pretty long on the considerations of space and duration ; yet they being ideas of general concernment, that have some- thing very abstruse and peculiar in their nature, the comparing them one with another may perhaps be of use for their illustration ; and we may have the more clear and distinct conception of them, by taking a view of them too-ether. Distance or space, in its simple abstract conception, to avoid confusion, I call expansion, to distinguish it from extension, which by some is used to express this distance only as it is in the solid parts of matter, and so includes, or at least intimate, the idea of body : whereas the idea of pure distance includes no such thing. I prefer also the word expansion to space, because space is often applied to distance of fleeting successive parts, which never exist together, as well as to those which are permanent. In both these (viz. expansion and duration) the mind has this common idea of continued lengths, capable of greater or less quantities : for a man has as clear an idea of the difference of the length of an hour and a day, as of an inch and a foot. Sect. 2. Expansion not bounded by matter. — The mind having got the idea of the length of any part of expansion, let it be a span or a pace, or what length you will, can, as has been said, repeat that idea ; and so, ad- ding it to the former, enlarge its idea of length, and make it equal to two spans, or two paces, and so as often as it will, till it equals the distance of any parts of the earth, one from another, and increase thus, till it amounts to the distance of the sun or remotest star. By such a progression as this, setting out from the place where it is, or any other place, it can proceed and pass beyond all those lengths, and find nothing to stop its going on, either in, or without body. It is true, we can easily, in our thoughts, come to the end of solid extension; the extremity and bounds of all body we have no difficulty to arrive at : but when the mind is there, it finds nothing to hinder its progress into this endless expansion ; of that it can neither find nor conceive any end. Nor let any one say, that beyond the bounds of body there is nothing at all, unless he will confine God within the limits of matter. Solomon, whose understanding was filled and enlarged with wis- dom, seems to have other thoughts, when he says, " heaven, and the heaven of heavens, cannot contain thee :" and he, I think, very much magnifies to himself the capacity of his own understanding, who persuades himself that he can extend his thoughts farther than God exists, or imagine any expan- sion where he is not. Sect. 3. Nor duration by motion. — Just so is it in duration. The mind having got the idea of any length of duration, can double, multiply, and enlarge it, not only beyond its own, but beyond tlie existence of all cor- poreal beings, and all the measures of time, taken from the great bodies of the world and their motions. But yet every one easily admits, that though we make duration boundless, as certainly it is, we cannot yet extend it be- yond all being. God, every one easily allows, fills eternity, and it is hard to find a reason why any one should doubt that he likewise fills immen- sity. His infinite being is certainly as boundless one way as another, and methinks it ascribes a little too much to matter to say where there is no body, there is nothing. Sect. 4. Why men more easily admit infinite duration than infinite expansion. — Hence, I think, we may learn the reason why every one fami- R 180 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. liarly, and without the least hesitation, speaks of, and supposes, eternity, uud slicks not to aacribe infinity to duration; but it is with more doubting and reserve that many admit or suppose the infinity of space. The reason whereof seems to me to be this; tliat duration and extension being used as names of afiections belonging to other beings, we easily conceive in God infinite duration, and we cannot avoid doing go ; but not attributing to him extension, but only to matter, which is finite, we are apter to doubt of the existence of expansion without matter, of which alone we commonly sup- v pose it an attribute. And therefore when men pursue their thouglits of space, they are apt to stop at the confines of body, as if space were there at an end too, and reached no farther. Or if their ideas upon consideration carry them farther, yet they term what is beyond the limits of the universe imaginary space ; as if it were nothing, because there is no body existing in it: whereas duration, antecedent to all body, and to the motions which it is measured by, they never term imaginary, because it is never supposed void of some other real existence. And if the names of things may at all direct our thoughts towards the originals of men's ideas (as I am apt to think they may very much) one may have occasion to think, by the name duration, that the continuation of existence, with a kind of resis- tance to any destructive force, and the continuation of solidity (which is apt to be confounded with, and, if we look into the minute anatomical parts of matter, is little different from, hardness) were thought to have some analogy, and gave occasion to words so near of kin as durare and durum esse. And that durare is applied to the idea of Jiardness as well as that of existence, we see in Horace, epod. xvi. "ferro duravit secula." But be that as it will, this is certain, that whoever pursues his own thoughts, will find them sometimes launch out beyond the extent of body into the infinity of space or expansion; the idea whereof is distinct and separate- from body and all other things : which may (to those who please) be a sub- ject of farther meditation. Sect. 5. Time to duration is as place to expansion. — Time in general is to diifation as place to expansion. They are so much of those bound- less oceans of eternity and immensity as is set out and distinguished from the rest*, as it were, by landmarks ; and so are made use of to denote the position of finite real beings, in respect one to another, in those uni- form infinite oceans of duration and space. These, rightly considered, are only ideas of determinate distances, from certain known points fixed in distinguishable sensible things, and supposed to keep the same distance one from another. From such points fixed in sensible beings we reckon, and from them we measure our portions of those infinite quantities ; which, so considered, are that which we call time and place. For duration and space being in themselves uniform and boundless, the order and position of things, without such known settled points, would be lost in them, and all things would lie jumbled in an incurable confusion. Sect. 6. Ti7ne and place are taken for so much of either, as are set out by the existence and motion of bodies. — Time and place,. taken thus for determinate distinguishable portions of those infinite abysses of space and duration, set out or supposed to be distinguished from the rest by marks and known boundaries, have each of them a twofold acceptation. First, Time in general is commonly taken for so much of infinite duration as is measured by, and eoexistent with, the existence and motions of the great bodies of the universe, as far as we know any thing of them: and in this sense time begins and ends with the frame of tliis sensible world, as in these phrases before mentioned, before all time, or when time shall be no more. Place likewise is taken sometime for that portion of infinite space which is possessed by, and comprehended witliin, the material world, and is thereby distinguished from the rest of expansion ; though this may more properly be called extension than place. Within these two are con- Ch. 15. DURATION AND EXPANSION CONSIDERED. 131 fined, and by the observable parts of them are measured and determined, the particular time or duration, and the particular extension and place of a!l corporeal beings. Sect. 7. Somttimes for so much of either, as we design by measures taken from the bulk or'motion of bodies. — Secondly, Sometimes the word time is used in a larger sense, and is applied to parts of that infinite dura- tion, not that were really distinguished and measured out by this real ex- istence, and periodical motions of bodies that were appointed from the be- ginning to be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years, and are accordmgly our measure of time; — but such other portions too of that in- finite uniform duration, wliich we, upon any occasion, do suppose equal to certain lengths of measured time; and so consider them as bounded and determined. For if we should suppose the creation or fall of the angels was at the beginning of the Julian period, we should speak properly enough, and should be mrderstood, if we said, it is a longer time since the creation of angels than the creation of the world by seven thousand six hundred and forty years ; whereby we would mark out so much of that undistinguished duration as we suppose equal to, and would have admitted, seven thousand six hundred and forty annual revolutions of the sun, moving at the rate it now does. And thus likewise we sometimes speak of place, distance, or bulk, in the great inane beyond the confines of the world, when we consid- er so much of that space as is equal to, or capable to receive a body of any assigned dimensions, as a cubic foot; or do suppose a point in it at such a certain distance from any part of the universe. Sect. 8. They belong to all beings. — Where and when are questions belonging to all finite existences, and are by us always reckoned li'om some known parts of this sensible world, and from some certain epochs marked out to us by the motions observable in it. Without some such fixed parts or periods, the order of things would be lost to our finite understandings, in the boundless invariable oceans of duration and expansion which comprehend in them all finite beings, and in their full extent belong only to the Deity. And therefore we are not to wonder that we comprehend them not, and do so oflen find our thoughts at a loss, when we would consider them either abstractly in tliemselves, or as any way attributed to the first incomprehen- sible being. But when applied to any particular finite beings, the extension, of any body is so much of that infinite space as the bulk of the body takes up ; and place is the position of any body, when considered at a certain distance from some other. As the idea of the particular duration of any thing is an idea of that portion of infinite duration which passed during the existence of that thing; so the time when the thing existed, is the idea of that space of duration which passed between some known and fixed period of dura- tion, and the being of that thing. One shows the distance of the extremi- ties of the bulk or existence of the same thing, as that it is a foot square, or lasted two years ; the other shows the distance of it in place or existence from other fixed points of space or duration, as that it was in the middle of Lincoln's-inn-fields, or the first degi-ee of Taurus, and in the year of our Lord 1671, or the 1000th year of the Julian period: all which distances we measure by preconceived ideas of certain lengths of space and duration, as inches, feet, miles, and degrees ; and in the other, minutes, days, and years. Sect. 9. All the parts of extension are extension; and all the farts of duration are duration. — There is one thing more wherein space and dura- tion have a great conformity : and that is, though they are justly reckoned among oinr simple ideas, yet none of the distinct ideas we have of either is without all manner of composition(2) ; it is the very nature of both of them (2) It has been objected to Mr Locke, that if space consists of parts, as it is con- fessed in this place, he should not have reckoned it in the number of simple ideas ; because it seems to be inconsistent with what he says elsewhere, that a simple 13-3 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. to consist of parts: but their parts beinnr all of the same kind, and without the mixture of any otlier idea, hinder them not from Iiaving a place among simple ideas. Could tlio mind, as in number, come to so small a part of extension or duration as excluded divisibility, that would be, as it were, the indivisible unit or idea; by repetition of which it would make its more enlarged ideas of extension and duration. But since the mind is not able to frame an idea of any space without parts, instead thereof it makes use of the common measures, which, by familiar use, in each country, have imprint- ed themselves on the memory, (as inches and feet, or cubits and parasangs; and so seconds, minutes, hours, days, and years in duration :) the mind makes use, I say, of such ideas as these, as simple ones; and these are the component parts of larger ideas, which the mind, upon occasion, makes by the addition of such known lengths, which it is acquainted with. On the other side, the ordinary smallest measure we have of either is looked on as an unit in number, when the mind by division would reduce them into less idea is uncompounded, and contains in it nothing but one uniform appearance or concoptioti of the mind, and is not distinguishable into different ideas. It is fartlier olijected, that Mr Locke lias not given ih the eleventh chapter of the second book, where he begins to speak of simple ideas, an exact definition of what he understands by the words simple ideas. To tliese difficulties Mr Locke answers thus : To l)egin with the last, he declares that he has not treated his subject in an order perfectly scholastic, having not had much familiarity with those sort of books during the writing of his, and not remembering at all the method in which they are written ; and therefore his readers ought not to expect definitions regu- larly placed at the beginning of each new subject. Mr Locke contents himself to employ the principal terms that he uses, so that from his use of them the reader may easily comprehend what he means by them. But with respect to the term simple idea, he has had the good luck to define that in the place cited in the objection ; and therefore there is no reason to supply that defect. The question then is to know whether the idea of extension agrees with this definition ? which will eff'ectually agree to it, if it be understood in the sense which Mr Locke had principally in his view ; for that composition which he designed to exclude in that definition was a composition of differeut ideas in the mind, and not a com- position of the same kind in athing whose essence consists in having parts of the same kind, where you can never come to a part entirely exempted from this com- position. So that if the idea of extension consists in having partes extra partes (as the schools speak,) it is always, in the sense of Mr Locke, a simple idea; because the idea of having partes extra partes cannot be resolved into two other ideas. For the remainder of the objection made to Mr Locke, with i-espect to the nature of extension, Mr Locke was aware of it, as may be seen in sect. 9, chap. 15, of the second book, where he says, that " the least portion of space or exten- sion, whereof we have a clear and distinct idea, may perhaps be the fittest to be considered by us as a simple idea of that kind out of which our complex modes of space and extension are made up." So that, according to Mr Locke, it may very fitly be called a simple idea, since it is the least idea of space that the mind can form to itself, and that cannot be divided by the mind into any less, ■whereof it has in itself any determined perception. From whence it follows, that it is to the mind one simple idea : and that is sufficient to take away this objection : for it is not the design of Mr Locke, in this place, to discourse of any thing but concerning the idea of the mind. But if this is not sufiicient to clear the diffi- culty, Mr Locke hath nothing more to add, but that if the idea of extension is so peculiar that it cannot exactly agree with the definition tiiat he has given of those simple ideas, so that it diff'ers in some manner from all others of that kind, he thinks it is better to leave it there exposed to this difficulty, than to make a new division in his favour. It is enough for Mr Locke that his meaning can be un- derstood. It is very commen to observe intelligible discourses spoiled by too much subtlety in nice divisions. AVe ought to put things together as well as we can, doctrime causa : but, after all, several things will not be bundled up to- gether under our terms and ways of speaking. Ch. 15. DURATION AND EXPANSION CONSIDERED. 133 fractions. Thoiig-Ii on both sides, both in addition and division, either of space or duration, when the idea under consideration becomes very big or very small, its precise bulk becomes very obscure and confused; and it is the number of its repeated additions or divisions that alone remains clear and distinct, as will easily appear to any one who will let his thoughts loose in the vast expansion of space, or divisibility of matter. Every part of dura- tion is duration too; and every part of extension is extension, both of them capable of addition or division ininjinitum. But the least portions of either of them, whereof we have clear and distinct ideas, may perhaps be fittest to be considered by us as the simple ideas of that kind, out of whicii our complex modes of space, extension, and duration, are made up, and into which they can again be distinctly resolved. Such a small part in duration may be called a moment, and is the time of one idea in our minds in the train of their ordinary succession there. The other wanting a proper name, I know not whether I may be allowed to call a sensible point, meaning there- by the least particle of matter or space we can discern, which is ordinarily about a minute, and to the sharpest eyes seldom less than thirty seconds of a circle, whereof the eye is the centre. Sect. 10. Their parts inseparable. — Expansion and duration have this farther agreement, that though they are both considered by us as having parts, yet their parts are not separable one from another, no, not even in thought ; though the parts of bodies from whence we take our measure of the one, and the parts of motion, or rather the succession of ideas in our minds, from whence we take the measure of the other, may be interrupted and separated ; as the one is often by rest, and the other is by sleep, which we call rest too. Sect. 11. Duration is as a line, expansion as a solid. — But there is this manifest difference between them; that the ideas of length, which we have of expansion7ai"e turned every way, and so make figure, and breadth, and thickness ; but duration is but as it were the length of one straight line extended in infinitum, not capable of multiplicity, variation, or figure ; but is one common measure of all existence whatsoever, wherein all things, whilst they exis^t, equally partake. For this present moment is common to all things that are now in being, and equally comprehends that part of their existence, as much as if they were all but one single being; and we may truly say, they all exist in the same moment of time. Whether an- gels and spirits have any analogy to this, in respect of expansion, is beyond my comprehension ; and, perhaps, for us, who have understandings and comprehensions suited to our own preservation, and the ends of our own being, but not to the reality and extent of all other benigs; it is near as hard to conceive any existence, or to have an idea of any real being, with a perfect negation of all manner of expansion, as it is to have the idea of any real existence with the perfect negation of all manner of dura- tion ; and therefore what spirits have to do with space, or how they com- municate in it, we know -not. All that we know is, that bodies do each singly possess its proper portion of it, according to the extent of solid parts ; and thereby exclude all other bodies from having any share in that parti- cular portion of space, whilst it remains there. Sect. 12. Duration has never two parts together, expansion all to- gether.— Duration, and time, which is a part of it, is the idea we have of perishing distance, ofwhich no two parts exist together, but follow each other in succession ; as expansion is the idea of lasting distance, all whose parts exist together, and are not capable of succession. And therefore, though we cannot conceive any duration without succession, nor can put it to- gether in our thoughts, that any being does now exist to-morrow, or possess at once more than the present moment of duration ; yet we can conceive the eternal duration of the Almighty far different from that of man, or any other finite being; because man comprehends not in his knowledge, or pow- er, all past and fntin-e things; his thoughts are but of yesterday, and he 134 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. knows not wliat to-morrow will bring forth. What is once passed he can never recall, and wliat ih yet to come he cannot make jjrcsent. What I Bay of man I say of all finite beings; who, though they may far exceed man in knowledge and power, yet are no more than tlic nieaiiost creature, in comparison with God himself Finite of any magnitude holds not any portion to infinite. God's infinite duration being accompanied witii inrinite knowledge and infinite power, he sees all things past and to come ; and they are no more distant from his knowledge, no farther removed from his sight, than the j-rcsent: tliey all lie under the same view; and there is no- thing wliich he cannot make exist each moment he pleases. For the e.x- istence of all things depending upon his good pleasure, all things exist every moment that he thinks fit to have them exist. To conclude, expansion and duration do mutually embrace and comprehend each other; every part of space being in every part of duration, and every part of duration in every part of expansion. Such a combination of two distinct ideas is, I suppose, scarce to be found in all that great variety we do or can conceive, and may afford matter to farther speculation. CHAPTER XVI. OF NUMBER. Sect. 1. Number the simplest and most universal idea. — Amongallthe ideas we have, as there is none suggested to the mind by more ways, so there is none more simp-!e than that of unity, or one. It has no shadow of variety or composition in it : every object our senses are employed about, every idea in our understandings, every thought of our minds, bring this idea along with it ; and therefore it is the most intimate to our thoughts, as well as it is, in its agreement to all other things, the most universal idea we have. For number applies itself to men, angels, actions, thoughts, every thing that either doth exist or can be imagined. Sect. 2. Its modes made by addition. — By repeating this idea in our minds, and adding the repetitions together, we come by the complex ideas of the modes of it. Thus by adding one to one, we have the complex idea of a couple ; by putting twelve units together, we have the complex idea of a dozen; and so of a score, or a million, or any other number. Sect. 3. Each mode distinct. — The simple modes of numbers are of all other the most distinct : every the least variation, which is an unit, making each combination as clearly different from that which approacheth nearest to it, as the most remote: two being as distinct from one as two hundred ; and the idea of two as distinct from the idea of three as the magnitude of the whole earth is from that of a mite. This is not so in other simple modes, in which it is not so easy, nor perhaps possible, for us to distinguish betwixt two approaching ideas, which yet are really different. For who will under- take to find a difference between the white of this paper, and tliat of the next degree to it ; or can form distinct ideas of every the least excess in extension. Sect. 4. Therefore demonstration in nuvibers the most precise. — The clearness and distinctness of each mode of number fi-om all others, even those that approach nearest, makes me apt to think that demonstrations in num- bers, if they are not more evident and exact than in extension, yet they are more general in their use, and more determinate in their application; be- cause the ideas of numbers are more precise and distinguishable tlian in exten- Bion,where every equality and excess are not so easy to be observed or measur- ed ; because our thoughts cannot in space amvo at any determined small- ness, beyond which it cannot go, as an unit; and therefore the quantity or proportion of any the least excess cannot be discovered: which is clear Ch. 16. NUMBER. 135 otherwise in number, where, as has been said, ninety-one is as distinguish- able from ninety as from nine thousand, thougli ninety-one be the next im- mediate excess to ninety. But it is not so in extension, where wliatsoever is more than just a foot or an inch, is not distinguishable from the standard of a foot or an incli: and in lines whicli appear of an equal length, one may be longer tliau the other by innumerable parts ; nor can any one assign an angle which shall be the next biggest to a right one. Sect. 5. Names necessary to numbers. — By the repeating, as has been said, the idea of an unit, and joining it to another unit, we make thereof one collective idea, marked by the name two. And whosoever can do this, and proceed on still, adding one more to the collective idea which he had of any number, and give a name to it, may count or have ideas for several collection of units, distinguished one from another, as far as he hath a se- ries of names for following numbers, and a memory to retain that series, with their several names ; all numeration being but still the adding of one unit to more, and giving to the whole together, as comprehended in one idea, a new or distinct name or sign, whereby to know it from those before and after, and distinguish it from every smaller or greater multitude of units. So that he can add one to one, and so to two, and so go on with his tale, taking still with him the distinct names belonging to every progression; and so again, by subtracting an unit from each collection, retreat and lessen them; is capable of all the ideas of numbers within the compass of his language, or for which he hath names, though not perhaps of more. For the several simple modes of numbers, being in our minds but so many combinations of units, which have no variety, nor are capable of any other difference but more or less, names or marks for each distinct combination seem more ne- cessary than in any other sort of ideas. For without such names or marks we can hardiy well ma!ce use of numbers in reckoning, especially where the combination is made up of any gTeat multitude of units ; which put to- gether without a name or mark, to distinguish that pi'ecise collection, will hardly be kept from being a heap in confusion. Sect. 6. This I think to be the reason why some Americans I have spoken with, (who were otherwise of quick and rational parts enough,) could not, as we do, by any means count to one thousand, nor had any distinct idea of that number, though they could reckon very well to twenty ; because their language being scanty, and accommodated only to the few necessaries of a needy snnple life, unacquainted either with trade or mathematics, had no words in it to stand for one thousand ; so that when they were discours- ed with of those great numbers, they would show the hairs of their head to express a great multitude which they could not number ; which inability, I suppose, proceeded from their want of names. The Tououpinambos had no names for numbers above five ; any number beyond that they made out by showing their fingers, and the fingers of others who were present(6). And I doubt not but we ourselves might distinctly number in words a great deal farther than we usually do, would we find out but some fit denomination to signify them by; whereas in the way we take now to name them by millions of millions of millions, &c. it is hard to go beyond eighteen, or at most four and twenty decimal progressions, without confusion. But to show how much distinct names conduce to our well reckoning, or having useful ideas of numbers, let us set all these following figures in one continued line, as the marks of one number: v. g. Nonillions. Octillions. Septillions. Sextillions. Quintillions. 857324 162486 34.5896 437918 423147 Quatrillions. Trillions. Billions. Millions. Units. 248106 23.5421 261734 368149 623137 (6) Histoire d'lui voyasje, fait en la terre du Brasil, par Jean de Lery, c. 20. ^£1.. A 130 UF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. The ordinary way of naming this nnmber in English will be the often re- peating of millions, of millions, of millions, of millions, of millions, of mil- lions, of millions, of millions (which is the denomination of the second six figures.) In which way it will be very hard to have any distinguishing no- tions of this number ; but whether, by giving every six ligures a new and or- derly denomination, these, and i>erhaps a great many more figures in j)ro- gression, might.not easily be counted distinctly, and ideas of them both got more easily to ourselves, and more plainly signified to others, I leave it to be considered. This I mention only to siiow how necessary distinct names are to numbering, without pretending to introduce new ones of my inven- tion. Sect. 7. Why children number 7iot earlier. — Thus children, either for want of names to mark the several progressions of numbers, or not having yef the faculty to collect scattered ideas into complex ones, and range them m a regular order, and so retain them in their memories, as is necessary to reckoning ; do not begin to number very early, nor proceed in it very far or steadily, till a good while after they are well furnished with good store of other ideas ; and one may oflen observe them discourse and reason pret- ty well, and have very clear conceptions of several other things, before they can tell twenty. Ajid some, through the default of their memories, who cannot retain the several combinations of numbers, with their names annex- ed in their distinct orders, and the dependence of so long a train of numeral progi'essions, and their relation one to another, are not able all their lifetime to reckon or regularly go over any moderate series of numbers. For he that will count twenty, or have any idea of that number, must know that nineteen went before, with the distinct name or sign of every one of them, as they stand marked in their order ; for wherever this fails, a gap is made, the chain breaks, and the progress in numbering can go no farther. So that to reckon right, it is required, 1. That the mind distinguish carefiilly/ two ideas, which are different one from another only by the addition; or subtraction of one unit. 2. That it retain in memory the names or marks of the several combinations, from an unit to that number ; and that not confusedly, and at random, but in that exact order that the numbers fol- low one another; in either of which, if it trips, the whole business of number- ing will be disturbed, and there will remain only the confused idea of multi- tude, but the ideas necessary to distinct numeration will not be attained to. Sect. 8. Number measures all measurables. — This farther is observa- ble in number, that it is that which the mind makes use of in measuring all things that by us are measurable, which principally are expansion and duration ; and our idea of infinity, even when applied to those, seems to be nothing but the infinity of number. For what else are our ideas of eter- nity and immensity, but the repeated additions of certain ideas of imagined parts of duration and expansion, with the infinity of number, in which we can come to no end of addition? For such an inexhaustible stock, number (of all other our ideas) most clearly furnishes us with, as is obvious to every one. For let a man collect into one sum as great a number as he pleases, this multitude, how gi'eat soever, lessens not one jot the power of adding to it, or brings him any nearer the end of the inexhaustible stock of number, where still there remains as much to be added as if none were taken out. And this endless addition or addibility (if any one like the word better) of numbers, so apparent to the mind, is that, I think, which gives us the clear- est and most distinct idea of infinity : of which more in the following chap- ter. Ch. 17. , INFINITY 137 CHAPTER XVII. OF INFINITY. Sect. 1. Infinity, in its original intention, attributed to space, dura- tion, and number. — He that would know what kind of idea it is to which we give the name of infinity, cannot do jt better than by considering to what infinity is by the mind more immediately attributed, and then how the mind comes to frame it. Finite and infinite seem to me to be looked upon by the mind as the modes of quantity, and to be attributed primarily in their first designation onty^tb those things which have parts, and are capable of increase or dimi- nution, by the addition or subtraction of any the least part; and such are the ideas of space, duration, and number, which we have considered in the foregoing chapters. It is true, that we cannot but be assured, that the great God, of whom and from whom are all things, is incomprehensibly infinite : but yet, when we apply to that first and supreme Being, our idea of infinite, in our weak and narrow thoughts, we do it primarily in respect of his duration and ubiquity; and, I think, more figuratively to his power wisdom, and goodness, and other attributes, which are properly inexhaus- tible and incomprehensible, t&c. For, when we call them infinite, we have no other idea of this infinity, but what carries with it some reflection on, and intimation of, that number or extent of the acts or objects of God's pow- er, wisdom, and goodness, which can never be supposed so great or so many, which these attributes will not always surmount and exceed, let us multiply them in our thoughts as far as we can ; with all the infinity of endless number. I do not pretend to say how these attributes are in God, who is infinitely beyond the reach of our narrow capacities. They do, without doubt, contain in them all possible perfection : but this, I say, is our way of conceiving them, and these our ideas of their infinity. Sect. 2. The idea offiiiite easily found. — Finite, then, and infinite, being by the mind looked on as modifications of expansion and duration, the next thing to be considered is, how the mind comes by them. As for the idea of finite, there is no great difficulty. The obvious portions of extension, that afl^ect our senses, carry with them into the mind the idea of finite ; and the ordinary periods of succession, whereby we measure time and duration, as hours, days, and years, are bounded lengths. The difficulty is, how we come by those boundless ideas of eternity and immensity, since the ob- jects we converse with come so much short of any approach or proportion to that largeness. Sect. 3. How we come by the idea of infinity. — Every one that has any idea of any stated lengths of space, as a foot, finds that he can repeat that idea : and, joining it to the former, make the idea of two feet ; and by the ad- dition of a third, tlu-ee feet ; and so on, without ever coming to an end of his addition, whether of the same idea of a foot, or if he pleases of doubling it, or any other idea he has of any length, as a mile, or diameter of the earth, or of the orbus magnus ; for whichsoever of these he takes, and how often soever he doubles, or any otherwise multiplies it, he finds that after he has continued this doubling in his thoughts, and enlarged his idea as much as he pleases, he has no more reason to stop, nor is one jot nearer the end of such addition, than he was at first setting out. The power of enlarging his idea of space by farther additions, remaining still the same, he hence takes the idea of infinite space. Sect. 4. Our idea of space boundless. — Tliis, I think, is the way where- by tne mind gets the idea of infinite space. It is a quite different considera- S 138 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. tion to examine whether the mind has the idea of such a boundless space actually existing, since our ideas are not always proofs of the existence of things; but yet, since this comes here in our \va\', I suppose I may say, that we are apt to tliink that si>ace in itself is actually boundless : to which imagination, tiie idea of space or expansion of itself naturally leads us. For it being considered by us either as the extension of body, or as existing by itself, without any solid matter, taking it up (for of such a void space we liave not only the idea, but I have proved, as 1 think, from the motion of body, its necessary existence), it is impossible tiie mind should be ever able to find or suppose any end f- things, which are discovered by our senses, and are in them even when we perceive them not; such are the bulk, figure, number, situation, and motion of the parts of bodies, which are really in them, whether we take notice of them or no. Secondly, the sensible secondary qualities, which depending on these, are nothing but the powers those substances have to produce several ideas in us by our senses ; which ideas are not in the things themselves, otherwise than aa Ch. 23. OUR IDEAS OP SUBSTANCES. 191 any thing is in its cause. Thirdly, the aptness we consider in any substance to give or receive such alterations of primary qualities, as that the substance so altered should produce in us different ideas from what it did before ; these are called active and passive powers; all which powers, as far as we have any notice or notion of them, terminate only in sensible simple ideas. For whatever alteration a loadstone has the power to make in the minute par- ticles of iron, we should have no notion of any power it had at all to operate on iron, did not its sensible motion discover it: and I doubt not but there are a thousand changes, that bodies we daily handle have a power to cause in one another, which we never suspect, because they never appear in sen- sible effects. Sect. 10. Powers make a great part of our comflex ideas of substances. — Powers therefore justly make a great part of our complex ideas of sub- stances. He that will e.xamine his complex idea of gold, will find several of its ideas that make it up to be only powers, as the power of being melted, but of not spending itself in the fire ; of being dissolved in aqua regia; are ideas as necessary to make up our com.plex idea of gold, as its colour and weight : which, if duly considered, are also nothing but different powers. For to speak truly, yellowness is not actually in gold ; but is a power in gold to produce that idea in us by our eyes, when placed in a due light : and the heat which we cannot leave out of our ideas of the sun, is no more real- ly in the sun, than the white colour it introduces into w' ax. These are both equally powers in the sun, operating, by the motion and figure of its sensi- ble parts, so on a man, as to make him have the idea of heat ; and so on wax, as to make it capable to produce in a man the idea of white. Sect. 11. The new secondary qualities of bodies would disappear, if we could discover the primary ones of their minute parts, — Had we senses acute enough to discern the minute particles of bodies, and the real consti- tution on which their sensible qualities depend, I doubt not but they would produce quite different ideas in us ; and that which is now the yellow colour of gold would then disappear, and instead of it we should see an admirable texture of parts of a certain size and figure. This microscopes plainly dis- cover to us ; for what to our naked eyes produces a certain colour, is, by thus augmenting the acuteness of our senses, discovered to be quite a dif- ferent thing ; and the thus altering, as it were, the proportion of the bulk of the minute parts of a coloured object to our usual sight, produces differ- ent ideas from what it did before. Thus sand or pounded glass, which is opaque, and white to the naked eye, is pellucid in a microscope ; and a hair seen this way loses its former colour, and is in a great measure pellucid, with a mixture of some bright sparkling colours, such as appear from the refraction of diamonds, and other pellucid bodies. Blood to the naked eye appears all red ; but by a good microscope, wherein its lesser parts ap- pear, shows only some few globules of red, swimming in a pellucid liquor : and how these red globules would appear, if glasses could be found that could yet magnify them a thousand or ten thousand times more, is uncer- tain. Sect. 12. Our faculties of discovery suited to our state. — The infinitely wise contriver of us, and all things about us, hath fitted our senses, facul- ties and organs to the conveniences of life, and the business we have to do here. We are able, by our senses, to know and distinguish things : and to examine them so far, as to apply them to our uses, and several ways to accommodate the exigencies of this life. We have insight enough into their admirable contrivances and wonderfiil effects, to admire and magnify the wisdom, power, and goodness of their author. Such a knowledge as this, which is suited to our present condition, we want not faculties to at- tain. But it appears not that God intended we should have a perfect, clear, and adequate knowledge of them : that perhaps is not in the comprehension of any finite being. We are furnished with faculties, (dull and weak as they 192 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. are) to discover enougli in the creatures, to lead us to tlie knowledge of the Creator, and the knowledge of our duty; and we are fitted well enougli with abilities to j)rovide for tlie conveniences of living: these are our business in this world. But were our senses altered, and made much quicker and acuter, the ajjpearance and outward scheme of things Would have quite anotiier face to us ; and, I am apt to think, would be inconsistent with our being, or at least well-being, in this part of the universe wliich we inhabit. i He that considers how little our constitution is able to bear a remove into I parts of this air, not much higher than that wo commonly breatlic in, will J have reason to be satisfied that in this globe of earth allotted for our mansion the all-wise Architect has suited our organs, and the bodies that are to af- fect them, one to another. If our sense of hearing were but one thousand ;. times quicker than it is, how would a perpetual noise distract us ! And wc should in the quietest retirement be less able to sleep or mediate, than in the middle of a sea-fight. Nay, if that most instructive ol" our senses, seeing, were in any man a thousand or an hundred thousand times more acute than it is by the best microscope, things several millions of times less than the smallest object of his sight now would then be visible to his naked eyes, and so he would come nearer to the discovery of the texture and mo- tion of the minute parts of corporeal things ; and in many of them, probably, get ideas of their internal constitutions. But then he would be in a quite ditferent world from other peo])le ; nothing would appear the same to him and others ; the visible ideas of every thing would be different. So that I doubt whether he and the rest of men could discourse concerning the ob- jects of sight, or have any communication about colours, their appearances being so wholly different. And perhaps such a quickness and tenderness of sight could not endure bright sunshine, or so much as open daylight ; nor take in but a very small part of any object at once, and that too only at a very near distance. And if by the help of such microscopical eyes (if I may so call them) a man could penetrate farther than ordinary into the secret composi- tion and radical texture of bodies, he would not make any great advantage by the change, if such an acute sight would not serve to conduct him to the market and exchange ; if he could not see things he was to avoid at a con- venient distance, nor distinguish things he had to do wdth by those sensible qualities others do. He that was sharp-sighted enough to see the configu- ration of the minute particles of the spring of a clock, and observe upon what peculiar structure and impulse its elastic motion depends, would no doubt discover something very admirable ; but if e3-es so framed could not view at once the hand and the characters of the hour-plate, and thereby at a distance see what o'clock it was, their owner could not be much benefrted by that acuteness ; which, whilst it discovered the secret contrivance of the parts of the machine, made him lose its use. Sect. 13. Conjecture about spirits. — And here give me leave to propose an extravagant conjecture of mine, viz. that since we have some reason (if there be any credit to be given to the report of things that our philosophy cannot account for) to imagine that spirits can assume to themselves bodies of different bulk, figure, and conformation of parts ; whether one great ad- vantage some of them have over us may not lie in this, that they can so frame and shape to themselves organs of sensation or perception as to suit them to their present design, and the circumstances of the object they would consider. For how much would that man exceed all others in know- ledge, who had but the faculty so to order the structure of his eyes, that one sense, as to make it capable of all the several degrees of vision which the assistance of glasses (casually at first lighted on) has taught us to conceive ! What wonders would he discover, who could so fit his eyes to all sorts of objects, as to see, when he pleased, the figure and motion of the minute par- ticles in the blood, and other juices of animals, as distinctly as he does, at other times, the shape and motion of the animals themselves? But to us, Ch. 23. OUR IDEAS OF SUBSTANCES. 193 in our present state, unalterable organs so contrived as to discover the figure and motion of tlie minute parts of bodies, whereon depend those sensible qualities we now observe in them, would perhaps be of no advantage. God has, no doubt, made them so as is best for us in our present condition. He hath fitted us for the neighbourhood of the bodies that surround us, and we have to do with : and though we cannot, by the faculties we have, attain to a perfect knowledge of things, yet they will serve us well enough for those ends above mentioned, which are our great concernment. I beg my reader's pardon for laying before him so wild a fancy, concerning the ways of percep- tion in beings above us ; but how extravagant soever it be, I doubt whether we can imagine any thing about the knowledge of angels, but afler this man- ner, someway or other, in proportion to what we find and observe in our- selves. And though we cannot but allow, that the infinite power and wisdom of God may frame creatures with a thousand other faculties and ways of perceiving things without them than what we have, yet our thoughts can go no farther tlian our own ; so impossible it is for us to enlarge our very guesses beyond the ideas received from our own sensation and reflection. The supposition, at least, that angels do sometimes assume bodies, needs not startle us ; since some of the most ancient and most learned fathers of the church seemed to believe that they had bodies : and this is certain, that their state and way of existence is unknown to us. Sect. 14. Complex ideas of substances. — But to return to the matter in hand; the ideas we have of substances, and the ways we come by them, — I say, our specific ideas of substances are notliing else but a collection of a certain number of simple ideas, considered as united in one thing. These ideas of substances, though they are commonly simple apprehensions, and the names of them simple terms, yet in effect are complex and compounded. Thus the idea which an Englishman signifies by the name swan, is white colour, long neck, red beak, black legs, and whole feet, and all these of a certain size, with a power of swimming in the water, and making a certain kind of noise : and perhaps, to a man who has long observed this kind of birds, some other properties which all terminate in sensible simple ideas, all united in one common subject. Sect 15. Idea of spiritual substances as clear as of bodily substances. — Besides the complex ideas we have of material sensible substances, of which I have last spoken, by the simple ideas we have taken from those operations of our own minds which we experiment daily in ourselves, as thinking, understanding, willing, knowing, and power of beginning mo- tion, &c. co-existing in some substance ; we are able to frame the complex idea of an immaterial spirit. And thus, by putting together the ideas of thinking, perceiving, liberty, and power of moving themselves and other things, we have as clear a perception and notion of immaterial substances as we have of material. For putting together the ideas of thinking and willing, or the power of moving or quieting corporeal motion, joined to substance, of which we liave no distinct idea, we have the idea of an immaterial spirit : and by putting together the ideas of coherent solid parts, and a power of being moved, joined with substance, of which likewise we have no positive idea, we have the idea of matter. The one is as clear and distinct an idea as the other : the idea of thinking, and moving a body, being as clear and distinct ideas as the ideas of extension, solidity, and being moved : for our idea of substance is equally obscure, or none at all in both ; it is but a sup- posed I know not what, to support those ideas we call accidents. It is for want of reflection that we are apt to think that our senses show us nothing but material things. Every act of sensation, when duly considered, gives us an equal view of both parts of nature, the corporeal and spiritual. For whilst I know, by seeing or hearing, «Scc. that there is some corporeal being without me, the object of that sensation; I do more certainly know, that there is some spiritual being within me that sees and hears. This, I must Z 194 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. be convinced, cannot be the action of bare insensible matter ; nor ever could be, witliout an immaterial thinking being. Sect. 16. No idea of abstract substance. — By the complex idea of ex- tended, ligured, coloured, and all other sensible qualities, which is all that we know of it, we are as far from the idea of the substance of body as if we knew nothing at all : nor after all the acquaintance and familiarity which we imagine we have with matter, and the many qualities men assure them- selves they perceive and know in bodies, will it perhaps upon examination be found, that they have any more or clearer primary ideas belonging to body, than they have belonging to immaterial spirit. Sect. 17. The cohesion of solid parts and impulse of primary ideas of body. — The primary ideas we have peculiar to body, as contradistinguished to spirit, are the cohesion of solid, and consequently separable, parts, and a power of communicating motion by impulse. These, I think, are the original ideas proper and peculiar to body ; for figure is but the consequence of Unite extension. Sect. 18. Thinking and motivity the primary ideas of spirit. — The ideas we have belonging and peculiar to spirit are thinking and will, or a power of puttingbody into motion by thought, and, whicli is consequent to it, liberty. For as body cannot but communicate its motion by impulse to another body, which it meets with at rest, so the mind can put bodies into motion, or forbear to do so, as it pleases. The ideas of existence, duration, and mo- bility, are common to them both. Sect. 19. Spirits capable of motion. — There is no reason why it should be thought strange, that I make mobility belong to spirit : for having no other idea of motion but change of distance with other beings that are con- sidered as at rest, — and finding that spirits, as well as bodies, cannot ope- rate but where they are, and that spirits do operate at several times in several places, — I cannot but attribute change of place to all finite spirits (for of the infinite spirit I speak not here). For my soul being a real being, as well as my body, is certainly as capable of changing distance with any other body, or Doing, as body itself, and so is capable of motion. And if a mathematician can consider a certain distance, or a change of that distance between two pomts, one may certainly conceive a distance and a change of distance between two spirits ; and so conceive their motion, their approach or removal, one from another. Sect. 20. Every one finds in himself, that his soul can think, will, and operate on his body in the place where that is ; but cannot operate on a body or in a ])lace an hundred miles distant from it. Nobody can imagine that his soul can think or move a body at Oxford, whilst he is at London ; and cannot but know, that, being united to his body, it constantly changes place all the whole journey between Oxford and London, as the coach or horse does that carries him, and I think may be said to be truly all that while in motion ; or if that will not be allowed to afford us a clear idea enough of its motion, its being separated from the body in death, I think, will ; for to consider it as going out of the body, or leaving it, and yet to have no idea of its motion, seems to me impossible. Sect. 21. If it be said by any one that it cannot change place, because it hath none, for spirits are not in loco, but ubi ; I suppose that way of talking will not now be of much weight to many, in an age that is not much disposed to admire or suffer themselves to be deceived by such unintelligible ways of speaking. But if any one thinks there is any sense in that distinc- tion, and that it is applicable to our present purpose, I desire him to put it into intelligible English ; and then from tlience draw a reason to show that immaterial spirits are not capable of motion. Indeed motion cannot be attri- buted to God ; not because he is an immaterial, but because he is an infinite spirit. Sect. 22. Idea of soul and body compared. — Let us compare then our complex idea of an immaterial spirit with our complex idea of body, and see Ch. 23. OUR IDEAS OP SUBSTANCES. 196 whether there be any more obscurity in one than in the other, and in which luvbt. Our idea of "body, as I think, is an extended soHd substance, ca- pable of communicating motion by impulse ; and our idea of soul, as an im- material spirit, is of a substance that thinks, and has a power of exciting motion in body, by willing or thought. These, I think, are our complex ideas of soul and body, as contradistinguished ; and now iet us examine which has most obscurity in it, and difficulty to be apprehended. I know that people, whose thoughts are innnersed in matter, and have so subjected their minds to their senses, that they seldom reflect on any tiling beyond them, are apt to say, they cannot comprehend a thinking thing, which per- liaps is true : but 1 affirm, when they consider it well, they can no more comprehend an extended thing. Sect. 23. Cohesion of solid parts in body as hard to be conceived as thinking in a soul. — If any one say, he knows not what it is thinks in him, he means he knows not what the substance is of that thinking thing: no more, say I, knows he what the substance is of that solid thing. Farther, if lie says he knows not how he thinks, I answer, neither knows he liow he is extended ; how the solid parts of body are united, or cohere together to make extension. For though the pressure of the particles of air may account for the cohesion of several parts of matter, that are grosser than the parti- cles of air, and have pores less than corpuscles of air, — yet the weight or pressure of the air will not explain, nor can be a cause of the coherence of the particles of air themselves. And if the pressures of the ether, or any subtiler matter than the air, may unite, and hold fast together the parts of a particle of air, as well as other bodies; yet it cannot make bonds for itself, and hold together the parts that make up every the least corpuscle of that materia subtilis. So that the hypothesis, how in- geniously soever explained, by showing that the parts of sensible bodies are held together by the pressure of other external insensible bodies, reaches not the parts of the ether itself; and by how much the more evident it proves that the parts of other bodies are held togetJier by the external pressure of the ether, and can have no other conceivable cause of their cohesion and union, by so much the more it leaves us in the dark concerning the cohe- sion of the parts of the corpuscles of the ether itself; which we can neither conceive without parts, they being bodies, and divisible, nor yet how their parts cohere, they wanting that cause of cohesion, which is given of the co- hesion of the parts of all other bodies. Sect. 24. But, in truth, the pressure of any ambient fluid, bow great so- ever, can be no intelligible cause of the cohesion of the solid parts of mat- ter. For though such a pressure may hinder the avulsion of two polished superficies, one from another, in a line perpendicular to them, as in the ex- periment of two polished marbles ; yet it can never, in the least, hinder the separation by a motion, in a line parallel to those surfaces ; because the ambient fluid, having a full liberty to succeed in each point of space, desert- ed by a laterial motion, resists such a motion of bodies so joined no more than it would resist the motion of that body, were it on all sides environed by that fluid, and touched no other body : and, therefore, if there were no other cause of cohesion, all parts of bodies must be easily separable by such a laterial sliding motion. For if the pressure of the ether be the adequate cause of cohesion, wherever that cause operates not, there can be no cohe- sion. And since it cannot operate against such a lateral separation (as has been shown,) therefore in every imaginary plane, intersecting any mass of matter, there could be no more cohesion than of two polished surfaces, which will always, notwithstanding any imaginable pressure of a fluid, easi- ly slide one from another. So that, perhaps, how clear an idea soever we think we have of the extension of body, which is nothing but the cohesion of solid parts, he that shall well consider it in his mind may have reason to conclude, that it is as easy for him to have a clear idea how the soul thiaks, as how body \» extended. For since body is no farther nor other- 196 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. wise extended tlian by the union and cohesion of its solid parts, we shall very ill conipreliend the extension of body, without understanding wherein consists tiie union and cohesion of its parts ; whicii seems to rne as incom- prehensible as the manner of thinking, and how it is performed. Sect. 25. I allow it is usual for most people to wonder how any one should rind a difficulty in what they think they every day observe. Do we not see, will they be ready to say, the parts of bodies stick firmly together] Is there any tiling more conmion ! And what doubt can there be made of it] And the like, I say, concerning thinking and voluntary motion : do we not every moment experiment it in ourselves ; and therefore can it be doubt- ed ] Tlie matter of fact is clear, I confess ; but when we would a little nearer look into it, and consider how it is done, there I think we are at a loss, both in the one and the other ; and can as little understand how the parts of body cohere, as how we ourselves perceive, or move. I would have any one in- telligibly explain to me how the parts of gold, or brass (that but now in fusion were as loose from one another as the particles of water or the sands of an hour glass,) come in a few moments to be so united, and adhere so strongly one to another, that the utmost force of men's arms cannot separate them : a considering man will, I suppose, be here at a loss to satis- fy his own, or another man's understanding. Sect. 26. The little bodies that compose that fluid we call water are so extremely small, that I have never heard of any one, who by a microscope (and yet I have heard of some that have magnified to ten thousand, nay, to much above a hundred thousand times) pretended to perceive their distinct bidk, figure, or motion : and the particles of water are also so per- fectly lo^se one from another, that the least force sensibly separates thein. Nay, if we consider their perpetual motion, we must allow them to have no cohesion one with another; and yet let but a sharp cold come, they unite, they consolidate, these little atoms cohere, and are not, without great force, separable. He that could find the bonds that tie these heaps of loose little bo- dies together so firmly; he that could make known the cement that makes them stick so fast one to another ; would discover a great and yet unknown secret : and yet, when that was done, would he be far enough from making the extension of body (which is the cohesion of its solid })arts) intelligible, till he could show wherein consisted the union or consolidation of the parts of those bonds, or of that cement, or of the least particle of matter that exists. Whereby it appears, that this primary and supposed obvious quality of body will be found, when examined, to be as incomprehensible as any thing belong- ingtoour minds, and a solid extended substance as hard to be conceived as a thinking immaterial one, whatever difficulties some woidd raise against it. Sect. 27. For, to extend our thoughts a little farther, that pressure, which is brought to explain the cohesion of bodies, is as unintelligible as the cohe- sion itself. For if matter be considered, as no doubt it is, finite, let any one send his contemplation to the extremities of the universe, and there see what conceivable hoops, what bond he can imagine to hold this mass of mat- ter in so close a pressure together; from whence steel has its firmness, and the parts of a diamond their hardness and indissolubility. If matter be finite, it must have its extremes; and there must be something to hinder it from scat- tering asunder. If, to avoid this difficulty, any one will throw himself into the supposition and abyss of infinite matter, let him consider what light he thereby brings to the cohesion of body, and whether he be ever the nearer making it intelligible by resolving it into a supposition the most absurd and most incomprehensible of all other: so far is our extension of body (which is nothing but the cohesion of solid parts) from being clearer, or more dis- tinct, when we would inquire into the nature, cause, or manner of it, than the idea of thinking. Sect. 28. Communication of motion by impulse, or by thought, equally intelligible. — Another idea we have of body is the power of communication Ch. 23. OUR IDEAS OF SUBSTANCES. 197 of motion by impulse ; and of our souls, the power of exciting motion by thought. These ideas, the one of body, the other of our lainds, every day's experience clearly furnishes us with : but if here again we inquire how this is done, we are equally in the dark. For to the communication of motion by impulse, wherein as much motion is lost to one body as is got to the other, which is the most ordinary case, we can have no other conception but of the passing of motion out of one body into another ; which, I think, is as obscure and unconceivable, as how our minds move or stop our bodies by thought : which we every moment find they do. The increase of motion by impulse, which is observed or believed sometimes to happen, is yet harder to be understood. We have by daily experience clear evidence of motion produced both by impulse and by thought ; but the manner, how, hardly comes within our comprehension ; we are equally at a loss in both. So that however we consider motion, and its comnmnica- tion, either from body or spirit, the idea which belongs to spirit is at least as clear as that which belongs to body. And if we consider the active power of moving, or as I may call it, motivity, it is much clearer in spirit than body ; since two bodies, placed by one another at rest, will never afford us the idea of a power in the one to move the other, but by a borrowed mo- tion ; whereas the mind, every day, affords us ideas of an active power of moving of bodies; and therefore it is worth our consideration, whether ac- tive power be not the proper attribute of spirits, and passive power of mat- ter. Hence may be conjectured, that created spirits are not totally sepa- rate from matter, because they are both active and passive. Pure spirit, viz. God, is only active ; pure matter is only passive ; those beings that are both active and passive, we may judge to partake of both. But be that as it will, I think we have as many, and as clear ideas belonging to spirit as we have belonging to body, the substance of each being equally unknown to us ; and the idea of thinking in spirit as clear as of extension in body ; and the communication of motion by thought, which we attribute to spirit, is as evident as that by impulse, which we ascribe to body. Constant expe- rience makes us sensible of both these, though our narrow understandings can comprehend neither. For when the mind would look beyond those original ideas we have from sensation on reflection, and penetrate into their causes, and manner of production, we find still it discovers nothing but its own short-sigiitedness. Sect. 29. To conclude — sensation convinces us that there are solid ex- tended substances, and reflection, that there are tliinking ones ; experience assures us of the existence of such beings, and that the one hath a power to move body by impulse, the other by thought ; this we cannot doubt of Experience, I say, every moment furnishes us with the clear ideas both of the one and the other. But beyond tliese ideas, as received from their proper sources, our faculties will not reach. If we would inquire farther into their nature, causes, and manner, we perceive not the nature of ex- tension clearer than we do of thinking. If we would explain them any farther, one is as easy as the other ; and there is no more difficulty to con- ceive how a substance we know not should by thought set body into mo- tion, than how a substance we know not should by impulse set body into motion. So that we are no more able to discover wherein the ideas be- longing to body consist, than those belonging to spirit. From whence it seems probable to me, that the simple ideas we receive from sensation and reflection are the boundaries of our thoughts; beyond which the mind, whatever efforts it would make, is not able to advance one jot; nor can it make any discoveries, when it would pry into the nature and hidden causes of those ideas. Sect. 30. Idea of spirit and body compared. — So that, in short, the idea we have of spirit, compared with the idea we have of body, stajids thus : the substance of spirit is unknown to us ; and so is the sub- 198 OF HUaiAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2, stance of body equally unknown to U8. Two primary qualities or proper- ties of body, viz. solid coherent parts and impulse, wc have distinct clear ideas of: so likewise wc know, and have distinct clear ideas of two primary qualities or properties of spirit, viz. thinking, and a power of action ; i. e. a power of beginning or stopping several thouglits or motions. We have also the ideas of several quahties, inlierent in bodies, and have the clear distinct ideas of them ; which qualities are but the various modifications of the extension of cohering solid parts and their motion. We have likewise the ideas of the several modes of thinking, viz. believing, doubting, intending, fearing, hoping; all which are but the several modes ol'thinking. We have also the ideas of willing, and moving the body consequent to it, and with the body itself too ; for, as has been shown, spirit is capable of motion. Sect. 31. The notion of sj)irit involves no more difficulty in it than that of body. — Lastly, if tliis notion of immaterial spirit may have per- haps some difficulties in it not easy to be explained, we have therefore no more reason to deny or doubt the existence of such spirits, than we have to deny or doubt the existence of body ; because the notion of body is cum- bered with some difficulties very hard, and perhaps impossible to be ex- plained or understood by us. For I would fain have instanced any tiling in our notion of spirit more perplexed, or nearer a contradiction, than the very notion of body includes in it : the divisibility in infinitum of any finite extension involving us, wliether we grant or deny it, in consequences im- possible to be e.xplicated or made in our apprehensions consistent : con- sequences tliat carry greater difficulty, and more apparent absurdity, tlian any thing that can follow from the notion of an immaterial knowing sub- stance. Sect. 32. We know nothing beyond our simple ideas. — Which we are not at all to wonder at, since we having but some few superficial ideas of things, discovered to us only by the senses from without, or by the mind, reflecting on what it experiments in itself within, have no knowledge be- yond that, much less of the internal constitution and true nature of things, being destitute of faculties to attain it. And therefore experimenting and discovering in ourselves knowledge, and the power of voluntary motion, as certainly as we experiment or discover in things without us the cohesion and separation of solid parts, which is the extension and motion of bodies ; we have as much reason to be satisfied with our notion of immaterial spirit, as with our notion of body, and the existence of the one as well as the other. For it being no more a contradiction tJiat thinking shoidd exist, separate and independent from solidity, than it is a contradiction that solidity should exist separate and independent from thinking, they being both but simple ideas, independent one from another, — and having as clear and distinct ideas in us of thinking as of solidity, — I know not why we may not as well allow a thinking thing v/ithout solidity, i. e. im- material, to exist, as a solid thing without thinking, i. e. matter, to exist ; especially since it is not harder to conceive how thinking should exist without matter, than how matter should think. For whensoever we would proceed beyond these simple ideas we have from sensation and reflection, and dive farther into the nature of things, we fall presently into darkness and obscurity, perplexedness and difficulties ; and can discover nothing fartlior but our own blindness and ignorance. But whichever of these complex ideas be clearest, that of body or immaterial spirit, tliis is evident, tliat the simple ideas tiiat maliC them up are no other tlian what we have received from sensation or reflection ; and so is it of all our other ideas of substances, even of God liimself. Sect. 33. Idea of God. — For if wc examine the idea we have of the in- comprehensil)lo Supreme lacing, we shall find, that we come by it the same way ; and that the complex ideas we have both of God and separate spirits, aro made up of the simple ideas we rcceivo from reflection ; v.g. having, Ch.23. OUR IDEAS OF SUBSTANCES. 199 from what we experiment in ourselves, got the ideas of existence and dura- tion ; oflcnowlcdge and power; of pleasure and happiness ; and of several other qualities and powers, which it is better to have than to be without ; when we would frame an idea the most suitable we can to the Supreme Be- ing, we enlarge every one of these with our idea of infinity ; and so putting them together, make our complex idea of God. For that the mind has such a power of enlarging some of its ideas, received from sensation and reflection, has been already shown. • ^ Sect. 34. If I find that I know some few things, and some of them, or all, perhaps, imperfectly, I can frame an idea of knowing twice as many; which I can double again, as often as I can add to number; and tims enlarge my idea of knowledge, by extending its comprehension to all things exist- ing or possible. The same also I can do of knowing them more perfectly ; i. e. all their qualities, powers, causes, consequences, and relations, »Sic. till all be perfectly known that is in them, or can any way relate to them ; and tlms frame the idea of infinite or boundless knowledge. The same may al- so be done of power, till we come to that we call infinite : and also of the duration of existence, without beginning or end ; and so frame the idea of an eternal being. The degrees or extent wherein we ascribe existence, power, wisdom, and all other perfections (which we can have any ideas of) to that sovereign being which we call God, being all boundless and infinite, we frame the best idea of him our minds are capable of: all which is done, I say, by enlarging those simple ideas we have taken from the operations of our own minds by reflection, or by our senses from exterior things, to tiiat vastness to which infinity can extend them. Sect. 35. Idea of God. — For it is infinity, which joined to our ideas of existence, power, knowledge, &c. makes that complex idea whereby we re- present to ourselves, the best we can, the Supreme Being. For though in his own essence (which certainly we do not know, not knowing the real essence of a pebble, or a fly, or of our own selves) God be simple and un- compounded ; yet, I think, I may say we have no other idea of him but a complex one of existence, knowledge, power, happiness, &c. infinite and eternal ; which are all distinct ideas, and some of them, being relative, nve again compounded of others ; all which being, as has been shown, originally got from sensation and reflection, go to make up the idea or notion we have of God. Sect. 36. No idea in our complex one of spirits, biit those got from sensation or reflection. — This farther is to be observed, that there is no idea we attribute to God, bating infinity, which is not also a part of our com- ])lex idea of other spirits. Because, being capable of no other simple ideas, belonging to any thing but body, but those which by reflection we receive from the operation of our minds, we can attribute to spirits no otiier but what we receive from thence : and all the difference we can put between tliem in our contemplation of spirits, is only in the several extents and degrees of their knowledge, power, duration, happiness, &c. For tliat in our ideas, as well of spirits as of other things, we are restrained to those we receive from sensation and reflection, is evident from hence, that in o\w ideas of spirits, how much soever advanced in perfection beyond those of bodies, even to that of infinite, we cannot yet have any idea of the manner wherein they discover their tlioughts one to another : though we must necessarily con- clude, tliat separate spirits, which are beings that have perfecter knowledge and greater happiness tlian we, must needs have also a perfecter way of communicating their thoughts than we have, who are fain to make use of corporeal signs and particular sounds ; which are therefore of most general use, as being the best and quickest we are capable of. But of innnediate commuuicnlion, liaving no experiment in ourselves, and consequently no notion of il at all, we have no idea how spirits, which use not words, can with quickness, or much less how spirits that have no bodies, can b« 200 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. masters of their own thoughts, and communicate or conceal them at plea- sure, though we cannot but necessarily suppose they have such a power. Sect. 37. Recapitulation. — And thus we have seen what kind of ideas we have of substances of all kinds, wherein they consist, and how we came by them. From whence, I think, it is very evident, First, that all our ideas of the several sorts of substances are nothing but collections of simple ideas, with a supposition of something to which they belong, and in which they subsist; though of this supposed something we have no clear distinct idea at all. Secondly, that all the simple ideas, that thus united in one common sub- stratum make up our complex ideas of several sorts of substances, are no other but such as we have received from sensation or reflection. So that even in those which we think we are most intimately acquainted with, and that come nearest the comprehension of our most enlarged conceptions, we cannot go beyond those simple ideas. And even in those which seem most remote irom all we have to do with, and do infinitely surpass any thing we can perceive in ourselves by reflection, or discover by sensation in other things, we can attain to nothing but those simple ideas, which we original- ly received from sensation and reflection ; as is evident in the complex ideas we have of angels, and particularly of God himself Thirdly, that most of the simple ideas that make up our complex ideas of substances, when truly considered, are only powers, however we are apt to take them for positive qualities; v.g. the gi'eatest part of the ideas that make our complex idea of gold are yellowness, great weight, ductility, fusi- bility, and solubility in aqua regia, &c. all united together in an unknown substratum ; all which ideas are nothing else but so many relations to other substances, and are not really in the gold, considered barely in itself, though they depend on those real and primary qualities of its internal constitution, whereby it has a fitness diflferently to operate, and be operated on by several other substances. CHAPTER XXIV. OF COLLECTIVE IDEAS OF SUBSTANCES/ Sect. 1. One idea. — Besides these complex ideas of several single sub- stances, as of man, horse, gold, violet, apple, &c. the mind hath also com- plex collective ideas of substances ; which I so call, because such ideas are made up of many particular substances considered together, as imited into one idea, and wliich so joined are looked on as one : v. g. the idea of such a collection of men as make an army, though consisting of a great number of distinct substances, is as much one idea as the idea of a man: and the great collective idea of all bodies whatsoever, signified by the name world, is as much one idea as the idea of any the least particle of matter in it; it suflicnig to the unity of any idea that it be considered as one repre- sentation or picture, though made up of ever so many particulars. Sect. 2. Made by the power of composing in the mind. — These collec- tive ideas of substances the mind makes by its power of composition, and uniting severally either simple or complex ideas into one, as it does by the siame faculty make the complex ideas of particular substances, consisting of an aggregate of divers simple ideas, united in one substance ; and as the mind, by putting together the repeated ideas of unity, makes the collective mode, or complex idea of any number, as a score, or a gross, &c. so by putting together several particular substances, it makes collective ideas of substances, as a troop, an army, a swarm, a city, a fleet; each of which, every one finds, that he represents to his own mind by one idea, in ono Ch. 'U. OF COLLECTIVE IDE.^ OF SUBSTANCES. 201 view ; and so under that notion considers those several thin^ as perfectly one, as one ship, or one atom. Xor is it harder to conceive how an army of ten thousand men should make one idea, than how a man should meike one idea : it bein^ as easy to the mind to unite into one the idea of a great number of men, and consider it as one, as it is to unite into one particular aU the distinct ideas that make up the composition of a man, and con- sider them all together as one. Sect. 3. All artificial things are collective ideas. — Among such kind of collective ideas are to be counted most part of artificial things, at least such of them as are made up of distinct substances: and in truth, if we consider all these collective ideas aright, as army, constellation, universe, as they are united into so many single ideas, they are but the artificial draughts of the mind ; bringing things very remote, and independent on one another, into one view, the better to contemplate and discourse of them, united into one conception, and signified by one name. For there are no things so re- mote, nor so contrary-, which the mind cannot, by this art of composition, bring into one idea ; as is visible in that signified' by the name universe. CHAPTER XXV. OF RELATION, Sect. 1. Relation, what. — Besides the ideas, whether simple or complex, that the mind has of things, as they are in themselves, there are others it^^ gets from their comparison one with another. The understanding, in the ^ consideration of any thing, is not confined to that precise object : it can car- Yv any idea as it were beyond itself, or at least look beyond it, to see how it stands in conformity to any other. 'SMien the mind so considers one thing, that it does as it were bring it to and set it by another, and carry its view from one to the other : this is, as the words import, relation and res- pect ; and the denominations given to positive things, intimating that res- pect, and serving as marks to lead the thoughts beyond the subject itself denominated to something distinct from it, are what we call relatives : and the things, so brought together, related. Thus, when the mind considers Caius as such a positive being, it takes nothing into that idea but what really exists in Caius ; v. g. when I consider him as a man, I have nothing in my mind but the complex idea of the species, man. So likewise, when I say Caius is a white man, I have nothing but the bare consideration of a man who hath that white colour. But when I give Caius the name hus- band, I intimate some other person; and when I give him the name whiter, I intimate some other thing : in both cases my thought is led ton . something beyond Cedus, and there are two things brought into considera- tion. And since any idea, whether simple or complex, maybe the occasion why the mind thus brings two things together, amd as it were takes a view of them at once, though still considered as distinct ; therefore any of our ideas may be the foundation of relation. As in the above-mentioned in- stance, the contract and ceremony of marriage with Sempronia is the occasion of the denomination or relation of husband; and the colour whit/ of any sort to a particular time and place, incommunicable to two beings of the same kind. This, though it seems easier to conceive in simple sub- Htances or modes,'yet when reflected on is not more difficult in compound ones, if care be taken to what it is applied : v. g. let us suppose an atom, %. e. a continued body under one immutable superficies, existing in a deter- mined time and place : it is evident that, considered in any instant of its existence, it is in that instant the same with itself For being at tliat in- stant what it is, and nothing else, it is the same, and so must continue as long as its existence is continued ; for so long it will be the same, and no other. In like manner, if two or more atoms be joined together into the same mass, every one of those atoms will be the same, by the foregoing rule: and whilst they exist united together, the mass, consisting of the same atoms, must be the same mass, or the same body, let the parts be ever so differently jumbled. But if one of these atoms be taken away, or one new '!t^i^u^iiJ\ one added, it iis lao lon^fcr the same mass, or the same body. In the state 208 OF HUAIAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. of living creatures, llieir identity depends not on amas3oftlie same par- ticles, but on something else. For in them the variation of great parcels of matter alters not the identity : an oak growing from a plant to a great tree, and then lopped, is still the same oak; and a colt grown up to a horse, sometimes fat, sometimes lean, is all the wliile the same horse; thougii, in botii these cases, tliere may be a manifest change of tiie parts ; so that truly they are not either of them the same masses of matter, though they be truly one of them the same oak, and the other tiie same horse. The reason ■JlVhereof is, that in these two cases, a mass of matter, and a living body, iden- / tity is not applied to the same thing. Sect. 4. Identity of vegetables. — We must therefore consider wherein an oak differs from a mass of matter, and that seems to me to be in tiiis, that tlie one is only the cohesion of particles of matter any how united, the other such a disi)osition of them as constitutes the parts of an oak ; and such an organization of those parts as is fit to receive and distribute nour- ishment, so as to continue and frame the wood, bark, and leaves, &lc. of an oak, in which consists the vegetable life. That being then one plant which has such an organization of parts in one coherent body partaking of one common life, it continues to be the same plant as long as it partakes of tJie same life, though that life be communicated to new particles of mat- ter vitally united to the living plant, in a like continued organization con- ibrniable to that sort of plants. For this organization being at any one instant in any one collection of matter, is in that particular concrete, dis- tinguished from all other, and is that individual life which existing con- stantly from that moment both forwards and backwards, in the same continuit}' of insensibly succeeding parts united to the living body of the plant, it has that identity, which makes the same plant, and all the parts of it, parts of the same plant, during all the time that they exist united in that continued organization, which is fit to convey that common life to all the parts so united. Sect. 5. Identity of animals.— The case is not so much different in brutes, but that any one may hence see what makes an animal, and con- tinues it the same. Something we have like this in machines, and may serve to illustrate it. For example, what is a watch? It is plain it is no- thing but a fit organization, or construction of parts, to a certain end, which, when a sufficient force is added to it, it is capable to attain. If we would suppose this machine one continued body, all whose organized parts were repaired, increased, or diminished, by a constant addition or separation of insensible parts, with one common life, we should have something very much like the body of an animo,l, with this difference, that in an animal the fitness of the organization, and the motion wherein life con- sists, begin together, the motion coming from within ; but in machines, the force coming sensibly from without, is oflen away when the organ is in or- der, and well fitted to receive it. Sect. 6. Identity of man. — This also shows wherein the identity of the same man consists ; viz. in nothing but a participation of the same contiimed | life, by constantly fleeting particles of matter, in succession, vitally united to| the same organized body. He that shall place the identity of man in any thing else, but, like that of other animals, in one fitly organized body, taken in any one instant, and from tlience continued under one organization of life in several successively fleeting particles of matter united to it, will find it liard to make an embryo, one of years, mad and sober, the same man, by any supposition, that will not make it possible for Seth, Ishmael, Socrates, Pilate, , St Austin, and Caesar Borgia, to be the same man. But if the identity of]/ soul alone makes the same man, and there be nothing in the nature of matter why the same individual spirit may not be united to different bodies, it will be possible that those men living in distant ages, and of different tem- pers, may have been the same man : which way of speaking must be, from a Ch. 27. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 209 very strange use of the word man, applied to an idea, out of which body and shape are exchided. And that way of speaking- would a^ee yet worse with the notions of those pliilosophers who allow of transmigration, and are of opinion that the souls of men may, for their miscarriages, be detruded into the bodies of beasts, as fit habitations, with organs suited to the satisfaction of their brutal inclinations. But yet, 1 think, nobody, could he be sure that the soul of Heliogabalus were in one of his hogs, would yet say that hog were a man or Heliogabalus. Sect. 7. Identity suited to the idea. — It is not therefore unity of sub- stance that comprehends all sorts of identity, or will determine it in every case: but to conceive and judge of it aright, we must consider what idea the u'ord it is applied to stands for; it being one thing to be the same sub- stance, another tlie same man, and a third the same person, if person, man, and substance are three names standing for three different ideas; for such as is the idea belonging to that name, such must be the identity; v.'hich, if it had been a little more carefully attended to, would possibly have prevent- ed a great deal of that confusion, which often occurs about this matter, v^-ith no small seeming difficulties, especially concerning personal identity, which therefore we shall in the ne.xt place a little consider. Sect. 8. Same man. — An animal is a living organized body; and fre- quently the same animal, as we have observed, is the same continued life communicated to different particles of matter, as they happen successively to be united to that organized living body. And whatever is talked of other definitions, ingenious observation puts it past doubt, that the idea in our minds, of which the sound man in our mouths is the sign, is nothing else but of an animal of such a certain form : since I tliink I may be confident, that whoever should see a creature of his own shape and make, though it had no more reason all its life than a cat or a parrot, would call him still a man ; or whoever should hear a cat or a parrot discourse, reason, and phi- losophize, would call or think it nothing but a cat or a parrot ; and say, the one was a dull irrational man, and the other a very intelligent ra- tional parrot. A relation we have in an author of great note is sufficient to countenance the supposition of a rational parrot. His words are(c) : " I had a mind to know from Prince Maurice's own mouth the account of a common, but much credited story, that I heard so often from many others, of an old parrot he had in Brasil during his government there, that spoke, and asked, and answered common questions like a reasonable crea- ture: so that those of his train there generally concluded it to be witchery or possession ; and one of his chaplains, who lived long after in Holland, would never from that time endure a parrot, but said, they all had a devil in them. I had heard many particulars of this story, and assevered by peo- ple hard to be discredited, which made me ask Prince Maurice what there was of it. He said, with his usual plainness and dryness in talk, there was something true, but a great deal false of what had been reported. I desired to know of him what there was of the first T He told me short and coldly, that he had heard of such an old parrot wiien he had been at Brasil ; and though he believed nothing of it, and it was a good v.-ay off, yet he had so much curiosity as to send for it : that it was a verj^ great and a very old one, and when it came first in the room where the prince was, with a great many Dutchmen about him, it said presently. What a company of white men are here ! They asked it what it thought that man was 1 point- ing to the prince. It answered, some general or other ; v.-hen they brought it close to him, he asked it, *D'ou venez vous ? It answered, De Marinnan. (r) Memoirs of what passed in Christendom from 1672 to I7f)9, p. -j-g'-y (*) Whence come ye ? It answered, From ^Marinnan. The prince, To whom do you belong ? The parrot. To a Portuguese. Prince, What do you there ? Parrot, 1 look after the chickens. The prince laughed, aad said, You look after 2B 210 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. The Prince, A qui estes vous 1 The parrot, A un Portugais. Prince, Qne fais tu la? Parrot, Je gardcz Ics poulles. The prince laughed, and said, Vous gardoz les poulles 1 The parrot answered, Qui, moi, et je scai bieu fiiire ; and made tiie chuck four or live times that peoj)le use to make to chickens when they call them. I set down the words of this worthy dia- logue in French, just as Prince Maurice said them to me. I asked him in what language the parrot spoke, and he said, in Brasilian ; I asked wheth- er he understood Brasilian ; he said, no, but he had taken care to have two interpreters by him, the one a Dutchman that spoke Brasilian, and the other a Brasilian that spoke Dutch ; that he asked them separately and pri- vately, and both of them agreed in telling him just the same thing that the parrot had said. I could not but tell this odd story, because it is so much out of the way, and from the first hand, and what may pass for a good one ; for I dare say this prince at least believed himself in all he told me, having ever passed for a very honest and pious man : I leave it to naturalists to reason, and to other men to believe, as they please upon it ; however, it is not, perhaps, amiss to relieve or enliven a busy scene sometimes with such digressions, whether to the purpose or no." Same man. — I have taken care that the reader should have the story at large in the author's own words, because he seems to me not to have thought it incredible ; for it cannot be imagined that so able a man as he, who had sufficiency enough to warrant all the testimonies he gives of him- self, should take so much pains in a place where it had nothing to do, to pin so close not only on a man whom he mentions as his friend, but on a prince in whom he acknowledges very great honesty and piety, a story which, if he himself thought incredible, he could not but also think ridiculous. The prince, it is plain, who vouches this story, and our author, who re- lates it from him, both of them call this talker a parrot ; and I ask any one else, who thinks such a story fit to be told, whether if this parrot, and all of its kind, had always talked, as we have a prince's word for it this one did, whether, I say, they would not have passed for a race of rational ani- mals : but yet whether for all that they would have been allowed to be men, and not parrots ? For I presume it is not the idea of a thinking or rational being alone that makes the idea of a man in most people's sense, but of a body, so and so shaped, joined to it : and if that be the idea of a man, the same successive body not shifted all at once, must, as well as the same immaterial spirit, go to the making of the same man. Sect. 9. Personal identity. — This being premised, to find wherein per- sonal identity consists, we must consider what person stands for: which, I think, is a thinking intelligent being, that has reason and reflection, and can consider itself as itself, the same thinking thing in different times and places ; which it does only by that consciousness which is inseparable from thinking, and as it seems to me essential to it: it being impossible for any one to perceive, without perceiving that he does perceive. When we see, hear, taste, smell, feel, meditate, or will any thing, we know that we do so. Thus it is always as to our present sensations and perceptions : and by this every one is to himself that which he calls self; it not being consi- dered in this case whether the same self be continued in the same or di- vers substances. For since consciousness always accompanies thinking, and it is that which makes every one to be what he calls self, and thereby distinguishes himself from all other thinking things ; in this alone consists personal identity, /. e. the sameness of a rational being : and as far as this consciousness can be extended backwards to any past action or thought, so far reaches the identity of that person ; it is the same self now it was the chickens ? The parrot answered, Yes, I and I know well enough how tu do it. Ch. 27. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 211 then ; and it is by the same self with this present one that now reflects on it, that that action was done. Sect. 10. Consciousness makes personal identity. — But it is farther inquired, whether it be the same identical substance ? This few would tliink tliey had reason to doubt of, if those perceptions, with their con- sciousness, always remained present in the mind, whereby the same think- ing thing- would be always consciously present, and, as would be thought, evidently the same to itself. But that which seems to make the difficulty is this, that this consciousness being interrupted always by forgetfulness, there being no moment of our lives wherein we have the whole train of all our past actions before our eyes in one view, but even the best memories losing the sight of one part whilst they are viewing another ; — and we sometimes, and that the greatest part of our lives, not reflecting on our past selves, being intent on our present tlioughts, and in sound sleep having no thoughts at all, or at least none with that consciousness which remarks our walking thoughts ; — I say, in all these cases, our consciousness being interrupted, and we losing the sight of our past selves, doubts are raised whether we are the same thinking thing, i. e. the same substance, or no. Which, however reasonable or unreasonable, concerns not personal iden- tity at all : the question being, wliat makes the same person, and not whe- tlier it be the same identical substance, which always thinks in the same person ; which in this case matters not at all : different substances, by the same consciousness (where they do partake in it,) being united into one person, as well as different bodies by the same life ai-e united into one animal, whose identity is preserved, in that change of substances, by the unity of one continued life. For it being the same consciousness that makes a man be himself to himself, personal identity depends on that only, whether it be annexed solely to one individual substance, or can be con- tinued in a succession of several substances. For as far as any intelligent being can repeat the idea of any past action with the same consciousness it had of it at first, and with the same consciousness it has of any present action, so far it is the same personal self. For it is by the consciousness it has of its present thoughts and actions, that it is self to itself now, and so will be the same self, as far as the same consciousness can extend to ac- tions past or to come ; and would be by distance of time, or change of sub- stance, no more two persons, than a man be two men by wearing other clothes to-day than he did yesterday, with a long or a short sleep between : the same consciousness uniting those distant actions into the same person, whatever substances contributed to their production. Sect. 11. Personal ideiitity in change of substances. — Thatthis is so, we have some kind of evidence in our very bodies, all whose particles, whilst vitally united to this same thinking conscious self, so that we feel when they are touched, and are effected by, and conscious of good or harm that happens to them, are a part of ourselves, i. e. of our thinking conscious self. Thus the limbs of his body are to every one a pail of himself: he sympathizes and is concerned for them. Cut off a hand, and thereby separate it from that consciousness he had of its heat, cold, and other affections, and it is then no longer a part of that which is himself, any more than the re- motest part of matter. Thus we see the substance, whereof personal self ^ consisted at one time, may be varied at another, without the change of per- , sonal identity ; there being no question about the same person, though the limbs, which but now were a part of it, be cut off". Sect. 12. But the question is, " Whether, if the same substance which thinks be changed, it can be the same person ; or, remaining the same, it can be different persons !" Whether in the change of thinldng substances. — And to this I answer, first, This can be no question at all to those who place thought in a purely material animal constitution void of an immaterial substance. For whether 212 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. their supposition be true or no, it is plain they conceive personal identity preserved in soniolliiiii,' else than identity of substance ; as animal identity is preserved in identity of life, and not of substance. And therefore those who place thinking in an immaterial substance only, before they can come to deal with these men, must siiow why personal identity cannot be pre- served in tiie change of immaterial substances, or variety of particular im- material substances, as well as animal identity is j)reserved in the ciiange of material substances, or variety of particular bodies : unless they will say, it is one inmiaterial spirit that makes the same life in brutes, as it is one immaterial spirit that makes the same person in men ; wiiich the Carte- sians at least will not admit, for fear of making brutes thinking things too. Sect. 13. But next, as to the lirst part of the question, " Whether if the same thinking substance (supposing iunnaterial substances only to think) be changed, it can be the same person !" I answer, that cannot be re^ solved, but by those who know what kind of substances they are that do\ think, and whether the consciousness of past actions can be transferred from one thinking substance to another. I grant, were the same conscious- ness the same individual action, it could not ; but it being but a present re- presentation of a past action, why it may not be possible that that may be represented to the mind to have been, which really never was, will remain to be shown. And therefore how far the consciousness of past actions is annexed to any individual agent, so that another cannot possibly have it, will be hard for us to determme, till we know what kind of action it is that cannot be done without a reflex act of perception accompanying it, and how performed by thinking substances, who cannot think without being- conscious of it. But that which we call the same consciousness, not be- ing the same individual act, why one intellectual substance may not have represented to it, as done by itself, what it never did, and was perhaps done by some other agent ; why, I say, such a representation may not pos- sibly be witliout reality of matter of fact, as well as several representations in dreams are, which yet whilst dreaming we take for true, will be ditEcult to conclude from the nature of things. And that it never is so, will by us, till we have clearer views of the nature of thinking substances, be best re- solved into the goodness of God, who, as far as the happiness or misery of any of his sensible creatures is concerned in it, will not by a fatal error of theirs transfer from one to another that consciousness which draws re- ward or punishment with it. How far this may be an argument against those who would place thinking in a system of fleeting animal spirits, I leave to be considered. But yet, to return to the question before us, it must be allowed, that if the same consciousness (which, as has been shown, is quite a ditl'erent thing from the same numerical figure or motion in body) can be transferred from one thinking substance to another, it will be possible that two thinking substances may make but one person. For the same consciousness being preserved, whether in the same or different substances, the personal identity is preserved. Sect. 14. As to the second part of the question, " whether the same im- material substance remaining, there may be two distinct persons V which question seems to me to be built on this, whether the same immaterial be- ing, being conscious of the action of its past duration, may be wholly, stripped of all the consciousness of its past existence, and lose it beyond' the power of ever retrieving it again ; and so as it were beginning a new ac- count from a new period, have a consciousness that cannot reach beyond this new state. All those who hold pre-existence are evidently of this mind, since they allow the soul to have no remaining consciousness of what it did in the pre-existing state, either wholly separate from body, or inform- ing any other body ; and if they should not, it is plain experience would be against them. So that personal identity reaching no farther than con- sciousness reaches, a pre-existent spirit not having continued so many Ch. ^11. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 213 ages in a state of silence, must needs make different persons. Suppose a Ciiristian, Platonist or Pythagorean should, upon God's having ended all his works of creation the seventn day, think his soul hath existed ever s;nce ; and would imagine it has revolved in several human bodies, as i once met with one who was persuaded his had been the soul of iSocrates, how rea- sonably I will not dispute ; tliis I know, that in the post he tilled, which was no inconsiderable one, he passed for a very rational man, and the press has shown that he wanted not parts or learning ; would any one say, that he being not conscious of any of Socrates's actions or thoughts, could be the same person with Socrates ! Let any one reflect upon lumself, and conclude that he has in himself an immaterial spirit, which is that which thinks in him, and in the constant change of his body keeps him the same ; and is that which he calls himself: let him also suppose it to be the same soul that was in Nestor or Thersites at the siege of Troy (for souls being, as far as we know any thing of them, in their nature indifferent to anv parcel of matter, the supposition has no apparent absurdity in it), winch it may have been, as well as it is now the soul of any other man : but he now having no consciousness of any of the actions either of Nes- tor or Thersites, does or can he conceive himself the same person with either of them? Can he be concerned in either of their actions ! attri- bute them to himself, or think them his own, more than the actions of any other man that ever existed ] So that this consciousness not reaching to i / any of the actions of either of those men, he is no more one self with ei- y^ ther of them, than if the soul or inmiaterial spirit that now informs him had been created, and began to exist, when it began to inform his present body; though it were ever so true, that the same spirit that informed Nestor's or Thersites's body, were numerically the same that now informs liis. For this would no more make him the same person with Nestor, than if some of the particles of matter that were once a part of Nestor, were nov^^ a part of this man ; the same immaterial substance, without the same con- sciousness, no more making the same person by being miited to any body, than the same particle of matter, without consciousness, imited to any body, makes the same person. But let him once find himself conscious of any of the actions of Nestor, he then finds himself the same person with Nes- tor. Sect. 1.5. And thus we may be able, without any difficidty, to conceive the same person at the resurrection, though in a body not exactly in make or parts the same which he had here, the same consciousness going along with the soul that inhabits it. But yet the soul alone, in the change ot bodies, would scarce to any one, but to him that makes the soul the man, be enough to make the same man. For should the soul of a prince, carrying with it the consciousness of the prince's past life, enter and inform the body of a cobbler, as soon as deserted by his own soul, every / one sees he would be the same person with the prince, accomitable only ' for the prince's actions ; but who would say it was the same man ! The body, too, goes to the making the man, and would, I guess, to every body determine the man in this case ; wherein the soul with all its princely thoughts about it, would not make another man : but he would be the same cobbler to every one besides himself I know that, in the ordinary way of rpeaking, the same person and the same man, stand for one and the same thing. And indeed every one will always have a liberty to speak as he l)leases, and to apply what articulate sounds to what ideas he thinks fit, and change them as often as he pleases. But yet when we will inquire what makes the same spirit, man, or person, we must fix the ideas of spirit, man, or person in our minds ; and liaving resolved with ourselves what we mean by them, it will not be hard to determine in either of them, or the like, when it is the same, and when not. Sect. 10. Consciousness makes the same person. — But though tha 214 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. same immaterial substance or soul does not alone, wherever it be, and in whatsoever state, make the same man ; yet it is j)lain, consciousness, as far as ever it can ho extended, should it be to ages ])ast, unites existences and actions, very remote in time, into tlie same person, as well as it does the existences and actions of the immediately })receding moment ; so that whatever has the coiisciousness of present and past actions, is the same person to whom they both belong. Had I the same consciousness that I saw tlie ark and Noah's flood, as that I saw an overflowing of the Tliamej last winter, or as that I write now ; I could no more doubt that I who write this now, that saw the Thames overflowed last winter, and tliat viewed the flood at the general deluge, was the same self, place that self in what substance you please, than that I who write this am the same my- self now wliilst I write (wiiether I consist of all the same substance, ma- terial or immaterial, or no) that I was yesterday. For as to this point of being the same self, it matters not whether tiiis present self be made up of the same or other substances ; I being as much concerned, and as justly accountable for any action tliat was done a thousand years since, appro- priated to me now by this self-consciousness, as I am for what I did the last moment. Sect. 17. Self depends on consciousness. — Self is that conscious think- ing thing (whatever substance made up of, whether spiritual or material, simple or compounded, it matters not) which is sensible, or conscious of pleasure and pain, capable of happiness or misery, and so is concerned for itself, as far as that consciousness extends. Thus every one finds, that whilst comprehended under that consciousness, the little finger is as much a part of himself, as what is most so. Upon separation of this little finger, should this consciousness go along with the little finger, and leave tlie rest of the body, it is evident the little finger would be the person, the same person ; and self tlien would have nothing to do with the rest of the body. As in this case it is the consciousness that goes along with the substance, when one part is separate from another, which makes the same person, and constitutes this inseparable self; so it is in reference to. substances remote in time. That with which the consciousness of this present think- ing thing can join itself, makes the same person, and is one self with it, and v\'ith nothing else; and so attributes to itself, and owns all the actions of that thing as its own, as far as that consciousness reaches, and no far- ther; as every one who reflects will perceive. Sect. 18. Objects of reward and jninishment. — In this personal iden- tity is founded all tiie rigiit and justice of reward and punishment ; happi- ]iess and misery being tliat for which every one is concerned for himself, and not mattering what becomes of any substance not joined to, or affected with that consciousness. For as it is evident in the instance I gave but now, if the consciousness went along with tlie little finger when it was cu* ofl^, tiiat would be the same self which was concerned for the whole body yesterday, as making part of itself, whose actions then it cannot but admit as its own now. Though if the saniO body should still live, and im- mediately, from the separation of the little finger, have its own peculiar consciousness, whereof the little finger knew nothing ; it would not at all be concerned for it, as a part of itself, or could own any of its actions, or have any of them imputed to him. Sect. 19. This may show us wherein personal identity consists ; not in tlie identity of substance, but, as I have said, in the identity of conscious- ness; wherein, if Socrates and the present mayor of Quecnborough agree, they are the same person: if the same Socrates waking and sleeping do not partake of the same consciousness, Socrates waking and sleeping is not the same person. And topunisli Socrates waking for what sleeping Socrates thought, and waking Socrates was never conscious of, would b'! no more of right, than to punish one twin for what his brother twin did Ch. 27. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 215 whereof he knew nothing, because their outsides were so hke that they couid not be distinguished; for such twins have been seen. Sect. 20. Jiiit yet possibly it will still be objected, suppose I wholly lose the memory of some parts of my life beyond a possibility of retrieving them, so that perhaps I shall never be conscious of them again ; yet am 1 not tlae same person that did those act'ons, had those thoughts that I once was conscious of, though I have now forgot them ! To which I answer, that we must here take notice what the word I is applied to ; which, in this case, is the man only. And the same man being presumed to be the same person, I is easily here supposed to stand also for the same person. But if it be possible for the same man to have distinct incommunicable consciousness at different times, it is past doubt the same man would at* dift'erent times make different persons ; which, we see, is the sense of mankind in the solemnest declarations of their opinions ; human laws not punishing the mad man for the sober man's actions, nor the sober man for what the mad man did, thereby making them two persons : which is some- what explained by our way of speaking in English, when we say, such a one is not himself, or is beside himself; in which phrases, it is insinuated, as if those who now, or at least tirst used them, thought that self was chang- ed,— the self-same person was no longer in that man. Sect. 21. Difference between Identity of man and person. — But yet it is hard to conceive that Socrates, the same individual man, should be two persons. To help us a little in this, we muot consider what is meant by Socrates or the same individual man. First, it must be either the same individual, immaterial, thinking sub- stance ; in short, the same nmiierical soul, and nothing else. Secondly, or the same animal, without any regard to an immaterial soul. Thirdly, or the same immaterial spirit imited to the same animal. Now, take which of these suppositions you please, it is impossible to make personal identity to consist in any thing but consciousness, or reach any farther than that does. For by the first of them, it must be allowed possible that a man born of different women, and in distant times, may be the same man. A way of speaking, which, whoever admits, must allow it possible for the same man to be two distinct persons as any two that have hved in different ages, without the knowledge of one another's thoughts. By the second and third, Socrates in this life, and after it, cannot be the same man any way but by the same consciousness ; and so making human identity to consist in the same thing wherein we place personal identity, there will be no difficulty to allow the same man to be the same person. But then they who place human identity in consciousness only, and not in something else, must consider how they will make the infant Socrates the same man with Socrates after the resurrection. But whatsoever to some men makes a man, and consequently the same individual man, wherein perhaps few are agreed, personal identity can by us be placed in nothing but consciousness, (which is that alone which makes what we call self) without involving us in great absurdities. Sect. 22. But is not man, drunk and sober, the same person, — why else is he punished for the fact he commits when drunk, though he be never afterwards conscious of it ] Just as much the same person as a man that walks, and does other things in his sleep, is the same person, and is answerable for any mischief he shall do in it. Human laws punish both, with a justice suitable to their way of knowledge ; because in these cases they cannot distinguish certainly what is real, what counterfeit : and so the ignorance in drunkenness or sleep is not admitted as a plea. For though punishment be annexed to personality, and personality to conscious- ness, and the drunkard perhaps be not conscious of what he did ; yet 216 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. human judicatures justly punisli liim ; because the fact is proved against liiui, but want of cousciousness cannot be provi-d for liiin. But in the great day, wherein the secrets of all hearts shall be laid oj)en, it may be reasoi;- able to think no one sliall be made to answer for what he knows nothing of, but shall receive his doom, his conscience accusing or excusing him. Sect. 2'S. Consciousness alone makes self . — Nothing but consciousness can unite remote existences into the same person ; the identity of substance will not do it. For whatever substance tiierc is, however framed, witliout consciousness tlicre is no person : and a carcass may be a person, as well as any sort of substance be so without consciousness. Could we suppose two distinct incommunicable consciousnesses acting the same body, the one constantly by day, the other by niglit; and, on the other side, the same consciousness acting by intervals, two distinct bodies : I ask, in the first case, whether the day and the night man would not be two as distinct persons as Socrates and Plato ! And, whether, in the second case, there would not be one person in two distinct bodies, as much as one man is the same in two distinct clothings "J Nor is it at all material to say, that this same, and this distinct consciousness, in the cases above men- tioned, is owing to the same, and distinct immaterial substances, bringing it with them to those bodies ; which, whether true or no, alters not the case ; since it is evident the personal identity would equally be determined ,- by the consciousness, whether that consciousness were annexed to some ■/ individual immaterial substance or no. For granting that the thinking substance in man must be necessarily supposed immaterial, it is evident that immaterial thinking thing may sometimes part with its past conscious- ness, and be restored to it again, as appears in the forgetfulness men often have of their past actions : and the mind many times recovers the memory of a past consciousness v/hichit had lost for twenty years together. Make these intervals of memory and forgetfulness to take their turns regularly by day and night, and you have two persons with the same immaterial spirit, as much as in the former instance, two persons with the same body. So tliat self is not determined by identity or diversity of substance, which it cannot be sure of, but only by identity of consciousness. Sect. 24. Indeed it may conceive the substance, whereof it is now made up, to have existed formerly, united in the same conscious being: but con- sciousness removed, that substance is no more itself, or mal;es no more a part of it, than any other substance ; as is evident in the instance we have already given of a limb cut off, of whose heat, or cold, or other affections, having no longer any consciousness, it is no more of a man's self than anv other matter of the universe. In like manner it will be in reference to any immaterial substance, which is void of that consciousness whereby I am myself to myself: if there be any part of its existence which I cannot upon recollection join with that present consciousness, whereby I am now my- self, it is in that part of its existence no more myself than any other imma- terial being. For whatsoever any substance has thought or done, which I cannot recollect, and by my consciousness make my own thought and action, it will no more belong to me, whether a part of me thought or did it, than if it had been thought or done by any other immaterial being any where existing. Sect. 25. I agree, the more probable opinion is, that this conscious- | J ness is annexed to, and the affection of, one individual immaterial substance. ' But let men, according to thoir diverse hypotheses, resolve of that as they please: this every intelligent being, sensible of happiness or misery, must grant, that there is something that is himself, that he is concerned for, and would have happy; that this self has existed in a continued dura- tion more than one instant, and therefore it is possible may exist, as it has done, months and years to come, without any certain bounds to be set to its duration ; and may be the same self, by the same consciousness, con- Ch. 27. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 217 tinned on for the future. And thus, by his consciousness, he finds himself to be the same self which did such or such an action some years since, by which he comes to be happy or miserable now. In all which account of self, the same numerical substance is not considered as making tlie same self; but the same continued consciousness, in which several substances may have been united, and again separated from it; which, whilst they continued in a vital union with that wherein this consciousness then re- sided, made a part of that same self. Thus any part of our bodies, vitally united to that which is conscious in us, makes a part of ourselves : but upon separation from the vital union, by which that consciousness is com- municated, that which a moment since was part of ourselves is now no more so than a part of another man's self is part of me ; and it is not im- possible but in a short time may become a real part of another person. And so we have the same numerical substance become a part of two diiferent persons, and the same person preserved under the change of various sub- stances. Could we suppose any spirit wholly stripped of all its memory or consciousness of past actions, as we find our minds always are of a great part of ours, and sometimes of them all, the union or separation of such a spiritual substance would make no variation of personal identity, any more than that of any particle of matter does. Any substance vitally united to the present tliinlcing being is a part of that very same self which now is : ^ any thing united to it by a consciousness of former actions makes also a part of the same self, which is the same both then and now. Sect. 26. Person, a forensic term. — Person, as I take it, is the name for this self. Wherever a man finds what he calls himself, thei'e I tliink another may say is the same person. It is a forensic term appropriating actions and tlieir merit ; and so belongs only to intelligent agents capable of a law, and happiness and misery. This personality extends itself beyond present existence to what is past only by consciousness, whereby it be- comes concerned and accountable, owns and imputes to itself past actions, just upon the same ground, and for the sam.e reason that it does the pre- sent ; all which is founded in a concern for happiness, the unavoidable con- comitant of consciousness ; that which is conscious of pleasure and pain desiring that the self that is conscious should be happy. And therefore whatever past actions it cannot reconcile or appropriate to that present'self by consciousness, it can be no more concerned in than if they had never been done: and to receive pleasure or pain, i. e. reward or punishment, on the account of any such action, is all one as to be made happy or miserable in its first being, without any demerit at all. For supposing a man pun- ished now for what he had done in another life, whereof he could be made to have no consciousness at all, what difference is there between that punish- ment, and being created miserable? And therefore, conformable to this, the apostle tells us, that at the great day, when every one shall "receive according to liis doings, the secrets of all hearts shall be laid open." The sentence shall be justified by the consciousness all persons shall have, that they themselves, in what body soever they appear, or what substances soever that consciousness adheres to, are the same that committed those actions, and deserve that punishment for them. Sect. 27. I am apt enough to think I have, in treating of this subject, made some suppositions that will look strange to some readers, and pos- sibly they are so in themselves. But yet, I think, they are such as are pardonable in this ignorance we are in of tlie nature of tliat thinking thing that is in us, and which we look on as ourselves. Did we know what it was, or how it was tied to a certain system of fleeting animal spirits ; or v/hcther it could or could not perform its operations of thinking and memory out of a body organized as ours is; and whether it has pleased (iod that no one such spirit shall ever be united to any but one such body, upon tlie right constitution of whose organs its memory should depend; we 2C •218 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. might see the absurdity of some of those suppositions I have made. But talung, as we ordinarily now do, (in the dark concerning these matters) the soul of a man fur an immaterial substance, independent from matter, and indifferent alike to it all, there can from the nature of things be no absurdity at all to suppose, that the same soul may, at different times, be united to different bodies, and with them make up, tor that time, one man : as well as we suppose a part of a sheep's body yesterday should be a part of a man's body to-morrow, and in tluit union make a vital part of Melibocus liimself, as well as it did of his ram. Sect. 28. Tlic difficulty from ill i(se of names. — To conclude: whatever substance begins to exist, it must, during its existence, necessarily be the same : whatever compositions of substances begin to exist during the union of those substances, the concrete must be the same: whatsoever mode begins to exist, during its existence it is the same : and so if the composi- tion be of distinct substances and different modes, the same rule holds. Whereby it wnll ap])oar, that the difficulty or obscurity that has been about this matter, rather rises from the names ill used, than from any obscurity in things themselves. For whatever makes the specific idea to which the name is applied, if that idea be steadily kept to, the distinction of any thing into the same, and divers, will easily be conceived, and there can arise no doubt about it. Sect. 29. Continued existence makes identity. — For supposing a rational spirit be the idea of a man, it is easy to know what is the same man, viz. the same spirit, whether separate or in a body, will be the same man. Supposing a rational spirit vitally united to a body of a certain con- formation of parts to make a man ; whilst that rational spirit, with that vital conformation of parts, though continued in a fleeting successive body, remains, it will be the same. But if t(i any one the idea of a man be but the vital union of parts in a certain shape: as long as that vital union and shape remain, in a concrete no otherwise the same, but by a continued succession of fleeting particles, it will be the same man. For whatever be the composition whereof the complex idea is made, whenever existence makes it one particular thing under any denomination, the same existence, con- tinued, preserves it the same individual under the same denomination(5). (5) The doctrine of identity and diversity contained in this chapter the bishop of Worcester pretends to be inconsistent wiih tlie doctrines of tlie Christian faith, concerning the resurrection of the dead. His way of arguing from it is this: he says, the reason of believing the resurrection of tlie same body, upon Mr Locke's grounds, is from tlie idea of identity. To which our author answers:* Give me leave, my lord, to say, that the reason of believing any article of the Christian faith (such as your lordship is here S[)eaking of) to me, and upon my grounds, is its being a part of divine revelation: upon this ground I believed it, before 1 either writ that chapter of identity and diversity, and before 1 ever thought of those propositions which your lordship cpiotes out of that chapter; and njjon the same ground I believe it still; and not from my idea of identity. This saying of your lordship's, therefore, being a proposition neither self-evident, nor allowed by me to be true, remains to be proved. So that your foundation failing, all your large superstructure built thereon comes to nothing. But, my lord, before we go any farllier, I crave leave humbly to represent to your lordship, that [ thouglit you undertook to make out that my notion of ideas was inconsistent with the articles of the Christian faitli. But that which your lordship instances in here, is not, that 1 yet know, an article of tlie Christian failh. The resurrection of the dead 1 acknowledge to be an article of the Christian faitli: but that the resurrection of the same body, in your lordsiiip's sense of the same body, is an article of the Ciirislian failii, is wliat, I confess, 1 do not yet know. In the New Testament (wherein, 1 think, are contained all the articles of the * In his tJiird letter to tlie Bishop of Worcester. Ch. 27. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 219 Christisii faith) I find our Saviour aiul the apostles to preach the icsui-rection of the dead, and tlie resurrection from llie dead, in many places; but I do not remem- ber anv ])h»ce wiiere tiie resurrection of the same body is so much as mentioned. Nay, which is very remarkable in the case, I do not remember in any place of the New Testament (where the general resurrection at the last day is spoken of) any such expression as the resurrection of tiie body, much less of the same body. I say the general resurrection at the last day; because, where the resurrection of some particular persons, presently upon our Saviour's resurrection, is men- tioned, the words are, *The graves were opened, and many bodies of saints, which slept, arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into tlie Holy City, and appeared to many: of whicli peculiar way of speaking of tliis re- surrection, the passage itself gives a reason in these words, Appeared to many, i. e. those ■who slept ap])eared, so as to be known to be risen. But this could not be known, unless they brought witli them the evidence that they were those who had been dead; wiiereof there were these two proofs, their graves were opened, and their bodies not only gone out of them, but appeared to be tlie same to tiiose who had kno\i n them formerly alive, and knew them to be dead and buried. For if they had been tliose who had been dead so long, that all who knew them once alive were now gone, those to whom tiiey appeared miglit liave known them to be men, but could not have known they were risen from tlic dead, because they never knew they had been dead. All that by their ajipearing they could have known was, they were so many living strangers, of whose resur- rection tliey knew nothing. It was necessary, thei'efore, that they should come in such bodies as might in make and size, 8cc. appear to be the same they had before, that they might be known to those of their acquaintance whom they ap- peared to. And it is probable they were such as were newlj' dead, whose bo- dies were not yet dissolved and dissipated; and, therefore, it is particularly said here (differently from what is said of the general resurrection,) that their bodies arose; because they were the same that \reve then lying in their graves the mo- ment before they rose. But your lordsiiip endeavours to prove it must be the same body: and let us grant that your lordship, nay, and others too, think you have proved it must be the same body; will you therefore say, that he holds what is inconsistent with an article of faith, who having never seen this your lordship's interpretation of the Scripture, nor your reasons for the same body, in your sense of same body; or, if he has seen them, yet not understanding them, or not perceiving the force of them, believes what the Scripture proposes to him, viz. that at the last day the dead shall be raised, without determining whether it shall be with the very same bodies or no? I know your lordship pretends not to erect your particular interpretations of Scripture into articles of faith. And if you do not, he that believes the dead shall be raised believes that article of faith which the Scripture proposes; and cannot be accused of holding any thing inconsistent with it, if it should happen that what he holds is inconsistent with another proposition, tiz. that the dead shall be raised with the same bodies, in your lordship's sense, which I do not find proposed in Holy AVrit as an article of faith. But your lordship argues, it must be the same body; which, as you explain same bodyt, is not the same individual partjcles of matter which were unjted at the point of death, nor the same particles of matter that the sinner had at the time of the commission of his sins; but that it must be the same material sub- stance which was vitally united to the soul here; i. e. as I understand it, the same individual particles of matter which were, some time or ether during his life here, vitally united to his soul. Your first argument to prove tliat it must be llie same body, in tins sense of the same body, is taken from these woids of our Sav!our|, All that ai-e in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth. From whence your lordship argues^, lliat these words. All that are in their graves, relate to no other substance llian what was united to the soul in life: because a dift'erent substance cannot be said to be in the gr.ives, and to come out of llien). Which words of your lord- • Matt, xxvii. 5'-', 5r.. f 2(1 Answer. | John v. 2S, 20. § 2d Answer. 220 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2 ship's, if they prove any thing, prove tliat the soul too is lodged in the grave, and raised out of it at tlie last day. For your lordship says. Can a different suhstance be said to be in tlic graves, and come out of them? So that, according to this iiiterjiretatlon of these words of our Saviour, no otiier substance being raised, but wliat beai's his voice; and no otlier substance hearing iiis voice, l)Ut what, being called, conies out of the grave; and no other substance coming out of the grave, but what was in the grave; any one must conclude, that the soul, unless it be in tlie grave, will make no part of the person that is raised; unless, as your lord- ship argues against me*, you can make it out, that a substance which never was in the grave may come otit of it, 'or that the soul is no substance. Hut setting aside the siibstance of the soul, another thing tliat will make any one doubt wlietlier tliis your interpretation of our Saviour'sSvords be necessarily to l)e received as their true sense, is, tliat it will not be very easily reconciled to your sayingf, vou do not mean by the same bodv the same individual particles whicii were united at tlie point of death. And yet, by this interpretation of our Saviour's words, you can mean no other particles but such as were united at the point of death; because you mean no other substance but what comes out of the grave; and no substance, no particles come out, you say, but what were in the grave; and I think your lordship will not say, that the particles that were separate from tke body by perspiration before the point of death were laid up in the grave. But your lordship, I find, has an answer to this, viz. :|:'rhat by comparing this with other places, you find that tlie words (of our Saviour above quoted) are to be understood of the substance of the body, to which tlie soul was united, and not to (I suppose your lordship writ, of) these individual particles, f". e. those individual particles that are in the grave at the resurrection. For so they must be read, to make your lordship's sense entire, and to the purpose of your answer here: and then, methiiiks, this last sense of our Saviour's words given by your lordshi\), wholly overturns the sense which we have given of them above, where from those words you press the belief of tlie resurrection of the same body, by this strong argument, that a substance could not, upon hearing the voice of Christ, come out of the grave, whicii was never in the grave. There (as far as I can understand your words) your lordship argues, that our Saviour's words are to be understood of the particles in the grave, unless, as your lordship says, one can make out that a substance which never was in the grave may come out of it. And here your lordship expressly says, That our Saviour's words are to be understood of the substance of that body to which the soul was (at any time) united, and not to those individual particles that are in the grave. Which, put together, seems to me to say, that our Saviour's words are to be understood of those particles only which are in the grave, and not of those particles only which are in the grave, but of others also, which have at any time been vitally united to the soul, but never were in the grave. The next text your lordship brings to make the resurrection of the same body, in your sense, an article of faith, are these words of St Paul: §For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or had. To which your lordship subjoins this question|l : Can these words be understood of any other material substance but that body in which these things were done? Answer: A man may suspend his determining the meaning of the apostle to be, that a sinner shall suffer for his sins in the very same body wherein he committed them; because St Paul does not say he shall have the very same body when he suffers that he had when he sinned. The apostle says indeed, done in his liody. The body he had, and did these things in, at five or fifteen, was, no doubt, his body, as much as that which he did things in at fifty was his body, though his body were not the very same body at those erson,the same numerical [larticles of matter are not required. What doesyour lordship infer from iiencei" to wit, tjiis: therefore, he wiio tiiinks that tlie same particles of matter are not necessary to tlie making of tlie same person, cannot believe that the same persons shall be raised with bodies made of the very same particles of matter, if God should reveal that it shall be so, viz. that the same persons shall be raised with tlie same bodies they had before. Which is all one as to say, that he wlio thought the blowing of rams' horns was not necessary in itself to the falling down of the walls of Jericho, could not believe that they should fall upon the blowing of rams' horns, when God had declared it should be so. Your lordship says, " my idea of personal identity is inconsistent with the article of the resurrection:" the reason you ground it on is this, because it makes not the same body necessaiy to the making the same person. Let us grant your lordship's consequence to be good, what will follow from it? No less than this, that your lordship's notion (for I dare not say your lordsliip has any so dangerous things as ideas) of personal iiletitily, is inconsistent witli the article of the resurrection. The demonstration of it is thus: your lordship says,t " It is not necessar}' that the body, to he raised at the last day, should consist of the same particles of matter which were united at the point of deatli, for there must be a great alteration in them in a lingering disease, as if a fat man falls into a consumption: you do not say the same particles which the sinner had at the very time of commission of his sins, for tiien a long sinner must have a vast body, considering the continual spending of particles iiy perspiration." And again, here your lordship says,^ •* You allow tlie notion of personal identity to belong to the same man under several changes of matter." From which words it is evident, that your lordship supposes a person in this world may be continued and preserved the same in a body not consisting of the same individual particles of matter ; and hence, it de- monstratively follows, that let your lordship's notion of personal identity be what it will, it makes " tlie same body not to be necessary to the same person;" and therefore it is by your lordsliip's rule inconsistent with the article of the resurrection. When your lordsliip shall think fit to clear your own notion of personal identity from this inconsistency with the article of the resurrection, I do not doubt but my idea of personal identity will be thereby cleared too. Till then, all inconsistency with that article, which your lordship has here charged on mine, will unavoidably fall upon your lordship's too. But for the clearing of both, give me leave to say, my lord, that whatsoever is not necessary, does n".t thereby become inconsistent. It is not necessary to the same person that his body should always consist of the same numerical particles; tliis is demonstration, because the particles of tlie bodies of the same persons in this life change every moment, and your lordship cannot deny it: and yet this makes it not inconsistent with God's preserving, if he thinks fit, to the same per- sons, bodies consisting of the same numerical particles always from the resur- rection to eternity. And so likewise though I say any tiling that supposes it not necessary, that the saine numerical particles which were vitally united to the soul in this life should be reunited to it at the resurrection, and constitute the body it shall then have; yet it is not inconsistent with this, that God may, if he pleases, give to every one a body consisting only of sucli paiticles as were before vitally united to his soul. And thus, 1 think, I have cleared my book from all that iu- * 2d Answer. + Ibid. ^ Ibid. Ch. 27. OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY. 2:33 consistency which your lordsliip charges on it, and would persuade the world it has with the article of the resurrection ot" llie dead. Only before I leave it, I will set down the remainder of what your lordsliip savs upon this liead, tiiat though I see not tl»e coherence nor tendency of it, nor the force of any argument in ij; against me; yet that nothing may be omitted that your lordship has thought fit to entertain your reader witii on this new point, nor any one have reason to suspect, tliaL 1 iiave passed bj' any word of your loi-dsiiip's (on this now first introduced subject) wherein he miglit find your lordsliip had proved what you had promised in your title page. Your remaining words are these*: "The dispute is not how far personal identity in itself may consist in the very same material substance ; for we allow the notion of personal identity to belong to the same man under several ciianges of matter; but whether it doth not depend upon a vital union between the soul and body, and tlie life wliich is consequent upon it ; and therefore in the resurrection, the same material sub- stance must be reunited, or else it cannot be called a resurrection, but a reno- vation, i. e. it may be a new life, but not a raising the body from the dead." I confess, I do not see how what is liere ushered in by the words " and tliere- fore," is a consequence from the preceding words: but as to the propriety of tlie name, I tiiink it will not much be questioned, that if the same man rise svho was dead, it may very properly be called the resurrection of the dead, which is the language of the Scripture. I must not part with this article of the resurrection witliout returning my thanks to your lordship for making met take notice of a fault in my essay. When I wrote that book, I took it for granted, as I doubt not but many others have done, that the Scripture had mentioned, in express terms, " tlie resurrection of the body." But upon the occasion your lordship lias given me in your last letter, to look a little more narrowly into what revelation has declared concerning the resurrection, and finding no such express words iri the Scripture as that "the body shall rise or be raised, or the resurrection of the body." I shall in the next edition of it change these words of my book|, " the dead bodies of men shall rise," into these of the Scriptures, "the dead shall rise." Not that I question that the dead shall be raised with bodies; but in matters of revelation, I think it not only safest, but our duty, as far as any one delivers it for revela- tion, to keep close to the words of the Scripture, unless he will assume to him- self the authority of one inspired, or make himself wiser than the Holy Spirit himself, if I had spoke of tlie resurrection in precisely Scripture terms, 1 had avoided giving your lordship the occasion of making§ here such a verbal reflec- tion on my words; " what! not if there be an idea of identity as to the body?" * 2d Answer. t Ibid. | 1 Essay, B. 4. C. 18. sect. 7. § 2d Answer. CHAPTER XXyill. ^ OF OTHER RELATIONS. Sect. 1. Proportional. — Besides the before-mentioned occasions of time, place, and casuality of comparing, or referring things one to another, there are, as I have said, infinite others, some whereof I shall mention. Firgt, The first I shall name, is some one simple idea; which being capable of parts or degrees, affords an occasion of comparing the subjects wherein it is to one another, in respect of that simple idea, v. g. whiter, sweeter, bigger, equal, more, &,c. These relations depending on the equality and excess of the same simple idea, in several subjects, may be called, if one will, proportional : and that these are only conversant about those simple ideas received from sensation or reflection, is so evident, that nothing need be said to evince it. Sect. 2. Natural. — Segondly, Another occasion of comparing tilings 2 E 234 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. together, or considering one tiling, so as to include in that consideration sonic other thing, is tlio circjliastance of their origin or beginning; which being not afterwards to be altered, make the relations depending thereon as lusting as the snbjects to which they belong; v. g. father and son, brothers, cousin-gernians, &c. which have their relations by one commu- nity of blood, wlierein they partake in several degrees; countrymen, i. e. those who wore born in the same country, or tract of ground ; and these I call naturiil relations ; wherein we may observe, that mankind have fitted their notions and words to the use of common life, and not to the truth and extent of things. For it is certain, that in reality the relation is the same betwixt the begetter and the begotten, in the several races of other animals as well as men: but yet it is seldom said, this bull is the grand- father of such a calf; or that two pigeons are cousin-germans. It is very convenient, that by distinct names these relations should be observed, and marked out in mankind ; tiiere being occasion, both in laws, and other comnmnications one with another, to mention and take notice of men un- der these relations : from whence also arise the obligations of several du- ties among men. Whereas in brutes, men having very little or no cause to mind these relations, they have not thought fit to give them distinct and peculiar names. This, by the way, may give us some light into the differ- ent state and growth of languages; which, being suited only to the con- venience of communication, are proportioned to the notions men have, and the commerce of thoughts familiar among them ; and not to the reality or extent of things, nor to the various respects might be found among them, nor the different abstract considerations might be framed about them. Where they had no philosophical notions, there they had no terms to ex- press them : and it is no wonder men should have framed no names for those things they found no occasion to discourse of From whence it is easy to imagine, why, as in some countries, they may not have so much as the name for a horse; and in others, where they are more careful of the pedigrees of their horses than of their own, that there they may have not only names for particular horses, but also of their several relations of kindred one to another. Sect. 3. Instituted. — Thirdly, Sometimes the foundation of considering things, with reference to one another, is some act whereby any one comes by a moral right, power, or obligation to do something. Thus a general is one that hath power to command an army : and an army under a general is a collection of armed men obliged to obey one man. A citizen, or a burgher, is one who has a right to certain privileges in tliis or that place. All this sort, depending upon men's wills, or agreement in society, I call instituted, or voluntary ; and may be distinguished from the natural, in that they are most, if not all of them, some way or other alterable, and separa* ble from the persons to whom they have sometimes belonged, though neither of the substances, so related, be destroyed. Now, though these are all reciprocal, as well as the rest, and contain in them a reference of two things one to the other ; yet, because one of the- two things often wants a relative name, importing that reference, men usually take no no- tice of it, and the relation is commonly overlooked : v. g. a. patron and client are easily allowed to be relations, but a constable or dictator are not so readily, at first hearing, considered as such; because there is no pecu- liar name for those who are under tiie command of a dictator, or constable, expressing a relation to either of them; though it be certain, that either of them hath a certain power over some others ; and so is so far related to them, as well as a patron is to his client, or general to his army. Sect. 4. Moral. — Fourthly, There is another sort of relation, which is the conformity, or disagreement, men's voluntary actions have to a rule to which they are referred, and by which they are Judged of; which, I think, may be called moral relation, as being that which denominates our moral actions, and deserves well to be examined ; tht>re being no part of knowledge Ch. 28. OP MORAL RELATIONS. 2.35 wherein we should be more careful to get determined ideas, and avoid, as much as may be, obscurity and confusion. Human actions, when with their various ends, objects, manners, and circumstances, they are framed into distinct complex ideas, are, as has been shown, so many mixed modes, a great part whereof have names annexed to tiiem. Thus, supposing gratitude to be a readiness to acknowledge and return kindness received ; polygamy to be the having more wives than one at once ; when we frame these notions thus in our minds, we have there so many determined ideas of mixed modes. But this is not all tliat concerns our actions ; it is not enough to have determined ideas of them, and to know what names be- long to such and such combinations of ideas. We have a farther and greater concernment, and that is, to know whether such actions, so made up, are morally good or bad. Sect. 5. Moral good and evil. — Good and evil, as hath been shown, B. IL Ch. 20, Sect. 2, and Ch. 21, Sect. 42, are notiiing but pleasure or pain, or tliat which occasions or procures pleasure or pain to us. Moral good and evil then is only the conformity or disagreement of our volun- tary actions to some law, whereby good or evil is drawn on us by the will and power of the law-maker; which good and evil, pleasure or pain, at- tending our observance, or breach of the law, by the decree of the law- maker, is that we call reward and punishment. Sect. 6. Moral rules. — Of these moral rules, or laws, to which men generally refer, and by which they judge of the rectitude or pravity of their actions, there seem to me to be three sorts, with their three different enforcements, or rewards and punishmeiifs. For since it would be utterly in vain to suppose a rule set to the free actions of man, without annexing to it some enforcement of good and evil to determine his will, we must, wherever we suppose a law, suppose also some reward or punishment an- nexed to that law. It would be in vain for one intelligent being to set a rule to the actions of another, if he had it not in his power to reward the compliance with, and punish deviation from his rule, by some good and evil, that is not the natural product and consequence of the action itself. For that being a natural convenience, or inconvenience, would operate of itself without a law. This, if I mistake not, is the true nature of all law, properly so called. Sect. 7. Laws. — The laws that men generally refer their actions to, to judge of their rectitude, or obliquity, seem to me to be these three. 1. The divine law. 2. The civil law. 3. Tlie law of opinion or reputation, if I may so call it. By the relation they bear to the first of these, men judge whe- ther their actions are sins or duties ; by the second, whether they be crimi- nal or innocent ; and by the third, whether they be virtues or vices. Sect. 8. Divine law, the measure of sin and duty. — First, The divine law, whereby I mean that law which God has set to the actions of men, whe- ther promulgated to them by the light of nature, or the voice of revelation.. That God has given a rule whereby men should govern themselves, I think there is nobody so brutish as to deny. He has a right to do it ; we are his creatures : he has goodness and wisdom to direct our actions to that which is best; and he has power to enforce it by rewards and punishments, of in- finite weight and duration, in another life; for nobody can take us out of his hands. This is the only true touchstone of moral rectitude, and by comparing them to tliis law it is that men judge of tlie most considerable moral good or evil of their actions; that is, whether as duties or sins, they are like to procure tliem happiness or misery from the hand of the Almighty. Sect. 9. Civil law, the measure of crimes and innocence. — Secondly, the civil law, the rule set by the commonwealth to the actions of those who belong to it, is another rule, to which men refer their actions, to judge whether they be criminal or no. This law nobody overlooks ; the rewards and punishments that enforce it being ready at hand, and suitable to tho 236 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. power that makes it; which is the force of the commonwealth, engaged to protect the hves, liberties, and possessions of tliose who live according to its laws, and has power to take away life, liberty, or goods, from him who disobeys: which is the punishinent of ollciicos coniniittcd against this law. Sect. 10. Philosophical law, the measure of virtue and vice. — Tliirdly, the law of ojiinion or rcj)iitation. Virtue and vice are names pretended and supposed every where to stand for actions in tlicir own nature riglit and wrong; and as far as tiiey really are so applied, they so far are coincident with tlie divine law above mentioned. But yet, whatever is pretended, this is visible, tiiat tliese names, virtue and vice, in the particular instances of their application, through the several nations and societies of men in the world, are constantly attributed only to such actions, as in each country j and society are in reputation or discredit. Nor is it to be thought strange, tiiat men every where siiould give tlie name of virtue to those actions, whicii among tliein are judged praise-worthy ; and call that vice, which they account blameable; since otherwise tliey would condemn tjiemselves if they sliould think any tiling right, to which they allowed not commen- dation : any thing wrong which they let pass without blame. Thus the measure of what is every where called and esteemed virtue and vice, is the approbation or dislike, praise or blame, which by a secret and tacit consent establishes itself in the several societies, tribes, and clubs of men in the world ; whereby several actions come to tind credit or disgrace among them according to the judgment, maxims, or fasJiion of tiiat place. For though men, uniting into politic societies, have resigned up to the public the disposing of all their force, so that they cannot employ it against any fel- low-citizens any farther than the law of the country directs ; yet they retain still the power of thinking well or ill, approving or disapproving of the actions of those whom they live among, and converse with : and by this approbation and dislike, they establish among themselves what they will call virtue and vice. Sect. 11. — That this is the common measure of virtue and vice, will ap- pear to any one who considers, that though tJiat passes for vice in one country which is counted a virtue, or at least not vice in another, yet, every where,V virtue and praise, vice and blame, go together. Virtue is every where that which is thought praise-worthy ; and nothing else but that which has the allowance of public esteem, is called virtuc((3). Virtue and praise are so (6) Our author, in his preface to the fourth edition, taking notice Iiow apt men have been to mistake liini, aikled what iicre follows; Of tliis the ingenious author of the discourse concerning- the nature of man has given me a late instance, to mention no other. Foi- the civility of his expressions, and the can- dour that belongs to his order, forbid me to tliiiik tliat he would have closed his preface with an insinuation, as if in what I had said, hook ii. chap. 28, cencern- ing the tiiird rule which men refer their actions to, I went about to make virtue vice, and vice virtue, unless he had mistaken my meaning; which lie could not have done, if he had but given himself the trouble to consider what the argu- ment was I was then upon, and what was the chief design of that chapter, I)lainly enough set down in the fourtli section, and those following. For 1 was there not laying down moral rules, but showing the original and nature of moral ideas, and enumerating the rules men make use of in moral relations, whether those rules were true or false : and, pursuant thereunto, I tell what lias every where that denomination, which in the language of that place answers to virtue and vice in ours; which alters not the nature of tilings, though men do generally judge of, and denominate their actions according to the esteem and fashion of the place or sect they are of. If he had been at the pains to reflect on what I had said, b. i.e. 3. sect. 18, and in this present chapter, sect. 13, 14, 15, and 20, he would have known what I think of the eternal and unalterable nature of right and wrong, and what I call virtue Ciu 28. OF OTHER RELATIONS. 237 united, that they are often called by the same name. Sunt sua prtBtnia laiidi, says Virgil ; and so Cicero, Nihil liabet natura prcestantius, quam honestatem, quam laudem, quam dignitatem, quam decus; which, he tells us, are aU names for the same thing, Tusc. lib. ii. This is the language of and vice: and if he had observed, tliat in the place he quotes, I only report as matter of fact what others call virtue and vice, he would not have found it liable to any great exception. For, I think, I am not much out in saying, that one of the rules made use of in the world, for a ground or measure of a moral relation, is that esteem and reputation which several sorts of actions find variously in the several societies of men, according to which they are there called virtues or vices: and whatever authority the learned Mr Lowde places in liis old English Dictionary, I dare say it no where tells him (if I should appeal to it) that the same action is not in credit, called and counted a virtue in one place, wliicii being in disrepute, passes for and under tiie name of vice in another. The taking notice that men bestow the names of virtue and vice according to this rule of reputation, is all I have done, or can be laid to my charge to have done, towards the making vice virtue, and virtue vice. But the good man does well, and as becomes his calling, to be watchful in such points, and to take the alarm, even at expressions, which standing alone by themselves miglit sound ill, and be suspected. It is to this zeal, allowable in his function, that 1 forgive his citing, as he does, these words of mine in sect. 11 of this chapter: " Tlie exhortations of inspired teachers have not feared to appeal to common repute : ' whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any virtue, if there be any praise,' &c. Phil. iv. 8." without taking notice of those immediately pre- ceding, whicli introduce them, and run thus: " whereby in the corruption of man- ners, the true boundaries of the law of nature, which ought to be the rule of virtue and vice, were pretty well preserved, so that even the exhortations of inspired teachers," &c. by which words, and the rest of that section, it is plain that I brought this passage of St Paul, not to prove that the general measure of what men call virtue and vice, throughout the world, was the reputation and fashion of each particular society witliin itself ^ but to show, that though it were so, yet, for reasons I there give men, in that way of denominating their actions, did not for the most part, much vary from the law of nature; which is that standing and unalterable rule by which they ought to judge of the moral rectitude and pravity of their actions, and accordingly denominate them virtues or vices. Had Mr Lowde considered this, he would have found it little to his purpose to have quoted that passage in a sense I used it not; and would, I imagine, have spared the explication he subjoins to it as not very necessary. But I hope this second edition will give him satisfaction in the point, and that this matter is now so expressed as to show him there was no cause of scruple. Though I am forced to differ from him in those apprehensions he has expressed in the latter end of his preface, concerning what I had said about virtue and vice, yet we are better agreed than he thinks, in what he says in his third chapter, p. 78, concerning natural inscription and innate notions. I shall not deny him the privilege he claims, p. 52, to state the question as he pleases, especially when he states it so, as to leave nothing in It contrary to what I have said; for, according to him, innate notions being conditional things, depending upon the concurrence of several other circumstances, in order to the soul's exerting them; all that he says for innate, imprinted, impressed notions (for of innate ideas he says nothing at all) amounts at last only to this: that there are certain propositions, which though the soul from the beginning, or when a man is born, docs not know, yet by assistance from the outward senses, and the help of some previous cultivation, it may afterwards come certainly to know the truth of; which is no more than what I have affirmed in my first book. For I suppose, by the soul's exerting them, he means its beginning to know tliem, or else the soul's exerting of notions ■will be to me a very unintelligible expression; and I think at best is a very unfit one in this case, it misleading men's thoughts by an insinuation, as if these no- tions were in the mind before tlie soul exerts them; i. e. before they are known; 238 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. the heatlien philosophers, who well understood wherein their notions of virtue and vice consisted, and though perhaps by the dilFerent temper, edu- cation, fashion, maxims, or interests of different sorts of rnen, it fell out tliat what was thought praise-worthy in one place, escaped not censure in another; and so in different societies, virtues and vices were changed; yet, as to the main, they for the most part kept the same every where. For since nothing can be more natural than to encourage with esteem and reputation that wherein everj"^ one finds his advantage, and to blame and discountenance the contrary; it is no wonder that esteem and discredit, virtue and vice, should in a great measure every where correspond with the unchangeable rule of right and wrong, which the law of God hath established : there being nothing that so directly and visibly secures and advances the general good of mankind in this world, as obedience to the laws he has set them; and nothing that breeds such mischiefs and confusion, as the neglect of them. And, therefore, men, without renouncing all sense and reason, and their own interest, which they are so constantly true to, could not generally mistake in placing their commendation and blame on that side that really deserved it not. Nay, even those men whose practice was otherwise, failed not to give their approbation right ; few being depraved to that de- gree, as not to condemn, at least in others, the faults they themselves were guilty of: whereby, even in the corruption of manners, the true bounda- ries of the law of nature, which ought to be the rule of virtue and vice, were pretty well preferred. So that even the exhortations of inspired teachers have not feared to appeal to common repute : " Whatsoever is lovely, whatsoever is of good report, if there be any virtue, if there be any praise," &c. Phil. iv. 8. Sect. 1:^. Its enforcements, commendation, and discredit. — If any one shall imagine that I have forgot my own notion of a law, when I make the law whereby men judge of virtue and vice, to be nothing else buttlie consent of private men, who have not authority enough to make a law; especially wanting that which is so necessary and essential to a law, a power to enforce it: I think I may say, that he who imagines commendation and disgrace not to be strong motives to men, to accommodate themselves to the opinions and rules of those with whom they converse, seems little skilled in the nature or history of mankind : the greatest part whereof he shall find to govern themselves chiefly, if not solely, by this law of fashion ; and so they do that which keeps them in reputation with their company, little regard the laws of God, or the magistrate. The penalties tliat attend the breach of God's laws, some, nay perhaps most men, seldom seriously reflect on ; whereas truly before they are known, there is nothing of them in the mind but a capacity to know them, when the concurrence of those circumstances, which this ingenious author thinks necessary, in order to the soul's exerting them, brings them into our knowledge. P. 52, 1 find him express it thus: "these natural notions arc not so imprinted upon the soul, as that tliey naturally and necessarily exert lliemsclves (even in children and idiots) without any assistance from thu outward senses, or witliout the help of some previous cultivation." Here, he says, they exert themselves, as p. 78, that the soul exerts tliem. When he has explained to himself or others ■what he means by the soul's exerting innate notions, or their exerting themselves, and what that i)revious cultivation and circumstances, in order to their being ex- erted, are; he will, I suppose, find there is so little of controversy between him and mc in the point, hating that he calls that exerting of notions wliich I in a more vulgar style call knowing, that I liave reason to think he brought in my name upon this occasion only out of the pleasure he has to speak civilly of me, ■which I must gratefully acknowledge he has done wherever he mentions me, not without conferring on me, as some others have done, a title I have no right to. Ch.23. OF OTHER RELATIONS. 239 and among those that do, many, whilst they break tliat law, entertain thoughts of fliture reconciliation, andjnaking their peace for such breaches. And as to the punishments due from the laws of the commonwealth, they frequently flatter themselves with the hopes of impunity. But no man escapes the punishment of their censure and dislike, who offends against the fashion and opinion of the company he keeps, and would recommend himself to. Nor is there one often thousand, who is stiff and insensible enough to bear up under the constant dislike and condemnation of his own club. He must be of a strange and unusual constitution, who can con- tent himself to live in constant disgrace and disrepute with his own par- ticular society. Solitude many men have sought, and been reconciled to : but nobody, that has the least thought or sense of a man about him, can live in society under the constant dislike and ill opinion of his familiars, and those he converses with. This is a burden too heavy for human suf- ferance ; and he must be made of irreconcilable contradictions, who can take pleasure in company, and yet be insensible of contempt and disgrace from his companions. Sect. 13. These three laws, the rules of moral good and evil. — These three then. First, The law of God; Secondly, The law of politic societies ; Thirdly, The law of fashion, or private censure, are those to which men variously compare their actions ; and it is by their conformity to one of these laws that they take their measures, when they would judge of their moral rectitude, and denominate their actions good or bad. Sect. 14. Morality is the relation of actions to these rules. — Whether the rule, to which, as to a touchstone, we bring our voluntary actions, to examine them by, and try their goodness, and accordingly to name them ; which is, as it were, the mark of the value we set upon them : whether, I say, we take that rule from the fashion of the country, or the will of a law- maker, the mind is easily able to observe the relation any action hath to it, and to judge whether the action agrees or disagrees with the rule ; and so hath a notion of moral goodness or evil, which is either conformity or not conformity of any action to that rule : and therefore is oflen called moral rectitude. This rule being nothing but a collection of several sim- ple ideas, the conformity thereto is but so ordering the action, that the simple ideas belonging to it may correspond to those which the law re- quires. And thus we see how moral beings and notions are founded on, and terminated in, these simple ideas we have received from sensation or reflection. For example, let us consider the complex idea we signify by the word murder ; and when we have taken it asunder, and examined all the particulars, we shall find them to amount to a collection of simple ideas derived from reflection or sensation, viz. First, from reflection on the ope- rations of our own minds, we have the ideas of willing, considering, pur- posing before hand, malice, or wishing ill to another ; and also of life, or perception, and self-motion. Secondly, from sensation we have the col- lection of those simple sensible ideas which are to be found in a man, and of some action, whereby we put an end to perception and motion in a man ; all which simple ideas are comprehended in the word murder. This collection of simple ideas being found by me to agree or disagree with the esteem of the country I have been bred in, and to be held by most men there worthy praise or blame, I call the action virtuous or vicious : if I have the will of a supreme invisible Law-maker for my rule ; then, as I sup- pose the action commanded or forbidden by God, I call it good or evil, sin or duty ; and if I compare it to the civil law, the rule made by the legis- lative power of the country, I call it lawful or unlawful, a crime or no crime. So that whencesoever we take the rule of moral actions, or by what standard soever we frame in our minds the ideas of \nrtues or vices, they consist only and are made up of collections of simple ideas, which we originally received from sense or reflection, and their rectitude or obliquity 240 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. consists in the agreement or disagreement with those patterns prescribed by some law. ^^ * Sect. 15. To conceive rightly o'Pfnoral actions, we must take notice of them under this twofold consideration. First, as Ihcy are in themselves each made up of such a collection of simple id^as. Thus drunkenness, or lying, signify such or such a collection of simple ideas, which I call mi.xcd modes : and in this sense they are as much jjositive absolute ideas as the drinking of a horse, or speaking of a parrot. Secondly, our actions are considered as good, bad, or indilferent ; and in this respect they are relative, it being their conformity to, or disagreement with, some rule that makes them to be regular or irregular, good or bad, and so as far as they are compared with a rule, and tliereupon denominated, they come under relation. Tlius, the challenging and figliting with a man, as it is a certain positive mode, or particular sort of action, by particular ideas, distinguish- ed from all others, is called duelling, which when considered in relation to the law of God, will deserve the name sin ; to the law of fashion, in some countries, valour and virtue ; and to the municipal laws of some go- vernments, a capital crime. In this case, when the positive mode has one name, and anotlier name as it stands in relation to the law, the distinction may as easily be observed as it is in substances, where one name, v. g. man, is used to signify the thing; anotlier, v. g. father, to signify the relation. Sect. 16. The denominations of actions often mislead us. — But because very frequently the positive idea of the action, and its moral relation, are comprehended together under one name, and the same word made use of to express both tlie mode or action, and its moral rectitude or obliquity; therefore the relation itself is less taken notice of, and there is often no distinction made between the positive idea of the action, and the reference it has to a rule. By which confusion of these two distinct considerations under one term, those who yield too easily to the impressions of sounds, and are forward to take names for things, are often misled in their judg- ment of actions. Thus the taking from another what is his, without his knowledge or allowance, is properly called stealing; but that name being commonly understood to signify also the moral pravity of the action, and to denote its contrariety to the law, men are apt to condemn whatever they hear called stealing as an ill action, disagreeing with the rule of right. And yet the private taking away his sword from a madman, to prevent his doing mischief, though it be properly denominated stealing, as the name of such a mi.xed mode; yet when compared to the law of God, and con- sidered in its relation to that supreme rule, it is no sin or transgression, though the name stealing ordinarily carries such an intimation with it. Sect. 17. Relations innumerable. — And thus much for the relation of human actions to a law, which therefore I call moral relation. It would make a volume to go over all sorts of relations ; it is not there- fore to be expected that I should here mention them all. It suffices to our present purpose to show by these what the ideas are we have of this com- prehensive consideration, called relation : which is so various, and the oc- casions of it so many (as many as there can be of comparing things one to another,) that it is not very easy to reduce it to rules, or under just heads. Those I have mentioned, I think, are some of the most considerable, and such as may serve to let us see from whence we get our ideas of re- lations, and wherein they are founded. But before I quit this argument, from what has been said, give me leave to observe, Sect. 18. All relations terminate in simple ideas. — First, that it is evident that all relation terminates in, and is ultimately founded on, those simple ideas we have got from sensation or reflection : so that all that we have in our thoughts ourselves (if we think of any thing, or have any meaning) or would signify to others, when we use words standing for re- Ch. 28. OF OTHER RELATIONS. 241 lations, is nothing but some simple ideas, or collections of simple ideas, compared one with another. This is so manifest in that sort called pro- portional, that nothing can be more : for when a man says honey is sweeter than wax, it is plain that his thoughts, in this relation, terminate in this simple idea, sweetness, which is equally true of all the rest; though, where they are compounded or decompounded, the simple ideas they are made up of are, perhaps, seldom taken notice of. V. g. when the word father is mentioned: First, there is meant that particular species, or col- lective idea, signified by the word man. Secondly, those sensible simple ideas, signified by the word generation ; and, thirdly, the effects of it, and all the simple ideas signified by the word child. So the word friend being taken for a man who loves, and is ready to do good to another, has all these following ideas to the making of it up ; first, all the simple ideas, comprehended in the word man, or intelligent being. Secondly, the idea of love. Thirdly, the idea of readiness or disposition. Fourthly, the idea of action, which is any kind of thought or motion. Fifthly, the idea of good, which signifies any thing that may advance his happiness, and ter- minates at last, if examined, in particular simple ideas, of which the word good in general signifies any one; but, if removed from all simple ideas quite, it signifies nothing at all. And thus also all moral words termi- nate at last, though perhaps more remotely, in a collection of simple ideas : the immediate signification of relative words being very often other sup- posed known relations, which, if traced one to another, still end in simple ideas. Sect. 19. We have ordinarily as clear (or clearer) a notion of the relation, as of its foundation. — Secqadly, that in relations we have for the most part, if not always, as clear a notion of the relation, as we have of those simple ideas wherein it is founded. Agreement or disagreement, whereon relation depends, being things whereof we have commonly as clear ideas as of any other whatsoever; it being but the distinguishing simple ideas, or their degrees one from another, without which we could have no distinct knowledge at all. For if I have a clear idea of sweetness, light, or extension, I have too of equal, or more or less, of each of these: if I know what it is for one man to be born of a woman, viz. Sempronia, I know what it is for another man to be born of the same woman, Sem- pronia; and so have as clear a notion of brothers as of births, and perhaps clearer. For if I believed that Sempronia dug Titus out of the parsley- bed (as they used to tell children), and thereby became his mother; and that afterward, in the same manner, she dug Caius out of the parsley-bed ; I had as clear a notion of the relation of brothers between them, as if I had all the skill of a midwife: the notion that the same woman contri- buted, as mother, equally to their births, (though I were ignorant or mis- taken in the manner of it,) being that on which I grounded the relation, and that they agreed in that circumstance of birth, let it be what it will. The comparing them then, in their descent from the same person, without knowing the particular circumstances of that descent, is enough to found my notion of their having or not having the relation of brothers. But though the ideas of particular relations are capable of being as clear and distinct in the minds of those who will duly consider them as those of mixed modes, and more determinate than those of substances ; yet the names belonging to relation are often of as doubtful and uncertain signifi- cation as those of substances or mixed modes, and much more than those of simple ideas ; because relative words being the marks of this compari- son, which is made only by men's thoughts, and is an idea only in men's minds, men frequently apply them to different comparisons of things, ac- cording to their own imaginations, which do not always correspond with those of others using the same name. Sect. 20. The notion of the relation is the same, whether the rule and 2 F 242 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. action to be coinparedis true or false. — Thirdly, tliat in these I call moral relations 1 have a true notion of relationTTJy comparing the action with the rule, whether tlie rule be true or false. For if 1 measure any thing by a yard, I know whether the thing I measure be longer or shorter than that supposed yard, though perliaps the yard I measure by be not exactly the standard, which indeed is another inquiry : for though the rule be errone- ous, and I mistaken in it, yet the agreement or disagreement observable in that which I compare with makes me perceive the relation. Though measuring by a wrong rule, I shall thereby be brought to judge amiss of its moral rectitude, because I have tried it by that which is not the true rule, yet I am not mistaken in the relation which that action bears to that rule I compare it to, which is agreement or disagreement. CHAPTER XXIX. OF CLEAR AND OBSCURE, DISTINCT AND CONFUSED IDEAS. Sect. 1. Ideas, some clear and distinct, others obscure and confused. — Having shown the original of our ideas, and taken a view of their several sorts, considered the ditference between the simple and the complex, and observed how the complex ones are divided into those of modes, substances, and relations ; all which, I think, is necessary to be done by any one who would acquaint himself thoroughly with the progress of the mind in its apprehension and knowledge of things ; it will, perhaps, be thought I have dwelt long enough upon the examination of ideas. I must, nevertheless, crave leave to offer some few other considerations concerning them. The first is, that some are clear, and others obscure ; some distinct, and others confused. Sect. 2. Clear and obscure explained by sight. — The perception of the mind being most aptly explained by words relating to the sight, we shall best understand what is meant by clear and obscure in our ideas by reflecting on what we call clear and obscure in the objects of sight. Light being that which discovers to us visible objects, we give the name of obscure to that which is not placed in a light sufficient to discover minute- ly to us the figure and colours which are observable in it, and which, in a better light, would be discernible. In like manner our simple ideas are clear when they are such as the objects themselves, from whence they were taken, did or might, in a well-ordered sensation or perception, present them. Whilst the memory retains them thus, and can produce them to the mind, whenever it has occasion to consider them, they are clear ideas. So far as they either want any thing of the original exactness, or have lost any of their first freshness, and are, as it were, faded or tarnished by time, so far are they obscure. Complex ideas, as they are made up of simple! ones, so they are clear when the ideas that go to their composition are' clear; and the number and order of those simple ideas, that are the in- gredients of any complex one, is determinate and certain. Sect. 3. Causes of obscurity. — The causes of obscurity in simple ideas i seem to be either dull organs, or very slight and transient impressions made by the objects, or else a weakness in the memory not able to retain ' them as received. For to return again to visible objects, to help us to ap- prehend this matter : if the organs or faculties of perception, like wax over-hardened with cold, will not receive the impression of the seal, from the usual impulse wont to imprint it; or, hke wax, of a temper too soft, will not hold it well when well imprinted; or else supposing the wax of a temper fit, but the seal not applied with a sufficient force to nial;c a clear Ch. 29. OF CLEAR AND OBSCURE IDEAS. '^43 impression : in any of these cases, the print left by the seal will be ob- scure. This, I suppose, needs no application to make it plainer. Sect. 4. Distinct and confused, what. — As a clear idea is that where- of the mind has such a full and evident perception, as it does receive from an outward object operating duly on a well-disposed organ ; so a distinct idea is that wherein the mind perceives a difference from all other; and a confused idea is such a one as is not sufficiently distinguishable from ano- ther, from which it ought to be different. Sect. 5. Objection. — If no idea be confused but such as is not sufficient- ly distinguishable from another, from which it should be different, it will be hard, may any one say, to find any where a confused idea. For let any idea be as it will, it can be no other but such as the mind perceives it to be; and that very perception sufficiently distinguishes it from all other ideas, which cannot be other, i. e. different, without being perceived to be so. No idea therefore can be undistinguishable from another, from which it ought to be different, unless you would have it different from itself: for from all other it is evidently different. Sect. 6. Confusion of ideas is in reference to their names. — To remove this difficulty, and to help us to conceive aright wliat it is that makes the confusion ideas are at any time chargeable with, we must consider, that things ranked under distinct names are supposed different enough to be-' distinguished, that so each sort by its peculiar name may be marked, and discoursed of apart upon any occasion: and there is nothing more evident, than that the greatest part of dilferent names are supposed to stand for different things. Now every idea a man has being visibly what it is, and distinct from all other ideas but itself, that which makes it confused is, when it is such, that it may as well be called by another name as that which it is expressed by : the difference which keeps the things (to be ranked under those two different names) distinct, and makes some of them belong rather to the one, and some of them to the other of those names, being left out ; and so the distinction, which was intended to be kept up by those different names is quite lost. Sect. 7. Defaults which make confusion. — The defaults which usually occasion this confusion, I think, are chiefly these following: First, complex ideas made up of too few simple ones. — First, when any complex idea (for it is complex ideas that are most liable to confusion) is made up of too small a number of simple ideas, and such only as are com-^^ mon to other things, whereby the differences that make it deserve a diffe- rent name are left out. Thus, he that has an idea made up of barely thei simple ones of a beast with spots, has but a confused idea of a leopard, it \ not being thereby sufficiently distinguished from a lynx, and several other sorts of beasts that are spotted. So that, such an idea, though it hath the peculiar name leopard, is not distinguishable from those designed by the names lynx, or panther, and may as well come under the name lynx as leopard. How much the custom of defining of words by general terms contributes to make the ideas we would express by them confused and undetermined, I leave others to consider. This is evident, that confused ideas are such as render the use of words uncertain, and take away the benefit of distinct names. When the ideas, for which we use different terms, have not a difference answerable to their distinct names, and so cannot be distinguished by them, there it is that they are truly confused. Sect. 8. Secondly, or its simple ones jumbled disorderly together. — Secondly, another fault which makes our ideas confused is when, though the particulars that make up any idea are in number enough, yet they are so jumbled together, that it is not easily discernible whether it more belongs to the name that is given it than to any other. There is nothing more proper to make us conceive this confusion, than a sort of pictures usually shown as surprising pieces of art, wherein the colours, as they are laid by 244 OF HUMAN UADERSTANDING. Book y. t!ie pencil on the tabic itself, mark out very odd and unusiial figures, and iiave no discernible order in their position. This dranglit, thus made up of parts wherein no symmetry nor order appears, is in itself no more a con- fused thing than the picture of a cloudy sky; wherein, though there be as little order of colours or figures to be found, yet nobody tlwnks it a con- fused picture. What is it then that makes it be thought confused, since the want of symmetry does not ] as it is plain it does not, for another draught made, barely in imitation of this, could not be called confused. I answer, that which makes it be thought confused is the applying it to some name to which it does no more discernibly belong than to some other: v. g. when it is said to be the picture of a man, or Caesar, then any one with reason counts it confused : because it is not discernible in that state to belong more to the name man, or Caesar, than to the name baboon, or Pompey ; which are supposed to stand for different ideas from those signified by man or Csesar. But when a cylindrical mirror, placed right, hath reduced those irregular lines on the table into their due order and proportion, then tiie confusion ceases, and the eye presently sees that it is a man, or Caesar, i. e. that it belongs to those names, and that it is suf- ficiently distinguishable from a baboon, or Pompey, i. e. from the ideas signified by those names. Just thus it is with our ideas, which are as it were the pictures of things. No one of these mental draughts, however the parts are put together, can be called confused (for they are plainly discernible as they are,) till it be ranked under some ordinary name, to which it cannot be discerned to belong, any more than it does to some other name of an allowed different signification. Sect. 9. Thirdly, or are mutable and undetermined. — Thirdly, a third defect that frequently gives the name of confused to our ideas, is when any one of them is uncertain and undetermined. Thus we may ob- serve men, who, not forbearing to use the ordinary words of their lan- guage till they have learned their precise signification, change the idea they make this or that term stand for, almost as often as they use it. He that does this, out of uncertainty of what he should leave out, or put into his idea of church or idolatry, every time he thinks of either, and holds not steady to any one precise combination of ideas that makes it up, is said to have a confused idea of idolatry, or the church ; though this be still for the same reason as the former, viz. because a mutable idea, (if we will allow it to be one idea,) cannot belong to one name rather than ano- ther ; and so loses the distinction that distinct names are designed for. Sect. 10. Confusion, without reference to names, hardly conceivable. — By what has been said, we may observe how much names, as supposed steady signs of things, and by their difference to stand for and keep things distinct that in themselves are different, are the occasion of denominating ideas distinct or confused, by a secret and unobserved reference the mind makes of its ideas to such names. This perhaps will be fuller understood after what I say of words, in the third book, has been read and considered. But without taking notice of such a reference of ideas to distinct names, as the signs of distinct things, it will be hard to say what a confused idea is. And therefore when a man designs, by any name, a sort of things, or any one particular thing, distinct from all others ; the complex idea he an- nexes to that name is the more distinct, the more particular the ideas are, and the greater and more determinate the number and order of them arc, whereof it is made up. For the more it has of these, the more it has still of the perceivable differences, whereby it is kept separate and distinct from all ideas belonging to other names, even those that approach nearest to it ; and thereby all confusion with them is avoided. Sect. 11. Confusion concerns always two ideas. — Confusion, making it a difficulty to separate two things that should be separated, concerns always two ideas ; and those most wliich most approach one another. - Ch.29. OF CLEAR AND OBSCURE IDEAS. 245 Whenever therefore we suspect any idea to be conflisecl, we must examine what other it is in danger to be confounded with, or which it cannot easily be separated from ; and that will always be found an idea belonging to another name, and so should be a different thing, from which yet it is not sufficiently distinct ; being either the same with it, or making a part of it, or at least, as properly called by that name as the other it is ranked under ; and so keeps not that difference from that other idea, which the different names import. Sect. 12. Causes of confusion. — This, I think, is the confusion pro- per to ideas, which still carries with it a secret reference to names. At least, if there be any other confusion of ideas, this is that which most of all disorders men's thoughts and discourses: ideas, as ranked undernames, being those that for the most part men reason of within themselves, and always those which they commune about with others. And therefore where there are supposed two different ideas marked by two different names, which are not as distinguishable as the sounds that stand for them, there never fails to be confusion ; and where any ideas are distinct, as the ideas of those two sounds they are marked by, there can be between them no confusion. — The way to prevent it is to collect and unite into one com- plex idea, as precisely as is possible, all those ingredients whereby it is differenced fi-om others ; and to them, so united in a determinate number and order, apply steadily the same name. But this neither accommodating men's ease or vanity, or serving any design but that of naked truth, which is not always the thing aimed at, such exactness is rather to be wished than hoped for. And since the loose application of names to undetermin- ed, variable, and almost no ideas, serves both to cover our own ignorance, as well as to perplex and confound others, which goes for learning and superiority in knowledge, it is no wonder that most men should use it themselves, whilst they complain of it in others. Though, I think, no small part of the confusion to be found in the notions of men might by care and ingenuity be avoided, yet I am far fi-om concluding it every where wilful. Some ideas are so complex, and made up of so many parts, that the memory does not easily retain the very same precise combination of simple ideas under one name ; much less are we able constantly to divine for what precise complex idea such a name stands in another man's use of it. From the first of these, follows confusion in a man's own reasonings and opinions within himself; from the latter, frequent confusion in dis- coursing and arguing with others. But having more at large treated of words, their defects and abuses, in the following book, I shall here say no more of it. Sect. 13. Complex ideas may be distinct in one part, and confused in another. — Our complex ideas being made up of collections, and so variety of simple ones, may accordingly be very clear and distinct in one part, and very obscure and confused in another. In a man who speaks of a clii- liaedron, or a body of a thousand sides, the ideas of the figure may be very confused, though that of the number be very distinct ; so that he being able to discourse and demonstrate concerning that part of his complex idea which depends upon the number of a thousand, he is apt to think he has a. distinct idea of a chilisedron ; though it be plain he has no precise idea of its figure, so as to distinguish it by that, from one that has but 999 sides ; the not obser\ing whereof causes no small error in men's thoughts, and confusion in their discourses. Sect. 14. This, if not heeded, causes confusion in our arguings. — He that thinks he has a distinct idea of the figure of a chilisedron, let him for trial sake take another parcel of the same uniform matter, viz. gold or wax, of an equal bulk, and make it into a figure of 999 sides : he will, I doiAt not, be able to distinguish these two ideas one from another by the number of sides, and reason and argue distinctly about them, whilst he 246 OP HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. keeps his thouglits and reasoning to that part only of these ideas which is contained in tlicir numbers ; as that tlic sides of tlie one coukl be divided into two c(jnal numbers, and of the others not, &-c. But wiicn he goes about to distinguisli them by their figure, lie will there be presently at a loss, and not be able, I think, to frame in his mind two ideas, one of them distinct from the other, by the bare figure of these two pieces of gold, as he could, if the same parcels of gold were made one into a cube, the other a figure of five sides. In whicli incomi^lete ideas we are very apt to impose on ourselves, and wrangle with otiiers, especially where they have particular and familiar names. For being satisfied in that part of the idea, which we have clear, — and the name which is familiar to us being applied to the whole, containing that part also which is imperfect and obscure, — we are apt to use it fur that confused part, and draw deductions from it, in the obscure part of its signification, as confidently as we do from the other. Sect. 15. Instance in eternity. — Having frequently in our mouths the name eternity, we are apt to think we have a positive comprehensive idea of it, which is as much as to say that there is no part of that duration which is not clearly contained in our idea. It is true, that he who thinks so may have a clear idea of duration ; he may also have a very clear idea of a very great length of duration ; he may also have a clear idea of the comparison of that great one with still a greater : but it not being possible for him to include in his idea of any duration, let it be as great as it will, the whole e.xtent together of a duration, where he supposes no end, that part of his idea, which is still beyond the bounds of that large duration he^ represents to his own thoughts, is very obscure and undetermined. And hence it is, that in disputes and reasonings concerning eternity, or any other infinity, we are apt to blunder, and involve ourselves in manifest absurdities. Sect. 16. Divisibility of matter. — In matter we have no clear ideas of the smallness of parts much beyond the smallest that occur to any of our senses ; and therefore when we talk of the divisibility of matter in infinitum, though we have clear ideas of division and divisibility, and have also clear ideas of parts made out of a whole by division, yet we have but very obscure and confused ideas of corpuscles, or minute bodies so to be divided, v;hen by former divisions they are reduced to a smallness much exceeding the perception of any of our senses; and so all that we have clear and distinct ideas of, is of what division in general or abstractedly is, and the relation of totum and parts ; but of the bulk of the body to be thus infinitely divided afler certain progressions, I think we have no clear nor distinct idea at all. For I ask any one, whether taking the smallest atom of dust he ever saw, he has any distinct idea (bating still the number, which concerns not.- extension) betwixt tho 10(),000th, and the l,(H)0,()00th part of it. Or if ho thinks he can refine his ideas to that degree, without losing sight of them, let him add ten cyphers to each of those numbers. Such a degree of small- ness is not unreasonable to be supposed, since a division carried on so far brings it no nearer the end of infinite division than the first division into two halves does. I must confess, for my part, I have no clear distinct ideas of the different bulk or extension of those bodies, having but a very obscure one of either of them. So that, I think, when we talk of the division of bodies in infinitum, our idea of their distinct bulks, which is the subject and foundation of division, comes, after a little progression, to be con- founded and almost lost in obscurity. For that idea winch is to represent only bigness, must ho vcrj' obscure and confused, which we cannot distin- guish from one ten times as big, hut only by number; so that we have clear, dis- tinct ideas, we may say, often and one, hut no distinct ideas of two such ex- tensions. It is i)lain from hence, that when we talk of infinite divisibility of body, or extension, our distinct and clear ideas arc only of numbers ; Ch. 29. OF CLEAR AND OBSCURE IDEAS. 247 but the clear distinct ideas of extension, after some progress of division, are quite lost: and of sucli miinite parts we liave no distinct ideas at all; but it returns, as all our ideas of infinite do, at last to that of number always to be added, but thereby never amounts to any distinct idea of ac- tual infinite parts. We have, it is true, a clear idea of division, as often as we think of it ; but thereby we have no more a clear idea of infinite parts in matter, than we have a clear idea of an infinite number, by being able still to add new numbers to any assigned numbers we have ; endless divisi- bility giving us no more a clear and distinct idea of actually infinite parts, than endless addibility (if I may so speak) gives us a clear and distinct idea of an actually infinite number, they both being only in a power still of increasing the number, be it already as great as it will. So that of what remains to be added (wherein consists the infinity,) we have but an obscure, imperfect, and confused idea ; from or about which we can argue or reason with no certainty or clearness, no more than we can in arithmetic about a number of which we have no such distinct idea, as we have of four or one hundred ; but only this relative obscure one, that compared to any other, it is still bigger ; and we have no more a clear positive idea of it when we say or conceive it is bigger, or more than 400,000,000, than if we should say it is bigger than forty or four; 400,000,000 having no nearer a proportion to the end of addition or number than four. For he that adds only four to four, and so proceeds, shall as soon come to the end of all addition, as he that adds 400,000,000 to 400,000,000. And so likewise in eternity, he that has an idea of but four years has as much a positive com- plete idea of eternity as he that has one of 400,000,000 of years : for what remains of eternity beyond either of these two numbers of years is as clear to the one as the other, i. e. neither of them has any clear positive idea of it at all. For he that adds only four years to four, and so on, shall as soon reach eternity as he that adds 400,000,000 of years, and so on ; or, if he please, doubles the increase as often as he will ; the remaining abyss being still as far beyond the end of all these progressions as it is from the length of a day or an hour. For nothing finite bears any proportion to infinite ; and therefore our ideas, which are all finite, cannot bear any. Thus it is also in our ideas of extension, when we increase it by addition, as well as when we diminish it by division, and would enlarge our thoughts to infinite space. After a few doublings of those ideas of extension, which are the largest we are accustomed to have, we lose the clear distinct idea of that space ; it becomes a confusedly great one, with a surplus of still greater ; about which, when we would argue or reason, we shall always find our- selves at a loss ; confused ideas in our arguings and deductions from that part of them which is confused always leading us into confusion. CHAPTER XXX. OF REAL AND FANTASTICAL IDEAS. Sect. 1. Real ideas are conformable to their archetypes. — Besides what we have already mentioned concerning ideas, other considerations belong to them, in reference to things from whence they are taken, or which they may be supposed to represent : and thus, I think, they may come under a threefold distinction ; and are. First, either real or fantastical. Secondly, adequate or inadequate. Thirdly, true or false. First, by real ideas, I mean such as have a foundation in nature ; euch as 248 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. Jiave a conformity witli the real being and existence of tilings, or with their archetypes. Fantastical or ciiimcrical I call such as have no foundation in nature, nor have any conformity to that reality of being to which they are tacitly referred as to their archetypes. If we examine tlie several sorts of ideas before mentioned, we shall hnd, that, Sect. 2. ^Simple ideas all real. — First, our simple ideas are all real, all agree to the reality of things, not that they are all of them the images or representations of what does exist ; the contrary whereof, in all but the primary qualities of bodies, hath been already shown. But though white- ness and coldness are no more in snow than pain is, yet those ideas of whiteness and coldness, pain, &-c. being in us the effects of powers in things without us, ordained by our Maker, to produce in us such sensations, they are real ideas in us, whereby we distinguish the qualities that are really in things themselves. For these several appearances being designed to be the inarlcs whereby we are to know and distinguish things which we liave to do Willi, our ideas do as well serve us to that purpose, and are as real distinguishing characters, whether they be only constant effects, or else exact resemblances of something in the things themselves ; the reaUty lying in that steady correspondence they have with the distinct constitutions of real beings. But whether they answer to those constitutions, as to causes or patterns, it matters not; it suffices that they are constantly produced by them. And thus our simple ideas are all real and true, because they an- swer and agree to those powers ' of things which produce them in our minds ; that being all that is requisite to make them real, and not fictions at pleasure. For in simple ideas (as has been shown) the mind is wholly confined to the operation of tilings upon it, and can make to itself no simple idea more than what it has received. Sect. 3. Complex ideas are voluntary combinations. — Though the mind be wholly passive in respect of its simple ideas, yet I think we may say, it is not so in respect of its complex ideas : for those being combina- tions of simple ideas put together, and united under one general name, it is plain that the mind of man uses some kind of liberty in forming those com- plex ideas; how else comes it to pass that one man's idea of gold, or justice, is different from another's ] but because he lias put in, or left out of his, some simple idea which the other has not. The question then is, which of these are real, and which barely imaginary combinations! What collec- tions agree to the reality cf things, and what not; and to this I say, that, Sect. 4. Mixed modes, made of consistent ideas, are real. — Secondly, mixed modes and relations having no other reality but what they have in the minds of men, there is nothing more required to this kind of ideas to make them real, but that they be so framed, that there be a possibility of existing conformable to them. These ideas themselves being archetypes, cannot differ from their archetypes, and so cannot be chimerical, unless any one will jumble together in them inconsistent ideas. Indeed, as any of them have the names of a known language assigned to them, by which he that has them in his mind would signify them to others, so bare possi- bility of existing is not enough ; they must have a conformity to the ordi- nary signification of the name that is given them, that they may not be thought fantastical ; as if a man would give the name of justice to that idea which common use calls liberality. But this fantasticalness relates more to propriety of speech than reality of ideas : for a man to be undisturbed in danger, sedately to consider what is fittest to be done, and to execute it steadily, is a mixed mode, or a complex idea of an action which may exist. But to be undisturbed in danger, without using one's reason or in- dustry, is what is also possible to be, and so is as real an idea as the otlier. Though the first of these, having the name courage given to it, may, in respect of that name, be a right or wrong idea : but the other, whilst it has not a common received name of any known language assigned to it, is Ch. 30. OP REAL AND FANTASTICAL IDEAS. 249 not capable of any deformity, being made with no reference to any thing but itself. Sect. 5. Ideas of substances are real, when they agree with the exist- ence of things. — Tliirdly, our complex ideas of substances being made all of them in reference to things existing without us, and intended to be re- presentations of substances, as they really are, are no farther real than as they are such combinations of simple ideas as are really united, and co- exist in things without us. On the contrary, those are fantastical, which are made up of such collections of simple ideas as were really never united, never were found together in any substance; v.g. a rational creature, con- sisting of a horse's head, joined to a body of human shape, or such as the centaurs are described : or, a body yellow, very malleable, fusible, and fixed, but lighter than common water : or a uniform, unorganized body, consisting, as to sense, all of similar parts, with perception and voluntary motion joined to it. Whether such substances as tliese can possibly exist or no, it is probable we do not know : but be that as it will, these ideas of substances being made conformable to no pattern existing that we know, and consisting of such collections of ideas as no substance ever showed us united together, they ouglit to pass with us for barely imaginary: but much more are those complex ideas so, which contain in them any inconsistency or contradiction of their parts. CHAPTER XXXI. OF ADEQUATE AND INADEQUATE IDEAS. Sect. 1. Adequate ideas are such as perfectly represent their arche- types.— Of our real ideas, some are adequate and some are inadequate. Those I call adequate, which perfectly represent those archetypes which the mind supposes them taken from ; which it intends them to stand for, and to which it refers them. Inadequate ideas are such which are but a partial or incomplete representation of those archetypes to which they are referred. Upon which account it is plain. Sect. 2. Simple ideas all adequate. — First, that all our simple ideas are adequate: because, being nothing but the eifects of certain powers in things, fitted and ordained by God to produce such sensations iiijis, they cannot but be correspondent and adequate to those powers ; and we are sure they agree to the reality of things. For if sugar produce in us the ideas which we call whiteness and sweetness, we are sure there is a povver in sugar to produce those ideas in our minds, or else they could not have been produced by it. And so each sensation answering the power that operates on any of our senses, the idea so produced is a real idea (and not a fiction of the mind, which has no power to produce any simple idea), and cannot but be adequate, since it ought only to answer that power ; and so all sim])le ideas are adequate. It is true, the things producing in us these simple ideas, are but few of them denominated by us as if they were only the causes of tiiem, but as if those ideas were real beings in them. For though fire be called painful to the touch, whereby is signified the power of producing in us the idea of pain, yet it is denominated also liglit and heat; as if light and heat were really something in tlie fire more than a power to excite these ideas in us, and tiierefore are called qualities in, or of the fire. But these being notliing, in truth, but powers to excite such ideas in us, I must in that sense be understood when I speak of secondary > qualities, as being in things ; or of their ideas, as being the objects tliat excite them in us. Such ways of speaking, though accommodated to the vulgar notions, without which one cannot be well understood, yet truly 2G 250 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book Q. signify nothincj but those powers which are in tilings to excite certain sensations or ideas in us : since were tiicrc no fit organs to receive tlie imjjressions tire nialces on tlie sight and towcli, nor a mind joined to tiiose organs to receive tlie ideas ot" light and heat by those impressions from the fire or sun, there would yet be no more light or heat in the world than there would be pain, if there were no sensible creature to feel it, though the sun should continue just as it is now, and mount Etna llame higher than ever it did. Solidity and extension, and the termination of it, figure, with motion and rest, whereof we have the ideas, would be really in the world as they are, whether there wore any sensible being to perceive them or no ; and therefore we have reason to look on those as the real modifi- cations of matter, and such are the exciting causes of all our various sen- sations from bodies. But this being an inquiry not belonging to this place, I shall enter no farther into it, but proceed to show what complex ideas are adequate, and what not. Sect. D. Modes are all adequate. — Secondly, our complex ideas of modes being voluntary collections of simple ideas, which the mind puts to- gether without reference to any real archetypes or standing patterns exist- ing any where, are and cannot but be adequate ideas. Because they not being intended for copies of things really existing, but for archetypes made ; / by the mind to rank and denominate things by, cannot want any thing;! they having each of them that combination of ideas, and thereby that per- fection which the mind intended they should, so that the mind acquiesces in them, and can find nothing wanting. Thus, by having the idea of a figure, with three sides meeting at three angles, I have a complete idea, wherein I require nothing else to make it perfect. That the mind is satis- fied with the perfection of this its idea, is plain in that it does not con- ceive that any understanding hath, or can have, a more complete or per- fect idea of that thing it signifies by the word triangle, supposing it to exist, than itself has in that complex idea of three sides and three angles ; in which is contained all that is or can be essential to it, or necessary to complete it, wherever or however it exists. But in our ideas of substances it is otherwise. For there desiring to copy things as they really do exist, and to represent to ourselves that constitution on which all their properties depend, we perceive our ideas attain not that perfection we intend ; we . find they still want something we should bo glad were in them, and so are r all inadequate. But mixed modes and relations, being archetypes without ' patterns, and so having nothing to represent but themselves, cannot but be adequate, every thing being so to itself He that at first put together the idea of danger, perceived absence of disorder from fear, sedate con- sideration of what was justly to be done, and executing that without dis- turbance, or being deterred by the danger of it, had certainly in his mind that complex idea made up of that combination ; and intending it to be no- thing else but what it is, nor to have in it any other simple ideas but what it hath, it could not also but bo an adequate idea: and laying this up in his memory, with the name courage annexed to it, to signify to others, and denominate from thence any action he should observe to agree with it, had thereby a standard to measure and denominate actions by, as they agreed to it. This idea thus made, and laid up for a pattern, must necessarily be adequate, being referred to nothing else but itself, nor made by any other ori- ginal, but the good liking and will of him that first made this combination. Sect. 4. Modes, in reference to settled names, may he inadequate. — Indeed another coming after, and in conversation learning from him the word courage, may make an idea to which he gives the name courage, dif- ferent from what the first author api)lied it to, and has in his mind when he uses it. And in this case, if he designs that his idea in thinking should be conformable to the other's idea, as the name he uses in speaking is con- formable in sound to his, from whom he learned it, liis idea may be very Ch. 31. OP ADEQUATE AND INADEQUATE IDEAS. 251 wrong and inadequate : because, in this case, making the other man's idea the pattern of his idea in thinking, as the other man's word or sound is the pattern of his in speaking, his idea is so far defective and inadequate, as it is distant from the archetype and pattern he refers it to, and intends to express and signify by the name he uses for it ; which name he would have to be a sign of the other man's idea (to wliich, in its proper use, it is pri- marily annexed) and of his own, as agreeing to it: to which, if his own does not exactly correspond, it is faulty and inadequate. Sect. 5. Therefore these complex ideas of modes, when they are re- ferred by the mind, and intended to correspond to the ideas in the mind of . some other intelligent being, expressed by the names we apply to them, they may be very deficient, wrong, and inadequate ; because they agree not to that which the mind designs to be their archetype and pattern ; in which respect only, any idea of modes can be wrong, imperfect, or inade- quate. And on this account our ideas of mixed modes are the most liable to be faulty of any other ; "but this refers more to proper speaking than knowing right. Sect. 6. Ideas of substances, as referred to real essences, not ade- quate.— Thirdly, what ideas we have of substances, I have above shown. Now, those ideas have in the mind a double reference : 1. Sometimes they are referred to a supposed real essence of each species of things. 2. Some- times they are only designed to be pictures and representations in the mind, of things that do exist by ideas of those qualities that are discover- able in them. In both which ways these copies of those originals and archetypes are imperfect and inadequate. First, it is usual for men to make the names of substances stand for things, as supposed to have certain real essences, whereby they are of this or that species : and names standing for nothing but the ideas that are iwj men's minds, they must consequently refer their ideas to such real essen- ces as to their archetypes. That men (especially such as have been bred up in the learning taught in this part of the world) do suppose certain specific essences of substances, which each individual, in its several kinds, is made conformable to, and partakes of, is so far from needing proof, that it will be thought strange if any one should do otherwise. And thus they ordi- narily apply the specific names they rank particular substances under to things as distinguished by such specific real essences. Who is there almost, who would not take it amiss, if it should be doubted, whether he called himself a man, with any other meaning, than as having the real essence of a man ] And yet if you demand what those real essences are, it is plain men are ignorant, and know them not. From whence it follows, that the ideas they have in their minds, being referred to real essences, as to arche. types which are unknown, must be so far fi'om being adequate, that they cannot be supposed to be any representation of them at all. The com- plex ideas we have of substances are, as it has been shown, certain collec- tions of simple ideas that have been observed or supposed constantly to exist together. But such a complex idea cannot be the real essence of any substance ; for then the properties we discover in that body would depend on that complex idea, and be deducible from it, and their necessary con- nexion with it be known: as all properties of a triangle depend on, and as far as they are discoverable, are deducible from, the complex idea of three lines, including a space. But it is plain, that in our complex ideas of sub- stances, are not contained such ideas, on which all the other qualities that are to be found in them do depend. The common idea men have of iron, is a body of a certain colour, weight and hardness; and a property that they look on as belonging to it, is malleableness. But yet this pro- perty has no necessary connexion with that complex idea, or any part of it; and there is no more reason to think that malleableness depends on that colour, weight and hardness, than that that colour, or that weight depends 252 OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Book 2. on its malleablencss. And yot, tlion