diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53679-8.txt | 15539 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53679-8.zip | bin | 294424 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53679-h.zip | bin | 544446 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53679-h/53679-h.htm | 19725 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53679-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 244960 -> 0 bytes |
8 files changed, 17 insertions, 35264 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bfea698 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #53679 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/53679) diff --git a/old/53679-8.txt b/old/53679-8.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 4b64f5d..0000000 --- a/old/53679-8.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,15539 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Philosophical Letters: or, modest -Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy, by Margaret Cavendish - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Philosophical Letters: or, modest Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy - -Author: Margaret Cavendish - -Release Date: December 6, 2016 [EBook #53679] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PHILOSOPHICAL LETTERS: OR *** - - - - -Produced by Clare Graham and Marc D'Hooghe at Free -Literature (online soon in an extended version, also linking -to free sources for education worldwide ... MOOC's, -educational materials,...) Images generously made available -by the Internet Archive. - - - - - - - -Philosophical Letters: - -OR, - -MODEST REFLECTIONS -Upon some Opinions in -_NATURAL PHILOSOPHY_, -MAINTAINED -By several Famous and Learned Authors of this Age, -Expressed by way of LETTERS: - -By the Thrice Noble, Illustrious, and Excellent Princess, -The Lady MARCHIONESS of _NEWCASTLE_. - -_LONDON_, Printed in the Year, 1664. - - - - -TO HER EXCELLENCY -The Lady Marchioness of NEWCASTLE -On her Book of Philosophical Letters. - - - _'Tis Supernatural, nay 'tis Divine, - To write whole Volumes ere I can a line. - I 'mplor'd the Lady Muses, those fine things, - But they have broken all their Fidle-strings - And cannot help me; Nay, then I did try - Their_ Helicon, _but that is grown all dry:_ - _Then on_ Parnassus _I did make a sallie, - But that's laid level, like a Bowling-alley; - Invok'd my Muse, found it a Pond, a Dream, - To your eternal Spring, and running Stream; - So clear and fresh, with Wit and Phansie store, - As then despair did bid me write no more._ - - W. Newcastle. - - - - -TO HIS EXCELLENCY -The Lord Marquis of NEWCASTLE. - - -My Noble Lord, - -Although you have, always encouraged me in my harmless pastime of -Writing, yet was I afraid that your Lordship would be angry with -me for Writing and Publishing this Book, by reason it is a Book -of Controversies, of which I have heard your Lordship say, That -Controversies and Disputations make Enemies of Friends, and that such -Disputations and Controversies as these, are a pedantical kind of -quarrelling, not becoming Noble Persons. But your Lordship will be -pleased to consider in my behalf, that it is impossible for one Person -to be of every one's Opinion, if their opinions be different, and that -my Opinions in Philosophy, being new, and never thought of, at least -not divulged by any, but my self, are quite different from others: For -the Ground of my Opinions is, that there is not onely a Sensitive, but -also a Rational Life and Knowledge, and so a double Perception in all -Creatures: And thus my opinions being new, are not so easily understood -as those, that take up several pieces of old opinions, of which -they patch up a new Philosophy, (if new may be made of old things,) -like a Suit made up of old Stuff bought at the Brokers: Wherefore to -find out a Truth, at least a Probability in Natural Philosophy by a -new and different way from other Writers, and to make this way more -known, easie and intelligible, I was in a manner forced to write this -Book; for I have not contradicted those Authors in any thing, but -what concerns and is opposite to my opinions; neither do I anything, -but what they have done themselves, as being common amongst them to -contradict each other: which may as well be allowable, as for Lawyers -to plead at the Barr in opposite Causes. For as Lawyers are not Enemies -to each other, but great Friends, all agreeing from the Barr, although -not at the Barr: so it is with Philosophers, who make their Opinions -as their Clients, not for Wealth, but for Fame, and therefore have no -reason to become Enemies to each other, by being Industrious in their -Profession. All which considered, was the cause of Publishing this -Book; wherein although I dissent from their opinions, yet doth not this -take off the least of the respect and esteem I have of their Merits -and Works. But if your Lordship do but pardon me, I care not if I be -condemned by others; for your Favour is more then the World to me, for -which all the actions of my Life shall be devoted and ready to serve -you, as becomes, - -My Lord, - -_Your Lordships_ - -_honest Wife, and humble Servant_, - -M. N. - - - - -TO THE MOST FAMOUS UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. - - -Most Noble, Ingenious, Learned, and Industrious Students. - -_Be not offended, that I dedicate to you this weak and infirm work of -mine; for though it be not an offering worthy your acceptance, yet it -is as much as I can present for this time; and I wish from my Soul, I -might be so happy as to have some means or ways to express my Gratitude -for your Magnificent favours to me, having done me more honour then -ever I could expect, or give sufficient thanks for: But your Generosity -is above all Gratitude, and your Favours above all Merit, like as your -Learning is above Contradiction: And I pray God your University may -flourish to the end of the World, for the Service of the Church, the -Truth of Religion, the Salvation of Souls, the instruction of Youth, -the preservation of Health, and prolonging of Life, and for the -increase of profitable Arts and Sciences: so as your several studies -may be, like several Magistrates, united for the good and benefit of -the whole Common-wealth, nay, the whole World. May Heaven prosper you, -the World magnifie you, and Eternity record your same; Which are the -hearty wishes and prayers of,_ - -Your most obliged Servant - -_M. NEWCASTLE._ - - - - -A PREFACE TO THE READER. - - -_Worthy Readers_, - -I did not write this Book out of delight, love or humour to -contradiction; for I would rather praise, then contradict any Person -or Persons that are ingenious; but by reason Opinion is free, and may -pass without a pass-port, I took the liberty to declare my own opinions -as other Philosophers do, and to that purpose I have here set down -several famous and learned Authors opinions, and my answers to them in -the form of Letters, which was the easiest way for me to write; and by -so doing, I have done that, which I would have done unto me; for I am -as willing to have my opinions contradicted, as I do contradict others: -for I love Reason so well, that whosoever can bring most rational -and probable arguments, shall have my vote, although against my own -opinion. But you may say, If contradictions were frequent, there would -be no agreement amongst Mankind. I answer; it is very true: Wherefore -Contradictions are better in general Books, then in particular -Families, and in Schools better then in Publick States, and better in -Philosophy then in Divinity. All which considered, I shun, as much as I -can, not to discourse or write of either Church or State. But I desire -so much favour, or rather Justice of you, _Worthy Readers_, as not to -interpret my objections or answers any other ways then against several -opinions in Philosophy; for I am confident there is not any body, that -doth esteem, respect and honour learned and ingenious Persons more then -I do: Wherefore judg me neither to be of a contradicting humor, nor of -a vain-glorious mind for differing from other mens opinions, but rather -that it is done out of love to Truth, and to make my own opinions the -more intelligible, which cannot better be done then by arguing and -comparing other mens opinions with them. The Authors whose opinions I -mention, I have read, as I found them printed, in my native Language, -except _Des Cartes_, who being in Latine, I had some few places -translated to me out of his works; and I must confess, that since -I have read the works of these learned men, I understand the names -and terms of Art a little better then I did before; but it is not so -much as to make me a Scholar, nor yet so little, but that, had I read -more before I did begin to write my other Book called _Philosophical -Opinions_, they would have been more intelligible; for my error was, -I began to write so early, that I had not liv'd so long as to be -able to read many Authors; I cannot say, I divulged my opinions as -soon as I had conceiv'd them, but yet I divulged them too soon to -have them artificial and methodical. But since what is past, cannot -be recalled, I must desire you to excuse those faults, which were -committed for want of experience and learning. As for School-learning, -had I applied my self to it, yet I am confident I should never have -arrived to any; for I am so uncapable of Learning, that I could never -attain to the knowledge of any other Language but my native, especially -by the Rules of Art: wherefore I do not repent that I spent not my -time in Learning, for I consider, it is better to write wittily then -learnedly; nevertheless, I love and esteem Learning, although I am -not capable of it. But you may say, I have expressed neither Wit nor -Learning in my Writings: Truly, if not, I am the more sorry for it; but -self-conceit, which is natural to mankind, especially to our Sex, did -flatter and secretly perswade me that my Writings had Sense and Reason, -Wit and Variety; but Judgment being not called to Counsel, I yielded -to Self-conceits flattery, and so put out my Writings to be Printed as -fast as I could, without being reviewed or Corrected: Neither did I -fear any censure, for Self-conceit had perswaded me, I should be highly -applauded; wherefore I made such haste, that I had three or four Books -printed presently after each other. - -But to return to this present Work, I must desire you, _worthy -Readers_, to read first my Book called _Philosophical and Physical -Opinions_, before you censure this, for this Book is but an explanation -of the former, wherein is contained the Ground of my Opinions, and -those that will judge well of a Building, must first consider -the Foundation; to which purpose I will repeat some few Heads and -Principles of my Opinions, which are these following: First, That -Nature is Infinite, and the Eternal Servant of God: Next, That she is -Corporeal, and partly self-moving, dividable and composable; that all -and every particular Creature, as also all perception and variety in -Nature, is made by corporeal self-motion, which I name sensitive and -rational matter, which is life and knowledg, sense and reason. Again, -That these sensitive and rational parts of matter are the purest -and subtilest parts of Nature, as the active parts, the knowing, -understanding and prudent parts, the designing, architectonical and -working parts, nay, the Life and Soul of Nature, and that there is -not any Creature or part of nature without this Life and Soul; and -that not onely Animals, but also Vegetables, Minerals and Elements, -and what more is in Nature, are endued with this Life and Soul, Sense -and Reason: and because this Life and Soul is a corporeal Substance, -it is both dividable and composable; for it divides and removes parts -from parts, as also composes and joyns parts to parts, and works in a -perpetual motion without rest; by which actions not any Creature can -challenge a particular Life and Soul to it self, but every Creature may -have by the dividing and composing nature of this self-moving matter -more or fewer natural souls and lives. - -These and the like actions of corporeal Nature or natural Matter -you may find more at large described in my afore-mentioned Book of -_Philosophical Opinions_, and more clearly repeated and explained in -this present. 'Tis true, the way of arguing I use, is common, but the -Principles, Heads and Grounds of my Opinions are my own, not borrowed -or stolen in the least from any; and the first time I divulged them, -was in the year 1653: since which time I have reviewed, reformed and -reprinted them twice; for at first, as my Conceptions were new and my -own, so my Judgment was young, and my Experience little, so that I had -not so much knowledge as to declare them artificially and methodically; -for as I mentioned before, I was always unapt to learn by the Rules of -Art. But although they may be defective for want of Terms of Art, and -artificial expressions, yet I am sure they are not defective for want -of Sense and Reason: And if any one can bring more Sense and Reason to -disprove these my opinions, I shall not repine or grieve, but either -acknowledge my error, if I find my self in any, or defend them as -rationally as I can, if it be but done justly and honestly, without -deceit, spight, or malice; for I cannot chuse but acquaint you, _Noble -Readers_, I have been informed, that if I should be answered in my -Writings, it would be done rather under the name and cover of a Woman, -then of a Man, the reason is, because no man dare or will set his name -to the contradiction of a Lady; and to confirm you the better herein, -there has one Chapter of my Book called _The Worlds Olio_, treating of -a Monastical Life, been answer'd already in a little Pamphlet, under -the name of a woman, although she did little towards it; wherefore it -being a Hermaphroditical Book, I judged it not worthy taking notice of. -The like shall I do to any other that will answer this present work of -mine, or contradict my opinions indirectly with fraud and deceit. But -I cannot conceive why it should be a disgrace to any man to maintain -his own or others opinions against a woman, so it be done with respect -and civility; but to become a cheat by dissembling, and quit the -Breeches for a Petticoat, meerly out of spight and malice, is base, and -not fit for the honour of a man, or the masculine sex. Besides, it will -easily be known; for a Philosopher or Philosopheress is not produced on -a sudden. Wherefore, although I do not care, nor fear contradiction, -yet I desire it may be done without fraud or deceit, spight and malice; -and then I shall be ready to defend my opinions the best I can, whilest -I live, and after I am dead, I hope those that are just and honorable -will also defend me from all sophistry, malice, spight and envy, for -which Heaven will bless them. In the mean time, _Worthy Readers_, I -should rejoyce to see that my Works are acceptable to you, for if you -be not partial, you will easily pardon those faults you find, when you -do consider both my sex and breeding; for which favour and justice, I -shall always remain, - -_Your most obliged Servant,_ - -M. N. - - - - -Philosophical Letters. - -Sect. I. - -I. - - -_MADAM,_ - -You have been pleased to send me the Works of four Famous and Learned -Authors, to wit, of two most Famous Philosophers of our Age, _Des -Cartes_, and _Hobbs_, and of that Learned Philosopher and Divine Dr. -_More_, as also of that Famous Physician and Chymist _Van Helmont_. -Which Works you have sent me not onely to peruse, but also to give -my judgment of them, and to send you word by the usual way of our -Correspondence, which is by Letters, how far, and wherein I do dissent -from these Famous Authors, their Opinions in _Natural Philosophy_. To -tell you truly, _Madam_, your Commands did at first much affright me, -for it did appear, as if you had commanded me to get upon a high Rock, -and fling my self into the Sea, where neither a Ship, nor a Plank, nor -any kind of help was near to rescue me, and save my life; but that I -was forced to sink, by reason I cannot swim: So I having no Learning -nor Art to assist me in this dangerous undertaking, thought, I must -of necessity perish under the rough censures of my Readers, and be -not onely accounted a fool for my labour, but a vain and presumptuous -person, to undertake things surpassing the ability of my performance; -but on the other side I considered first, that those Worthy Authors, -were they my censurers, would not deny me the same liberty they take -themselves; which is, that I may dissent from their Opinions, as well -as they dissent from others, and from amongst themselves: And if I -should express more Vanity then Wit, more Ignorance then Knowledg, more -Folly then Discretion, it being according to the Nature of our Sex, I -hoped that my Masculine Readers would civilly excuse me, and my Female -Readers could not justly condemn me. Next I considered with my self, -that it would be a great advantage for my Book called _Philosophical -Opinions_, as to make it more perspicuous and intelligible by the -opposition of other Opinions, since two opposite things placed near -each other, are the better discerned; for I must confess, that when -I did put forth my Philosophical Work at first, I was not so well -skilled in the Terms or Expressions usual in _Natural Philosophy_; and -therefore for want of their knowledg, I could not declare my meaning so -plainly and clearly as I ought to have done, which may be a sufficient -argument to my Readers, that I have not read heretofore any _Natural -Philosophers_, and taken some Light from them; but that my Opinions -did meerly issue from the Fountain of my own Brain, without any other -help or assistance. Wherefore since for want of proper Expressions, -my named Book of _Philosophy_ was accused of obscurity and intricacy, -I thought your Commands would be a means to explain and clear it the -better, although not by an Artificial way, as by Logical Arguments or -Mathematical Demonstrations, yet by expressing my Sense and Meaning -more properly and clearly then I have done heretofore: But the chief -reason of all was, the Authority of your Command, which did work so -powerfully with me, that I could not resist, although it were to the -disgrace of my own judgment and wit; and therefore I am fully resolved -now to go on as far, and as well as the Natural strength of my Reason -will reach: But since neither the strength of my Body, nor of my -understanding, or wit, is able to mark every line, or every word of -their works, and to argue upon them, I shall onely pick out the ground -Opinions of the aforementioned Authors, and those which do directly -dissent from mine, upon which I intend to make some few Reflections, -according to the ability of my Reason; and I shall meerly go upon the -bare Ground of _Natural Philosophy_, and not mix Divinity with it, -as many Philosophers use to do, except it be in those places, where -I am forced by the Authors Arguments to reflect upon it, which yet -shall be rather with an expression of my ignorance, then a positive -declaration of my opinion or judgment thereof; for I think it not onely -an absurdity, but an injury to the holy Profession of Divinity to draw -her to the Proofs in _Natural Philosophy_; wherefore I shall strictly -follow the Guidance of _Natural Reason_, and keep to my own ground and -Principles as much as I can; which that I may perform the better, I -humbly desire the help and assistance of your Favour, that according to -that real and intire Affection you bear to me, you would be pleased to -tell me unfeignedly, if I should chance to err or contradict but the -least probability of truth in any thing; for I honor Truth so much, as -I bow down to its shadow with the greatest respect and reverence; and I -esteem those persons most, that love and honor Truth with the same zeal -and fervor, whether they be Ancient or Modern Writers. - -Thus, _Madam_, although I am destitute of the help of Arts, yet being -supported by your Favour and wise Directions, I shall not fear any -smiles of scorn, or words of reproach; for I am confident you will -defend me against all the mischievous and poisonous Teeth of malicious -detractors. I shall besides, implore the assistance of the Sacred -Church, and the Learned Schools, to take me into their Protection, and -shelter my weak endeavours: For though I am but an ignorant and simple -Woman, yet I am their devoted and honest Servant, who shall never quit -the respect and honor due to them, but live and die theirs, as also, - -MADAM, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble and faithful Servant._ - -M. N. - - - - -II. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Before I begin my Reflections upon the Opinions of those Authors you -sent me, I will answer first your Objection concerning the Ground of my -Philosophy, which is Infinite Matter: For you were pleased to mention, -That you could not well apprehend, how it was possible, that many -Infinites could be contained in one Infinite, since one Infinite takes -up all Place Imaginary, leaving no room for any other; Also, if one -Infinite should be contained in an other Infinite, that which contains, -must of necessity be bigger then that which is contained, whereby the -Nater of Infinite would be lost; as having no bigger nor less, but -being of an Infinite quantity. - -First of all, _Madam_, there is no such thing as All in Infinite, nor -any such thing as All the Place, for Infinite is not circumscribed -nor limited: Next, as for that one Infinite cannot be in an other -Infinite, I answer, as well as one Finite can be in another Finite; -for one Creature is not onely composed of Parts, but one Part lies -within another, and one Figure within another, and one Motion within -another. As for example, Animal Kind, have they not Internal and -External Parts, and so Internal and External Motions? And are not -Animals, Vegetables and Minerals inclosed in the Elements? But as for -Infinites, you must know, _Madam_, that there are several kindes of -Infinites. For there is first Infinite in quantity or bulk, that is -such a big and great Corporeal substance, which exceeds all bounds -and limits of measure, and may be called Infinite in Magnitude. Next -there is Infinite in Number, which exceeds all numeration and account, -and may be termed Infinite in Multitude; Again there is Infinite in -Quality; as for example, Infinite degrees of softness, hardness, -thickness, thinness, heat and cold, &c. also Infinite degrees of -Motion, and so Infinite Creations, Infinite Compositions, Dissolutions, -Contractions, Dilations, Digestions, Expulsions; also Infinite degrees -of Strength, Knowledg, Power, &c. Besides there is Infinite in Time, -which is properly named Eternal. Now, when I say, that there is but -one Infinite, and that Infinite is the Onely Matter, I mean infinite -in bulk and quantity. And this Onely matter, because it is Infinite -in bulk, must of necessity be divisible into infinite Parts, that is, -infinite in number, not in bulk or quantity; for though Infinite Parts -in number make up one infinite in quantity, yet they considered in -themselves, cannot be said Infinite, because every Part is of a certain -linked and circumscribed Figure, Quantity and Proportion, whereas -Infinite hath no limits nor bounds: besides it is against the nature -of a single Part to be Infinite, or else there would be no difference -between the Part and the whole, the nature of a Part requiring that it -must be less then its whole, but all what is less hath a determined -quantity, and so becomes finite. Therefore it is no absurdity to say, -that an Infinite may have both Finite and Infinite Parts, Finite in -Quantity, Infinite in Number. But those that say, if there were an -Infinite Body, that each of its Parts must of necessity be Infinite -too, are much mistaken; for it is a contradiction in the same Terms -to say One Infinite Part, for the very Name of a Part includes a -Finiteness, but take all parts of an Infinite Body together, then you -may rightly say they are infinite. Nay Reason will inform you plainly, -for example: Imagine an Infinite number of grains of Corn in one heap, -surely if the number of Grains be Infinite, you must grant of necessity -the bulk or body, which contains this infinite number of grains, to -be Infinite too; to wit, Infinite in quantity, and yet you will find -each Grain in it self to be Finite. But you will say, an Infinite -Body cannot have parts, for if it be Infinite, it must be Infinite in -Quantity, and therefore of one bulk, and one continued quantity, but -Infinite parts in number make a discrete quantity. I answer it is all -one; for a Body of a continued quantity may be divided and severed -into so many Parts either actually, or mentally in our Conceptions or -thoughts; besides nature is one continued Body, for there is no such -_Vacuum_ in Nature, as if her Parts did hang together like a linked -Chain; nor can any of her Parts subsist single and by it self, but all -the Parts of Infinite Nature, although they are in one continued Piece, -yet are they several and discerned from each other by their several -Figures. And by this, I hope, you will understand my meaning, when I -say, that several Infinites may be included or comprehended in one -Infinite; for by the one Infinite, I understand Infinite in Quantity, -which includes Infinite in Number, that is Infinite Parts; then -Infinite in Quality, as Infinite degrees of Rarity, Density, Swiftness, -Slowness, Hardness, Softness, &c. Infinite degrees of Motions, Infinite -Creations, Dissolutions, Contractions, Dilations, Alterations, &c. -Infinite degrees of Wisdom, Strength, Power, &c., and lastly Infinite -in Time or Duration, which is Eternity, for Infinite and Eternal are -inseparable; All which Infinites are contained in the Onely Matter -as many Letters are contained in one Word, many Words in one Line, -many Lines in one Book. But you will say perhaps, if I attribute an -Infinite Wisdom, Strength, Power, Knowledg, &c. to Nature; then Nature -is in all coequal with God, for God has the same Attributes: I answer, -Not at all; for I desire you to understand me rightly, when I speak -of Infinite Nature, and when I speak of the Infinite Deity, for there -is great difference between them, for it is one thing a Deitical or -Divine Infinite, and another a Natural Infinite; You know, that God -is a Spirit, and not a bodily substance, again that Nature is a Body, -and not a Spirit, and therefore none of these Infinites can obstruct -or hinder each other, as being different in their kinds, for a Spirit -being no Body, requires no place, Place being an attribute which onely -belongs to a Body, and therefore when I call Nature Infinite, I mean -an Infinite extension of Body, containing an Infinite number of Parts; -but what doth an Infinite extension of Body hinder the Infiniteness of -God, as an Immaterial Spiritual being? Next, when I do attribute an -Infinite Power, Wisdom, Knowledg, &c. to Nature, I do not understand -a Divine, but a Natural Infinite Wisdom and Power, that is, such as -properly belongs to Nature, and not a supernatural, as is in God; -For Nature having Infinite parts of Infinite degrees, must also have -an Infinite natural wisdom to order her natural Infinite parts and -actions, and consequently an Infinite natural power to put her wisdom -into act; and so of the rest of her attributes, which are all natural: -But Gods Attributes being supernatural, transcend much these natural -infinite attributes; for God, being the God of Nature, has not onely -Natures Infinite Wisdom and Power, but besides, a Supernatural and -Incomprehensible Infinite Wisdom and Power; which in no wayes do hinder -each other, but may very well subsist together. Neither doth Gods -Infinite Justice and his Infinite Mercy hinder each other; for Gods -Attributes, though they be all several Infinites, yet they make but one -Infinite. - -But you will say, If Nature's Wisdom and Power extends no further then -to natural things, it is not Infinite, but limited and restrained. -I answer, That doth not take away the Infiniteness of Nature; for -there may be several kinds of Infinites, as I related before, and one -may be as perfect an Infinite as the other in its kind. For example: -Suppose a Line to be extended infinitely in length, you will call -this Line Infinite, although it have not an Infinite breadth; Also, -if an infinite length and breadth joyn together, you will call it, an -infinite Superficies, although it wants an infinite depth; and yet -every Infinite, in its kinde, is a Perfect Infinite, if I may call it -so: Why then shall not Nature also be said to have an Infinite Natural -Wisdom and Power, although she has not a Divine Wisdom and Power? Can -we say, Man hath not a free Will, because he hath not an absolute free -Will, as God hath? Wherefore, a Natural Infinite, and the Infinite -God, may well stand together, without any opposition or hinderance, or -without any detracting or derogating from the Omnipotency and Glory -of God; for God remains still the God of Nature, and is an Infinite -Immaterial Purity, when as Nature is an Infinite Corporeal Substance; -and Immaterial and Material cannot obstruct each other. And though an -Infinite Corporeal cannot make an Infinite Immaterial, yet an Infinite -Immaterial can make an Infinite Corporeal, by reason there is as much -difference in the Power as in the Purity: And the disparity between the -Natural and Divine Infinite is such, as they cannot joyn, mix, and work -together, unless you do believe that Divine Actions can have allay. - -But you may say, Purity belongs onely to natural things, and none but -natural bodies can be said purified, but God exceeds all Purity. 'Tis -true: But if there were infinite degrees of Purity in Matter, Matter -might at last become Immaterial, and so from an Infinite Material turn -to an Infinite Immaterial, and from Nature to be God: A great, but an -impossible Change. For I do verily believe, that there can be but one -Omnipotent God, and he cannot admit of addition, or diminution; and -that which is Material cannot be Immaterial, and what is Immaterial -cannot become Material, I mean, so, as to change their natures; for -Nature is what God was pleased she should be; and will be what she -was, until God be pleased to make her otherwise. Wherefore there can -be no new Creation of matter, motion, or figure; nor any annihilation -of any matter, motion, or figure in Nature, unless God do create -a new Nature: For the changing of Matter into several particular -Figures, doth not prove an annihilation of particular Figures; nor -the cessation of particular Motions an annihilation of them: Neither -doth the variation of the Onely Matter produce an annihilation of any -part of Matter, nor the variation of figures and motions of Matter -cause an alteration in the nature of Onely Matter: Wherefore there -cannot be new Lives, Souls or Bodies in Nature; for, could there be -any thing new in Nature, or any thing annihilated, there would not -be any stability in Nature, as a continuance of every kind and sort -of Creatures, but there would be a confusion between the new and -old matter, motions, and figures, as between old and new Nature; In -truth, it would be like new Wine in old Vessels, by which all would -break into disorder. Neither can supernatural and natural effects be -mixt together, no more then material and immaterial things or beings: -Therefore it is probable, God has ordained Nature to work in her self -by his Leave, Will, and Free Gift. But there have been, and are still -strange and erroneous Opinions, and great differences amongst Natural -Philosophers, concerning the Principles of Natural things; some will -have them _Atoms_, others will have the first Principles to be _Salt, -Sulphur_ and _Mercury_; some will have them to be the four Elements, -as _Fire, Air, Water,_ and _Earth_; and others will have but one of -these Elements also some will have _Gas_ and _Blas, Ferments, Ideas_ -and the like; but what they believe to be Principles and Causes of -natural things, are onely Effects; for in all Probability it appears to -humane sense and reason, that the cause of every particular material -Creature is the onely and Infinite Matter, which has Motions and -Figures inseparably united; for Matter, Motion and Figure, are but -one thing, individable in its Nature. And as for Immaterial Spirits, -there is surely no such thing in Infinite Nature, to wit, so as to be -Parts of Nature; for Nature is altogether Material, but this opinion -proceeds from the separation or abstraction of Motion from Matter, -_viz._ that man thinks matter and motion to be dividable from each -other, and believes motion to be a thing by its self, naming it an -Immaterial thing, which has a being, but not a bodily substance: But -various and different effects do not prove a different Matter or Cause, -neither do they prove an unsetled Cause, onely the variety of Effects -hath obscured the Cause from the several parts, which makes Particular -Creatures partly Ignorant, and partly knowing. But in my opinion, -Nature is material, and not any thing in Nature, what belongs to her, -is immaterial; but whatsoever is Immaterial, is Supernatural, Therefore -Motions, Forms, Thoughts, Ideas, Conceptions, Sympathies, Antipathies, -Accidents, Qualities, as also Natural Life, and Soul, are all Material: -And as for Colours, Sents, Light, Sound, Heat, Cold, and the like, -those that believe them not to be substances or material things, surely -their brain or heart (take what place you will for the forming of -Conceptions) moves very Irregularly, and they might as well say, Our -sensitive Organs are not material; for what Objects soever, that are -subject to our senses, cannot in sense be denied to be Corporeal, when -as those things that are not subject to our senses, can be conceived -in reason to be Immaterial? But some Philosophers striving to express -their wit, obstruct reason; and drawing Divinity to prove Sense and -Reason, weaken Faith so, as their mixed Divine Philosophy becomes meer -Poetical Fictions, and Romancical expressions, making material Bodies -immaterial Spirits, and immaterial Spirits material Bodies; and some -have conceived some things neither to be Material nor Immaterial but -between both. Truly, _Madam_, I wish their Wits had been less, and -their Judgments more, as not to jumble Natural and Supernatural things -together, but to distinguish either clearly, for such Mixtures are -neither Natural nor Divine; But as I said, the Confusion comes from -their too nice abstractions, and from the separation of Figure and -Motion from Matter, as not conceiving them individable; but if God, and -his servant Nature were as Intricate and Confuse in their Works, as Men -in their Understandings and Words, the Universe and Production of all -Creatures would soon be without Order and Government, so as there would -be a horrid and Eternal War both in Heaven, and in the World, and so -pittying their troubled Brains, and wishing them the Light of Reason, -that they may clearly perceive the Truth, I rest - -Madam, - -_Your real Friend_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - - - - -III. - - -_MADAM,_ - -It seems you are offended at my Opinion, that _Nature_ is Eternal -without beginning, which, you say, is to make her God, or at least -coequal with God; But, if you apprehend my meaning rightly, you will -say, I do not: For first, God is an Immaterial and Spiritual Infinite -Being, which Propriety God cannot give away to any Creature, nor -make another God in Essence like to him, for Gods Attributes are not -communicable to any Creature; Yet this doth not hinder, that God -should not make Infinite and Eternal Matter, for that is as easie to -him, as to make a Finite Creature, Infinite Matter being quite of -another Nature then God is, to wit, Corporeal, when God is Incorporeal, -the difference whereof I have declared in my former Letter. But as for -_Nature_, that it cannot be Eternal without beginning, because God is -the Creator and Cause of it, and that the Creator must be before the -Creature, as the Cause before the Effect, so, that it is impossible -for _Nature_ to be without a beginning; if you will speak naturally, -as human reason guides you, and bring an Argument concluding from the -Priority of the _Cause_ before the _Effect_, give me leave to tell you, -that God is not tied to Natural Rules, but that he can do beyond our -Understanding, and therefore he is neither bound up to time, as to be -before, for if we will do this, we must not allow, that the Eternal Son -of God is Coeternal with the Father, because nature requires a Father -to exist before the Son, but in God is no time, but all Eternity; -and if you allow, that God hath made some Creatures, as Supernatural -Spirits, to live Eternally, why should he not as well have made a -Creature from all Eternity? for Gods making is not our making, he needs -no Priority of Time. But you may say, the Comparison of the Eternal -Generation of the Son of God is Mystical and Divine, and not to be -applied to natural things: I answer, The action by which God created -the World or made Nature, was it natural or supernatural? surely you -will say it was a Supernatural and God-like action, why then will -you apply Natural Rules to a God-like and Supernatural Action? for -what Man knows, how and when God created Nature? You will say, the -Scripture doth teach us that, for it is not Six thousand years, when -God created this World, I answer, the holy Scripture informs us onely -of the Creation of this Visible World, but not of Nature and natural -Matter; for I firmly believe according to the Word of God, that this -World has been Created, as is described by _Moses_, but what is that -to natural Matter? There may have been worlds before, as many are of -the opinion that there have been men before _Adam_, and many amongst -Divines do believe, that after the destruction of this World God will -Create a new World again, as a new Heaven, and a new Earth; and if -this be probable, or at least may be believed without any prejudice -to the holy Scripture, why may it not be probably believed that -there have been other worlds before this visible World? for nothing -is impossible with God; and all this doth derogate nothing from the -Honour and Glory of God, but rather increases his Divine Power. But -as for the Creation of this present World, it is related, that there -was first a rude and indigested Heap, or Chaos, without form, void -and dark; and God said, _Let it be light; Let there be a Firmament -in the midst of the Waters, and let the Waters under the Heaven be -gathered together, and let the dry Land appear; Let the Earth bring -forth Grass, the Herb yielding seed, and the Fruit-tree yielding Fruit -after its own kind; and let there be Lights in the Firmament, the one -to rule the Day, and the other the Night; and let the Waters bring -forth abundantly the moving Creature that hath life; and let the Earth -bring forth living Creatures after its kinde; and at last God said, -Let us make Man, and all what was made, God saw it was good._ Thus -all was made by Gods Command, and who executed his Command but the -Material servant of God, Nature? which ordered her self-moving matter -into such several Figures as God commanded, and God approved of them. -And thus, _Madam_, I verily believe the Creation of the World, and that -God is the Sole and omnipotent Creator of Heaven and Earth, and of all -Creatures therein; nay, although I believe Nature to have been from -Eternity, yet I believe also that God is the God and Author of Nature, -and has made Nature and natural Matter in a way and manner proper to -his Omnipotency and Incomprehensible by us: I will pass by natural -Arguments and Proofs, as not belonging to such an Omnipotent Action; as -for example, how the nature of relative terms requires, that they must -both exist at one point of Time, _viz._ a Master and his Servant, and -a King and his Subjects; for one bearing relation to the other, can in -no ways be considered as different from one another in formiliness or -laterness of Time; but as I said, these being meerly natural things, I -will nor cannot apply them to Supernatural and Divine Actions; But if -you ask me, how it is possible that _Nature_, the Effect and Creature -of God, can be Eternal without beginning? I will desire you to answer -me first, how a Creature can be Eternal without end, as, for example. -Supernatural Spirits are, and then I will answer you, how a Creature -can be Eternal without beginning; For Eternity consists herein, that -it has neither beginning nor end; and if it be easie for God to make a -Being without end, it is not difficult for Him to make a Being without -beginning. One thing more I will add, which is, That if _Nature_ has -not been made by God from all Eternity, then the Title of God, as -being a Creator, which is a Title and action, upon which our Faith is -grounded, (for it is the first Article in our Creed) has been accessory -to God, as I said, not full Six thousand years ago; but there is not -any thing accessory to God; he being the Perfection himself. But, -_Madam_, all what I speak, is under the liberty of Natural Philosophy, -and by the Light of Reason onely, not of Revelation; and my Reason -being not infallible; I will not declare my Opinions for an infallible -Truth: Neither do I think, that they are offensive either to Church or -State, for I submit to the Laws of One, and believe the Doctrine of the -Other, so much, that if it were for the advantage of either, I should -be willing to sacrifice my Life, especially for the Church; yea, had I -millions of Lives, and every Life was either to suffer torment or to -live in ease, I would prefer torment for the benefit of the Church; -and therefore, if I knew that my Opinions should give any offence to -the Church, I should be ready every minute to alter them: And as much -as I am bound in all duty to the obedience of the Church, as much am I -particularly bound to your Ladiship, for your entire love and sincere -affection towards me, for which I shall live and die, - -Madam, - -_Your most faithful Friend,_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -IV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I have chosen, in the first place, the Work of that famous Philosopher -_Hobbs_ called _Leviathan_, wherein I find he sayes,[1] _That the -cause of sense or sensitive perception is the external body or Object, -which presses the Organ proper to each Sense_. To which I answer, -according to the ground of my own _Philosophical Opinions_, That all -things, and therefore outward objects as well as sensitive organs, have -both Sense and Reason, yet neither the objects nor the organs are the -cause of them; for Perception is but the effect of the Sensitive and -rational Motions, and not the Motions of the Perception; neither doth -the pressure of parts upon parts make Perception; for although Matter -by the power of self-motion is as much composeable as divideable, -and parts do joyn to parts, yet that doth not make perception; nay, -the several parts, betwixt which the Perception is made, may be at -such a distance, as not capable to press: As for example, Two men -may see or hear each other at a distance, and yet there may be other -bodies between them, that do not move to those perceptions, so that -no pressure can be made, for all pressures are by some constraint -and force; wherefore, according to my Opinion, the Sensitive and -Rational free Motions, do pattern out each others object, as Figure -and Voice in each others Eye and Ear; for Life and Knowledge, which -I name Rational and Sensitive Matter, are in every Creature, and in -all parts of every Creature, and make all perceptions in Nature, -because they are the self-moving parts of Nature, and according as -those Corporeal, Rational, and Sensitive Motions move, such or such -perceptions are made: But these self-moving parts being of different -degrees (for the Rational matter is purer then the Sensitive) it -causes a double perception in all Creatures, whereof one is made by -the Rational corporeal motions, and the other by the Sensitive; and -though both perceptions are in all the body, and in every part of -the body of a Creature, yet the sensitive corporeal motions having -their proper organs, as Work-houses, in which they work some sorts -of perceptions, those perceptions are most commonly made in those -organs, and are double again; for the sensitive motions work either -on the inside or on the out-side of those organs, on the inside in -Dreams, on the out-side awake; and although both the Rational and the -Sensitive matter are inseparably joyned and mixed together, yet do they -not always work together, for oftentimes the Rational works without -any sensitive paterns, and the sensitive again without any rational -paterns. But mistake me not, _Madam_, for I do not absolutely confine -the sensitive perception to the Organs, nor the rational to the Brain, -but as they are both in the whole body, so they may work in the whole -body according to their own motions. Neither do I say, that there is -no other perception in the Eye but sight, in the Ear but hearing, and -so forth, but the sensitive organs have other perceptions besides -these; and if the sensitive and rational motions be irregular in those -parts, between which the perception is made, as for example, in the -two fore-mentioned men, that see and hear each other, then they both -neither see nor hear each other perfectly; and if one's motions be -perfect, but the other's irregular and erroneous, then one sees and -hears better then the other; or if the Sensitive and Rational motions -move more regularly and make perfecter paterns in the Eye then in the -Ear, then they see better then they hear; and if more regularly and -perfectly in the Ear then in the Eye, they hear better then they see: -And so it may be said of each man singly, for one man may see the -other better and more perfectly, then the other may see him; and this -man may hear the other better and more perfectly, then the other may -hear him; whereas, if perception were made by pressure, there would -not be any such mistakes; besides the hard pressure of objects, in my -opinion, would rather annoy and obscure, then inform. But as soon as -the object is removed, the Perception of it, made by the sensitive -motions in the Organs, ceaseth, by reason the sensitive Motions cease -from paterning, but yet the Rational Motions do not always cease -so suddenly, because the sensitive corporeal Motions work with the -Inanimate Matter, and therefore cannot retain particular figures long, -whereas the Rational Matter doth onely move in its own substance and -parts of matter, and upon none other, as my Book of Philosophical -Opinions will inform you better. And thus Perception, in my opinion, is -not made by Pressure, nor by Species, nor by matter going either from -the Organ to the Object, or from the Object into the Organ. By this it -is also manifest, that Understanding comes not from Exterior Objects, -or from the Exterior sensitive Organs; for as Exterior Objects do not -make Perception, so they do neither make Understanding, but it is the -rational matter that doth it, for Understanding may be without exterior -objects and sensitive organs; And this in short is the opinion of - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Part._ 1. _ch._ 1. - - - - -V. - - -_Madam_, - -Your Authours opinion is,[1] that _when a thing lies still, unless -somewhat else stir it, it will lie still for ever; but when a thing is -in motion, it will eternally be in motion, unless somewhat else stay -it; the reason is,_ saith he, _because nothing can change it self_; -To tell you truly, _Madam_, I am not of his opinion, for if Matter -moveth it self, as certainly it doth, then the least part of Matter, -were it so small as to seem Individable, will move it self; 'Tis true, -it could not desist from motion, as being its nature to move, and no -thing can change its Nature; for God himself, who hath more power then -self-moving Matter, cannot change himself from being God; but that -Motion should proceed from another exterior Body, joyning with, or -touching that body which it moves, is in my opinion not probable; for -though Nature is all Corporeal, and her actions are Corporeal Motions, -yet that doth not prove, that the Motion of particular Creatures or -Parts is caused by the joining, touching or pressing of parts upon -parts; for it is not the several parts that make motion, but motion -makes them; and yet Motion is not the cause of Matter, but Matter is -the cause of Motion, for Matter might subsist without Motion, but not -Motion without Matter, onely there could be no perception without -Motion, nor no Variety, if Matter were not self-moving; but Matter, if -it were all Inanimate and void of Motion, would lie as a dull, dead -and senseless heap; But that all Motion comes by joining or pressing -of other parts, I deny, for if sensitive and rational perceptions, -which are sensitive and rational motions, in the body, and in the mind, -were made by the pressure of outward objects, pressing the sensitive -organs, and so the brain or interior parts of the Body, they would -cause such dents and holes therein, as to make them sore and patched -in a short time; Besides, what was represented in this manner, would -always remain, or at least not so soon be dissolved, and then those -pressures would make a strange and horrid confusion of Figures, for -not any figure would be distinct; Wherefore my opinion is, that the -sensitive and rational Matter doth make or pattern out the figures -of several Objects, and doth dissolve them in a moment of time; as -for example, when the eye seeth the object first of a Man, then of a -Horse, then of another Creature, the sensitive motions in the eye move -first into the figure of the Man, then straight into the figure of -the Horse, so that the Mans figure is dissolved and altered into the -figure of the Horse, and so forth; but if the eye sees many figures at -once, then so many several figures are made by the sensitive Corporeal -Motions, and as many by the Rational Motions, which are Sight and -Memory, at once: But in sleep both the sensitive and rational Motions -make the figures without patterns, that is, exterior objects, which -is the cause that they are often erroneous, whereas, if it were the -former Impression of the Objects, there could not possibly be imperfect -Dreams or Remembrances, for fading of Figures requires as much motion, -as impression, and impression and fading are very different and -opposite motions; nay, if Perception was made by Impression, there -could not possibly be a fading or decay of the figures printed either -in the Mind or Body, whereas yet, as there is alteration of Motions in -self-moving Matter, so there is also an alteration of figures made by -these motions. But you will say, it doth not follow, if Perception be -made by Impression, that it must needs continue and not decay; for if -you touch and move a string, the motion doth not continue for ever, but -ceaseth by degrees; I answer, There is great difference between Prime -self-motion, and forced or Artificial Motions; for Artificial Motions -are onely an Imitation of Natural Motions, and not the same, but caused -by Natural Motions; for although there is no Art that is not made by -Nature, yet Nature is not made by Art; Wherefore we cannot rationally -judg of Perception by comparing it to the motion of a string, and its -alteration to the ceasing of that motion, for Nature moveth not by -force, but freely. 'Tis true, 'tis the freedom in Nature for one man -to give another a box on the Ear, or to trip up his heels, or for one -or more men to fight with each other; yet these actions are not like -the actions of loving Imbraces and Kissing each other; neither are -the actions one and the same, when a man strikes himself, and when -he strikes another; and so is likewise the action of impression, and -the action of self-figuring not one and the same, but different; for -the action of impression is forced, and the action of self-figuring -is free; Wherefore the comparison of the forced motions of a string, -rope, watch, or the like, can have no place here; for though the rope, -made of flax or hemp, may have the perception of a Vegetable, yet not -of the hand, or the like, that touched or struck it; and although the -hand doth occasion the rope to move in such a manner, yet it is not -the motion of the hand, by which it moveth, and when it ceases, its -natural and inherent power to move is not lessened; like as a man, -that hath left off carving or painting, hath no less skill then he -had before, neither is that skill lost when he plays upon the Lute or -Virginals, or plows, plants, and the like, but he hath onely altered -his action, as from carving to painting, or from painting to playing, -and so to plowing and planting, which is not through disability but -choice. But you will say, it is nevertheless a cessation of such a -motion. I grant it: but the ceasing of such a motion is not the ceasing -of self-moving matter from all motions, neither is cessation as much as -annihilation, for the motion lies in the power of the matter to repeat -it, as oft it will, if it be not overpowred, for more parts, or more -strength, or more motions may over-power the less; Wherefore forced, -or artificial and free Natural motions are different in their effects, -although they have but one Cause, which is the self-moving matter, and -though Matter is but active and passive, yet there is great Variety, -and so great difference in force and liberty, objects and perceptions, -sense and reason, and the like. But to conclude, perception is not -made by the pressure of objects, no more then hemp is made by the -Rope-maker, or metal by the Bell-founder or Ringer, and yet neither -the rope nor the metal is without sense and reason, but the natural -motions of the metal, and the artificial motions of the Ringer are -different; wherefore a natural effect in truth cannot be produced from -an artificial cause, neither can the ceasing of particular forced or -artificial motions be a proof for the ceasing of general, natural, free -motions, as that matter it self should cease to move; for there is no -such thing as rest in Nature, but there is an alteration of motions and -figures in self-moving matter, which alteration causeth variety as well -in opinions, as in every thing else; Wherefore in my opinion, though -sense alters, yet it doth not decay, for the rational and sensitive -part of matter is as lasting as matter it self, but that which is -named decay of sense, is onely the alteration of motions, and not an -obscurity of motions, like, as the motions of memory and forgetfulness, -and the repetition of the same motions is called remembrance. And thus -much of this subject for the present, to which I add no more but rest - -Madam, - -_your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, Part._ 1. _c._ 2. - - - - -VI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your Authour discoursing of Imagination, saith,[1] _That as soon as any -object is removed from our Eyes, though the Impression that is made -in us remain, yet other objects more present succeeding and working -on us, the Imagination of the past is obscured and made weak_. To -which I answer, first, that he conceives Sense and Imagination to be -all one, for he says, _Imagination is nothing else, but a fading or -decaying sense_; whereas in my opinion they are different, not onely -their matter, but their motions also being distinct and different; for -Imagination is a rational perception, and Sense a sensitive perception; -wherefore as much as the rational matter differs from the sensitive, as -much doth Imagination differ from Sense. Next I say, that Impressions -do not remain in the body of sensitive matter, but it is in its power -to make or repeat the like figures; Neither is Imagination less, when -the object is absent, then when present, but the figure patterned out -in the sensitive organs, being altered, and remaining onely in the -Rational part of matter, is not so perspicuous and clear, as when it -was both in the Sense and in the Mind: And to prove that Imagination of -things past doth not grow weaker by distance of time, as your Authour -says, many a man in his old age, will have as perfect an Imagination -of what is past in his younger years, as if he saw it present. And as -for your Authours opinion, that _Imagination and Memory are one and the -same_, I grant, that they are made of one kind of Matter; but although -the Matter is one and the same, yet several motions in the several -parts make Imagination and Memory several things: As for Example, a -Man may Imagine that which never came into his Senses, wherefore -Imagination is not one and the same thing with Memory. But your Authour -seems to make all Sense, as it were, one Motion, but not all Motion -Sense, whereas surely there is no Motion, but is either Sensitive or -Rational; for Reason is but a pure and refined Sense, and Sense a -grosser Reason. Yet all sensitive and rational Motions are not one and -the same; for forced or Artificial Motions, though they proceed from -sensitive matter, yet are they so different from the free and Prime -Natural Motions, that they seem, as it were, quite of another nature: -And this distinction neglected is the Cause, that many make Appetites -and Passions, Perceptions and Objects, and the like, as one, without -any or but little difference. But having discoursed of the difference -of these Motions in my former Letter, I will not be tedious to you with -repeating it again, but remain, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, part._ 1. _c._ 2. - - - - -VII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your Authours opinion, concerning Dreams,[1] seemeth to me in some part -very rational and probable, in some part not; For when he sayes, that -_Dreams are onely Imaginations of them that sleep, which imaginations -have been before either totally or by parcels in the Sense; and that -the organs of Sense, as the Brain and the Nerves, being benumb'd -in sleep, as not easily to be moved by external objects, those -Imaginations proceed onely from the agitation of the inward parts of -mans body, which for the connexion they have with the Brain, and other -organs, when they be distemper'd, do keep the same in motion, whereby -the Imaginations there formerly made, appear as if a man were waking_; -This seems to my Reason not very probable: For, first, Dreams are not -absolutely Imaginations, except we do call all Motions and Actions -of the Sensitive and Rational Matter, Imaginations. Neither is it -necessary, that all Imaginations must have been before either totally -or by parcels in the Sense; neither is there any benumbing of the -organs of Sense in sleep. But Dreams, according to my opinion, are made -by the Sensitive and Rational Corporeal Motions, by figuring several -objects, as awake; onely the difference is, that the Sensitive motions -in Dreams work by rote and on the inside of the Sensitive organs, when -as awake they work according to the patterns of outward objects, and -exteriously or on the outside of the sensitive Organs, so that sleep -or dreams are nothing else but an alteration of motions, from moving -exteriously to move interiously, and from working after a Pattern to -work by rote: I do not say that the body is without all exterior -motions, when asleep, as breathing and beating of the Pulse (although -these motions are rather interior then exterior,) but that onely the -sensitive organs are outwardly shut, so as not to receive the patterns -of outward Objects, nevertheless the sensitive Motions do not cease -from moving inwardly; or on the inside of the sensitive Organs; But the -rational matter doth often, as awake, so asleep or in dreams, make such -figures, as the sensitive did never make either from outward objects, -or of its own accord; for the sensitive hath sometimes liberty to work -without Objects, but the Rational much more, which is not bound either -to the patterns of Exterior objects, or of the sensitive voluntary -Figures. Wherefore it is not divers distempers, as your Authour sayes, -that cause different Dreams, or Gold, or Heat; neither are Dreams the -reverse of our waking Imaginations, nor all the Figures in Dreams are -not made with their heels up, and their heads downwards, though some -are; but this error or irregularity proceeds from want of exterior -Objects or Patterns, and by reason the sensitive Motions work by rote; -neither are the Motions reverse, because they work inwardly asleep, and -outwardly awake, for Mad-men awake see several Figures without Objects. -In short, sleeping and waking, is somewhat after that manner, when men -are called either out of their doors, or stay within their houses; or -like a Ship, where the Mariners work all under hatches, whereof you -will find more in my Philosophical Opinions; and so taking my leave, I -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, Part._ 1. _c._ 2. - - - - -VIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your Authour going on in his discourse of Imagination, says,[1] _That, -as we have no Imagination, whereof we have not formerly had sense, in -whole or in parts; so we have not Transition from one Imagination to -another, whereof we never had the like before in our senses_. To which -my answer is in short, that the Rational part of Matter in One composed -figure, as in Man, or the like Creature, may make such figures, as -the senses did never make in that composed Figure or Creature; And -though your Authour reproves those that say,[2] _Imaginations rise -of themselves_; yet, if the self-moving part of Matter, which I call -Rational, makes Imaginations, they must needs rise of themselves; for -the Rational part of matter being free and self-moving, depends upon -nothing, neither Sense nor Object, I mean, so, as not to be able to -work without them. Next, when your Author, defining _Understanding_, -says that it is nothing else, but[3] _an Imagination raised by words or -other voluntary signs_, My Answer is, that Understanding, and so Words -and Signs are made by self-moving Matter, that is, Sense and Reason, -and not Sense and Reason by Words and Signs; wherefore Thoughts are -not like[4] _Water upon a plain Table, which is drawn and guided by -the finger this or that way_, for every Part of self-moving matter is -not alwayes forced, perswaded or directed, for if all the Parts of -Sense and Reason were ruled by force or perswasion, not any wounded -Creature would fail to be healed, or any disease to be cured by outward -Applications, for outward Applications to Wounds and Diseases might -have more force, then any Object to the Eye: But though there is great -affinity and sympathy between parts, yet there is also great difference -and antipathy betwixt them, which is the cause that many objects -cannot with all their endeavours work such effects upon the Interiour -parts, although they are closely press'd, for Impressions of objects -do not always affect those parts they press. Wherefore, I am not of -your Author's opinion, that all Parts of Matter press one another; It -is true, _Madam_, there cannot be any part single, but yet this doth -not prove, that parts must needs press each other: And as for his -_Train of Thoughts_, I must confess, that Thoughts for the most part -are made orderly, but yet they do not follow each other like Geese, -for surely, man has sometimes very different thoughts; as for Example, -a man sometime is very sad for the death of his Friend, and thinks -of his own death, and immediately thinks of a wanton Mistress, which -later thought, surely, the thought of Death did not draw in; wherefore, -though some thought may be the Ring-leader of others, yet many are made -without leaders. Again, your Author in his description of the Mind -sayes, that _the discourse of the mind, when it is govern'd by design, -is nothing but seeking, or the Faculty of Invention; a hunting out of -the Causes of some Effects, present or past; or of the Effects of some -present or past Cause. Sometimes a man seeks what he has lost, and from -that Place and Time wherein he misses it, his mind runs back from place -to place, and time to time, to find where and when he had it, that is -to say, to find some certain and limited Time and Place, in which to -begin a method of Seeking. And from thence his thoughts run over the -same places and times to find what action or other occasion might make -him lose it. This we call Remembrance or calling to mind. Sometimes -a man knows a place determinate, within the compass whereof he is to -seek, and then his thoughts run over all the Parts thereof in the same -manner as one would sweep a room to find a Jewel, or as a Spaniel -ranges the field till he find a sent; or as a Man should run over the -Alphabet to start a Rime._ Thus far your Author: In which discourse I -do not perceive that he defineth what the Mind is, but I say, that if, -according to his opinion, nothing moves it self, but one thing moves -another, then the Mind must do nothing, but move backward and forward, -nay, onely forward, and if all actions were thrusting or pressing of -parts, it would be like a crowd of People, and there would be but -little or no motion, for the crowd would make a stoppage, like water in -a glass, the mouth of the Glass being turned downwards, no water can -pass out, by reason the numerous drops are so closely press'd, as they -cannot move exteriously. Next, I cannot conceive how the Mind can run -back either to Time or Place, for as for Place, the mind is inclosed -in the body, and the running about in the parts of the body or brain -will not inform it of an Exterior place or object; besides, objects -being the cause of the minds motion, it must return to its Cause, and -so move until it come to the object, that moved it first, so that the -mind must run out of the body to that object, which moved it to such -a Thought, although that object were removed out of the World (as the -phrase is:) But for the mind to move backward, to Time past, is more -then it can do; Wherefore in my opinion, Remembrance, or the like, is -onely a repetition of such Figures as were like to the Objects; and for -Thoughts in Particular, they are several figures, made by the mind, -which is the Rational Part of matter, in its own substance, either -voluntarily, or by imitation, whereof you may see more in my Book of -Philosophical Opinions. Hence I conclude, that Prudence is nothing -else, but a comparing of Figures to Figures, and of the several actions -of those Figures; as repeating former Figures, and comparing them to -others of the like nature, qualities, proprieties, as also chances, -fortunes, &c. Which figuring and repeating is done actually, in and -by the Rational Matter, so that all the observation of the mind on -outward Objects is onely an actual repetition of the mind, as moving -in such or such figures and actions; and when the mind makes voluntary -Figures with those repeated Figures, and compares them together, this -comparing is Examination; and when several Figures agree and joyn, -it is Conclusion or Judgment: likewise doth Experience proceed from -repeating and comparing of several Figures in the Mind, and the more -several Figures are repeated and compared, the greater the experience -is. One thing more there is in the same Chapter, which I cannot let -pass without examination; Your Authour says, That _things Present -onely have a being in Nature, things Past onely a being in the Memory, -but things to come have no being at all_; Which how it possibly can -be, I am not able to conceive; for certainly, if nothing in nature is -lost or annihilated, what is past, and what is to come, hath as well -a being, as what is present; and, if that which is now, had its being -before, why may it not also have its being hereafter? It might as well -be said, that what is once forgot, cannot be remembred; for whatsoever -is in Nature, has as much a being as the Mind, and there is not any -action, or motion, or figure, in Nature, but may be repeated, that is, -may return to its former Figure, When it is altered and dissolved; -But by reason Nature delights in variety, repetitions are not so -frequently made, especially of those things or creatures, which are -composed by the sensitive corporeal motions in the inanimate part of -Matter, because they are not so easily wrought, as the Rational matter -can work upon its own parts, being more pliant in its self, then the -Inanimate matter is; And this is the reason, that there are so many -repetitions of one and the same Figure in the Rational matter, which -is the Mind, but seldom any in the Gross and inanimate part of Matter, -for Nature loves ease and freedom: But to conclude, _Madam_, I perceive -your Author confines Sense onely to Animal-kind, and Reason onely to -Man-kind: Truly, it is out of self-love, when one Creature prefers his -own Excellency before another, for nature being endued with self-love, -all Creatures have self-love too, because they are all Parts of Nature; -and when Parts agree or disagree, it is out of Interest and Self-love; -but Man herein exceeds all the rest, as having a supernatural Soul, -whose actions also are supernatural; To which I leave him, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, part._ 1. _c._ 3. - -[2] _part._ 1. _c._ 2. - -[3] _ibid. c._ 3. - -[4] _ibid._ - - - - -IX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -When your Author discourseth of the use of _Speech or Words and Names_, -he is pleas'd to say,[1] _That their use is to serve for marks and -notes of Remembrance_; Whereof to give you my opinion, I say, That -Speech is natural to the shape of Man; and though sometimes it serves -for marks or notes of remembrance, yet it doth not always, for all -other Animals have Memory without the help of Speech, and so have deaf -and dumb men, nay more then those that hear and speak: Wherefore, -though Words are useful to the mind, and so to the memory, yet both -can be without them, whereas Words cannot be without Memory; for take -a Bird, and teach him to speak, if he had not Memory, before he heard -the words, he could never learn them. You will ask me, _Madam_, What -then, is Memory the Cause of Speech? I answer, Life and Knowledg, which -is Sense and Reason, as it creates and makes all sorts of Creatures, -so also amongst the rest it makes Words: And as I said before, that -Memory may be without the help of Speech or Words, so I say also, that -there is a possibility of reckoning of numbers, as also of magnitudes, -of swiftness, of force, and other things without words, although your -Author denies it: But some men are so much for Art, as they endeavour -to make Art, which is onely a Drudgery-maid of Nature, the chief -Mistress, and Nature her Servant, which is as much as to prefer Effects -before the Cause, Nature before God, Discord before Unity and Concord. - -Again, your _Author_, in his Chapter of Reason,[2] defines _Reason_ to -be nothing else but _Reckoning_: I answer, That in my opinion Reckoning -is not Reason it self, but onely an effect or action of Reason; for -Reason, as it is the chiefest and purest degree of animate matter, -works variously and in divers motions, by which it produces various -and divers effects, which are several Perceptions, as Conception, -Imagination, Fancy, Memory, Remembrance, Understanding, Judgment, -Knowledg, and all the Passions, with many more: Wherefore this Reason -is not in one undivided part, nor bound to one motion, for it is in -every Creature more or less, and moves in its own parts variously; and -in some Creatures, as for example, in some men, it moves more variously -then in others, which is the cause that some men are more dull and -stupid, then others; neither doth Reason always move in one Creature -regularly, which is the cause, that some men are mad or foolish: And -though all men are made by the direction of Reason, and endued with -Reason, from the first time of their birth, yet all have not the like -Capacities, Understandings, Imaginations, Wits, Fancies, Passions, -&c. but some more, some less, and some regular, some irregular, -according to the motions of Reason or Rational part of animate matter; -and though some rational parts may make use of other rational Parts, -as one man of another mans Conceptions, yet all these parts cannot -associate together; as for example, all the Material parts of several -objects, no not their species, cannot enter or touch the eye without -danger of hurting or loosing it, nevertheless the eye makes use of the -objects by patterning them out, and so doth the rational matter, by -taking patterns from the sensitive; And thus knowledg or perception of -objects, both sensitive and rational, is taken without the pressure of -any other parts; for though parts joyn to parts, (for no part can be -single) yet this joining doth not necessarily infer the pressure of -objects upon the sensitive organs; Whereof I have already discoursed -sufficiently heretofore, to which I refer you, and rest - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, part._ 1. _c._ 4. - -[2] _Ch._ 5. - - - - -X. - - -_MADAM,_ - -_Understanding_ says your Author,[1] _is nothing else but Conception -caused by speech, and therefore, if speech be peculiar to man, (as, for -ought I know, it is) then is understanding peculiar to him also._ Where -he confineth Understanding onely to speech and to Mankind; But, by his -leave, _Madam_, I surely believe, that there is more understanding in -Nature, then that, which is in speech, for if there were not, I cannot -conceive, how all the exact forms in Generations could be produced, -or how there could be such distinct degrees of several sorts and -kinds of Creatures, or distinctions of times and seasons, and so many -exact motions and figures in Nature: Considering all this, my reason -perswadeth me, that all Understanding, which is a part of Knowledg, is -not caused by speech, for all the motions of the Celestial Orbs are not -made by speech, neither is the knowledg or understanding which a man -hath, when sick, as to know or understand he is sick, made by speech, -nor by outward objects, especially in a disease he never heard, nor -saw, nor smelt, nor tasted, nor touched; Wherefore all Perception, -Sensation, Memory, Imagination, Appetite, Understanding, and the like, -are not made nor caused by outward objects, nor by speech. And as for -names of things, they are but different postures of the figures in -our mind or thoughts, made by the Rational matter; But Reasoning is -a comparing of the several figures with their several postures and -actions in the Mind, which joyned with the several words, made by the -sensitive motions, inform another distinct and separate part, as an -other man, of their minds conceptions, understanding, opinions, and the -like. - -Concerning Addition and Subtraction, wherein your _Author_ sayes -Reasoning consists, I grant, that it is an act of Reasoning, yet it -doth not make Sense or Reason, which is Life and Knowledge, but Sense -and Reason which is self-motion, makes addition and subtraction of -several Parts of matter; for had matter not self-motion, it could not -divide nor compose, nor make such varieties, without great and lingring -retardments, if not confusion. Wherefore all, what is made in Nature, -is made by self-moving matter, which self-moving matter doth not at all -times move regularly, but often irregularly, which causes false Logick, -false Arithmetick, and the like; and if there be not a certainty in -these self-motions or actions of Nature, much less in Art, which is -but a secundary action; and therefore, neither speech, words, nor -exterior objects cause Understanding or Reason. And although many parts -of the Rational and Sensitive Matter joyned into one, may be stronger -by their association, and over-power other parts that are not so well -knit and united, yet these are not the less pure; onely these Parts and -Motions being not equal in several Creatures, make their Knowledge and -Reason more or less: For, when a man hath more Rational Matter well -regulated, and so more Wisdom then an other, that same man may chance -to over-power the other, whose Rational Matter is more irregular, but -yet not so much by strength of the united Parts, as by their subtilty; -for the Rational Matter moving regularly, is more strong with subtilty, -then the sensitive with force; so that Wisdom is stronger then -Life, being more pure, and so more active; for in my opinion, there -is a degree of difference between Life and Knowledge, as my Book of -_Philosophical Opinions_ will inform you. - -Again, your _Author_ sayes, _That Man doth excel all other Animals in -this faculty, that when he conceives any thing whatsoever, he is apt -to enquire the Consequences of it, and what effects he can do with -it: Besides this_ (sayes he) _Man hath an other degree of Excellence, -that he can by Words reduce the Consequences he finds to General Rules -called Theoremes or Aphorisms, that is, he can reason or reckon not -onely in Number, but in all other things, whereof one may be added -unto, or substracted from an other._ To which I answer, That according -to my Reason I cannot perceive, but that all Creatures may do as much; -but by reason they do it not after the same manner or way as Man, Man -denies, they can do it at all; which is very hard; for what man knows, -whether Fish do not Know more of the nature of Water, and ebbing and -flowing, and the saltness of the Sea? or whether Birds do not know -more of the nature and degrees of Air, or the cause of Tempests? or -whether Worms do not know more of the nature of Earth, and how Plants -are produced? or Bees of the several sorts of juices of Flowers, then -Men? And whether they do not make there Aphorismes and Theoremes by -their manner of Intelligence? For, though they have not the speech of -Man, yet thence doth not follow, that they have no Intelligence at -all. But the Ignorance of Men concerning other Creatures is the cause -of despising other Creatures, imagining themselves as petty Gods in -Nature, when as _Nature_ is not capable to make one God, much less so -many as Mankind; and were it not for Mans supernatural Soul, Man would -not be more Supreme, then other Creatures in Nature, _But_ (says your -_Author_) _this Priviledge in Man is allay'd by another, which is, No -living Creature is subject to absurdity, but onely Man._ Certainly, -_Madam_, I believe the contrary, to wit, that all other Creatures do -as often commit mistakes and absurdities as Man, and if it were not to -avoid tediousness, I could present sufficient proofs to you: Wherefore -I think, not onely Man but also other Creatures may be Philosophers and -subject to absurdities as aptly as Men; for Man doth, nor cannot truly -know the Faculties, and Abilities or Actions of all other Creatures, -no not of his own Kind as Man-Kind, for if he do measure all men by -himself he will be very much mistaken, for what he conceives to be -true or wise, an other may conceive to be false and foolish. But Man -may have one way of Knowledge in Philosophy and other Arts, and other -Creatures another way, and yet other Creatures manner or way may be -as Intelligible and Instructive to each other as Man's, I mean, in -those things which are Natural. Wherefore I cannot consent to what -your _Author_ says, _That Children are not endued with Reason at all, -till they have attained to the use of Speech_; for Reason is in those -Creatures which have not Speech, witness Horses, especially those which -are taught in the manage, and many other Animals. And as for the weak -understanding in Children, I have discoursed thereof in my Book of -Philosophy; The rest of this discourse, lest I tire you too much at -once, I shall reserve for the next, resting in the mean time, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, part._ 1. _c._ 4. - - - - -XI. - - -_Madam,_ - -I sent you word in my last, that your _Author's_ opinion is, _That -Children are not endued with Reason at all, until they have attained -to the use of Speech,_ in the same Chapter[1] he speaks to the same -purpose thus: _Reason is not as Sense and Memory born with us, nor -gotten by experience onely, as Prudence is, but attained by industry._ -To which I reply onely this, That it might as well be said, a -Child when new born hath not flesh and blood, because by taking in -nourishment or food, the Child grows to have more flesh and blood; or, -that a Child is not born with two legs, because he cannot go, or with -two arms and hands, because he cannot help himself; or that he is not -born with a tongue, because he cannot speak: For although Reason doth -not move in a Child as in a Man, in Infancy as in Youth, in Youth as in -Age, yet that doth not prove that Children are without Reason, because -they cannot run and prate: I grant, some other Creatures appear to -have more Knowledg when new born then others; as for example, a young -Foal has more knowledg than a young Child, because a Child cannot run -and play; besides a Foal knows his own Dam, and can tell where to -take his food, as to run and suck his Dam, when as an Infant cannot -do so, nor all beasts, though most of them can, but yet this doth not -prove, that a Child hath no reason at all; Neither can I perceive -that man is a Monopoler of all Reason, or Animals of all Sense, but -that Sense and Reason are in other Creatures as well as in Man and -Animals; for example, Drugs, as Vegetables and Minerals, although they -cannot slice, pound or infuse, as man can, yet they can work upon man -more subtilly, wisely, and as sensibly either by purging, vomiting, -spitting, or any other way, as man by mincing, pounding and infusing -them, and Vegetables will as wisely nourish Men, as Men can nourish -Vegetables; Also some Vegetables are as malicious and mischievous to -Man, as Man is to one another, witness Hemlock, Nightshade, and many -more; and a little Poppy will as soon, nay sooner cause a Man to sleep, -though silently, then a Nurse a Child with singing and rocking; But -because they do not act in such manner or way as Man, Man judgeth them -to be without sense and reason; and because they do not prate and -talk as Man, Man believes they have not so much wit as he hath; and -because they cannot run and go, Man thinks they are not industrious; -the like for Infants concerning Reason. But certainly, it is not local -motion or speech that makes sense and reason, but sense and reason -makes them; neither is sense and reason bound onely to the actions of -Man, but it is free to the actions, forms, figures and proprieties of -all Creatures; for if none but Man had reason, and none but Animals -sense, the World could not be so exact, and so well in order as it -is: but Nature is wiser then Man with all his Arts, for these are -onely produced through the variety of Natures actions, and disputes -through the superfluous varieties of Mans follies or ignorances, not -knowing Natures powerful life and knowledg: But I wonder, _Madam_, your -_Author_ says in this place, _That Reason is not born with Man_, when -as in another place,[2] he says, _That every man brought Philosophy, -that is Natural reason with him into the World_; Which how it agree, I -will leave to others to judg, and to him to reconcile it, remaining in -the meantime, - -Madam, - -_Your Constant Friend_ - -_and Faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ 4. - -[2] In his _Elements of Philosophy, part._ 1. _c._ 1. _art._ 1. - - - - -XII. - - -_Madam,_ - -Two sorts of motions, I find your _Author_[1] doth attribute to -Animals, _viz. Vital and Animal, the Vital motions_, says he, _are -begun in Generation, and continued without Interruption through their -whole life, and those are the Course of the Blood, the Pulse, the -Breathing, Conviction, Nutrition, Excretion, &c. to which motions -there needs no help of Imaginations; But the animal Motions, otherwise -called voluntary Motions, are to go, to speak, to move any of our -limbs, in such manner as is first fancied in our minds: And because -going, speaking, and the like voluntary motions, depend always upon -a precedent thought of whither, which way, and what, it is evident, -that the Imagination is the first Internal beginning of all voluntary -Motion_. Thus far your _Author_. Whereof in short I give you my -opinion, first concerning Vital Motions, that it appears improbable if -not impossible to me, that Generation should be the cause and beginning -of Life, because Life must of necessity be the cause of Generation, -life being the Generator of all things, for without life motion could -not be, and without motion not any thing could be begun, increased, -perfected, or dissolved. Next, that Imagination is not necessary to -Vital Motions, it is probable it may not, but yet there is required -Knowledg, which I name Reason; for if there were not Knowledg in all -Generations or Productions, there could not any distinct Creature be -made or produced, for then all Generations would be confusedly mixt, -neither would there be any distinct kinds or sorts of Creatures, nor -no different Faculties, Proprieties, and the like. Thirdly, concerning -_Animal Motions_, which your _Author_ names _Voluntary Motions, as to -go, to speak, to move any of our limbs, in such manner as is first -fancied in our minds, and that they depend upon a precedent thought -of whither, which way, and what, and that Imagination is the first -Internal beginning of them_; I think, by your _Authors_ leave, it doth -imply a contradiction, to call them Voluntary Motions, and yet to say -they are caused and depend upon our Imagination; for if the Imagination -draws them this way, or that way, how can they be voluntary motions, -being in a manner forced and necessitated to move according to Fancy -or Imagination? But when he goes on in the same place and treats of -Endeavour, Appetite, Desire, Hunger, Thirst, Aversion, Love, Hate, and -the like, he derives one from the other, and treats well as a Moral -Philosopher; but whether it be according to the truth or probability of -Natural Philosophy, I will leave to others to judge, for in my opinion -Passions and Appetites are very different, Appetites being made by -the motions of the sensitive Life, and Passions, as also Imagination, -Memory, &c. by the motions of the rational Life, which is the cause -that Appetites belong more to the actions of the Body then the Mind: -'Tis true, the Sensitive and Rational self-moving matter doth so much -resemble each other in their actions, as it is difficult to distinguish -them. But having treated hereof at large in my other Philosophical -Work, to cut off repetitions, I will refer you to that, and desire -you to compare our opinions together: But certainly there is so much -variety in one and the same sort of Passions, and so of Appetites, as -it cannot be easily express'd. To conclude, I do not perceive that your -_Author_ tells or expresses what the cause is of such or such actions, -onely he mentions their dependance, which is, as if a man should -converse with a Nobleman's Friend or Servant, and not know the Lord -himself. But leaving him for this time, it is sufficient to me, that I -know your Ladyship, and your Ladyship knows me, that I am, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend, and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Leviathan, part._ 1. _c._ 6. - - - - -XIII. - - -_Madam,_ - -Having obey'd your Commands in giving you my opinion of the First Part -of the Book of that famous and learned _Author_ you sent me, I would -go on; but seeing he treats in his following Parts of the Politicks, I -was forced to stay my Pen, because of these following Reasons. First, -That a Woman is not imployed in State Affairs, unless an absolute -Queen. Next, That to study the Politicks, is but loss of Time, unless -a man were sure to be a Favourite to an absolute Prince. Thirdly, That -it is but a deceiving Profession, and requires more Craft then Wisdom. -All which considered, I did not read that part of your _Author_: But -as for his _Natural Philosophy_, I will send you my opinion so far as -I understand it: For what belongs to Art, as to Geometry, being no -Scholar, I shall not trouble my self withal. And so I'l take my leave -of you, when I have in two or three words answered the Question you -sent me last, which was, Whether Nature be the Art of God, Man the Art -of Nature, and a Politick Government the Art of Man? To which I answer, -'Tis probable it may be so; onely I add this, That Nature doth not -rule God, nor Man Nature, nor Politick Government Man; for the Effect -cannot rule the Cause, but the Cause doth rule the Effect: Wherefore -if men do not naturally agree, Art cannot make unity amongst them, or -associate them into one Politick Body and so rule them; But man thinks -he governs, when as it is Nature that doth it, for as nature doth unite -or divide parts regularly or irregularly, and moves the several minds -of men and the several parts of mens bodies, so war is made or peace -kept: Thus it is not the artificial form that governs men in a Politick -Government, but a natural power, for though natural motion can make -artificial things, yet artificial things cannot make natural power; -and we might as well say, nature is governed by the art of nature, as -to say man is ruled by the art and invention of men. The truth is, Man -rules an artificial Government, and not the Government Man, just like -as a Watch-maker rules his Watch, and not the Watch the Watch-maker. -And thus I conclude and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning the other Book of that learned Author _Hobbs_ you sent me, -called _Elements of Philosophy_, I shall likewise according to your -desire, give you my judgment and opinion of it as I have done of the -former, not that I intend to prejudice him any ways thereby, but onely -to mark those places wherein I seem to dissent from his opinions, -which liberty, I hope, he will not deny me; And in order to this, -I have read over the first Chapter of the mentioned Book, treating -of Philosophy in General, wherein amongst the rest, discoursing of -the Utility of Natural Philosophy, and relating the commodities and -benefits which proceed from so many arts and sciences, he is pleased to -say,[1] that they are _injoyed almost by all people of_ Europe, Asia, -_and some of_ Africa, _onely the Americans, and those that live neer -the Poles do want them: But why_, says he, _have they sharper wits -then these? Have not all men one kind of soul, and the same faculties -of mind?_ To which, give me leave, _Madam_, to add, That my opinion -is, that there is a difference between the Divine and the Natural -soul of man, and though the natural mind or soul is of one kind, yet -being made of rational matter, it is divideable and composeable, by -which division and composition, men may have more or less wit, or -quicker and slower wit; the like for Judgments, Imaginations, Fancies, -Opinions, &c. For were the natural rational mind individeable, all -men would have the like degree of wit or understanding, all men would -be Philosophers or fools, which by reason they are not, it proves the -natural rational mind is divideable and composeable, making variations -of its own several parts by self-motion; for it is not the several -outward objects, or forreign instructions, that make the variety of -the mind; neither is wit or ingenuity alike in all men; for some are -natural Poets, Philosophers, and the like, without learning, and some -are far more ingenious then others, although their breeding is obscure -and mean, Neither will learning make all men Scholars, for some will -continue Dunces all their life time; Neither doth much experience -make all men wise, for some are not any ways advanced in their wisdom -by much and long experiences; And as for Poetry, it is according to -the common Proverb; a _Poet is born, not made_; Indeed learning doth -rather hurt Fancy, for great Scholars are not always good Poets, nor -all States-men Natural Philosophers, nor all Experienced Men Wise -Men, nor all Judges Just, nor all Divines Pious, nor all Pleaders -or Preachers Eloquent, nor all Moral Philosophers Vertuous; But all -this is occasioned by the various Motions of the rational self-moving -matter, which is the Natural Mind. And thus much for the present of the -difference of wits and faculties of the mind; I add no more, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Art._ 7. - - - - -XV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -My Discourse for the present shall be of _Infinite_, and the question -shall be first _Whether several Finite parts, how many soever there be, -can make an Infinite._ Your Author says,[1] _that several Finite parts -when they are all put together make a whole Finite_; which, if his -meaning be of a certain determinate number, how big soever, of finite -parts, I do willingly grant, for all what is determinate and limited, -is not Infinite but Finite; neither is there any such thing, as Whole -or All in Infinite; but if his meaning be, that no Infinite can be made -of finite parts, though infinite in number, I deny it; Next he says -_there can be no such thing as One in Infinite, because No thing can -be said One, except there be another to compare it withal_; which in -my opinion doth not follow, for there is but One God, who is Infinite, -and hath none other to be compared withal, and so there may be but one -Onely Infinite in Nature, which is Matter. But when he says, _there -cannot be an Infinite and Eternal Division_, is very true, _viz._, in -this sense, that one single part cannot be actually infinitely divided, -for the Compositions hinder the Divisions in Nature, and the Divisions -the Compositions, so that Nature, being Matter, cannot be composed -so, as not to have parts, nor divided so, as that her parts should -not be composed, but there are nevertheless infinite divided parts -in Nature, and in this sense there may also be infinite divisions, -as I have declared in my Book of Philosophy[2]. And thus there are -Infinite divisions of Infinite parts in Nature, but not Infinite actual -divisions of one single part; But though Infinite is without end, yet -my discourse of it shall be but short and end here, though not my -affection, which shall last and continue with the life of - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Humble Servant._ - -[1] _Elem. of Philos. c._ 7. _a._ 1 2. - -[2] _P._ 1. _c._ 8. - - - - -XVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -An _Accident_, says your _Author_,[1] _is nothing else, but the manner -of our Conception of body, or that Faculty of any body, by which it -works in us a Conception of it self_; To which I willingly consent; -but yet I say, that these qualities cannot be separated from the body, -for as impossible it is that the essence of Nature should be separable -from Nature, as impossible is it that the various modes or alterations, -either of Figures or Motions, should be separable from matter or body; -Wherefore when he goes on, and says,[2] _An accident is not a body, -but in a body, yet not so, as if any thing were contained therein, as -if for example, redness were in blood in the same manner as blood is -in a bloody cloth; but as magnitude is in that which is great, rest in -that which resteth, motion in that which is moved_; I answer, that in -my opinion, not any thing in Nature can be without a body, and that -redness is as well in blood, as blood is in a bloody cloth, or any -other colour in any thing else; for there is no colour without a body, -but every colour hath as well a body as any thing else, and if Colour -be a separable accident, I would fain know, how it can be separated -from a subject, being bodiless, for that which is no body is nothing, -and nothing cannot be taken away from any thing; Wherefore as for -natural Colour it cannot be taken away from any creature, without the -parts of its substance or body; and as for artificial Colours, when -they are taken away, it is a separation of two bodies, which joyned -together; and if Colour, or Hardness, or Softness do change, it is -nothing else but an alteration of motions and not an annihilation, for -all changes and alterations remain in the power of Corporeal motions, -as I have said in other places; for we might as well say, life doth -not remain in nature, when a body turns from an animal to some other -figure, as believe that those, they name accidents, do not remain in -Corporeal Motions; Wherefore I am not of your _Authors_ mind, when -he says,[3] that _when a White thing is made black, the whiteness -perishes_; for it cannot perish, although it is altered from white to -black, being in the power of the same matter, to turn it again from -black to white, so as it may make infinite Repetitions of the same -thing; but by reason nature takes delight in variety, she seldom uses -such repetitions; nevertheless that doth not take away the Power of -self-moving matter, for it doth not, and it cannot, are two several -things, and the latter doth not necessarily follow upon the former; -Wherefore not any, the least thing, can perish in Nature, for if this -were possible, the whole body of nature might perish also, for if so -many Figures and Creatures should be annihilated and perish without -any supply or new Creation, Nature would grow less, and at last become -nothing; besides it is as difficult for Nature to turn something into -nothing, as to Create something out of nothing; Wherefore as there is -no annihilation or perishing in Nature, so there is neither any new -Creation in Nature. But your _Author_ makes a difference between bodies -and accidents, saying, _that bodies are things and not generated, -but accidents are Generated and not things._ Truly, _Madam_, these -accidents seem to me to be like _Van Helmont's_ Lights, Gases, Blazes -and Ideas; and Dr _More's_ Immaterial Substances or Dæmons, onely in -this Dr _More_ hath the better, that his Immaterial Substances, are -beings, which subsist of themselves, whereas accidents do not, but -their existence is in other bodies; But what they call Accidents, -are in my opinion nothing else but Corporeal Motions, and if these -accidents be generated, they must needs be bodies, for how nothing -can be Generated in nature, is not conceivable, and yet your _Author_ -denies,[4] that _Accidents are something, namely some part of a natural -thing_; But as for Generations, they are onely various actions of -self-moving matter, or a variety of Corporeal Motions, and so are all -Accidents whatsoever, so that there is not any thing in nature, that -can be made new, or destroyed, for whatsoever was and shall be, is -in nature, though not always in act, yet in power, as in the nature -and power of Corporeal motions, which is self-moving matter, And as -there is no new Generation of Accidents, so there is neither a new -Generation of Motions; wherefore when your _Author_ says,[5] _That, -when the hand, being moved, moveth the pen, the motion doth not go out -of the hand into the pen, for so the writing might be continued, though -the hand stood still, but a new motion is generated in the pen, and -is the pens motion_: I am of his opinion, that the motion doth not -go out of the hand into the pen, and that the motion of the pen, is -the pens own motion; but I deny, that after holding the hand a little -while still, and beginning to write again, a new motion of the pen is -generated; for it is onely a repetition, and not a new generation, -for the Hand, Pen and Ink, repeat but the same motion or action of -writing: Besides, Generation is made by Connexion or Conjunction of -parts, moving by consent to such or such Figures, but the motion of -the Hand or the Pen is always one and the same; wherefore it is but -the variation and repetition in and of the same motion of the Hand, -or Pen, which may be continued in that manner infinitely, just as the -same Corporeal Motions can make infinite variations and repetitions -of one and the same Figure, repeating it as oft as they please, as -also making Copy of Copy; And although I do not deny, but there are -Generations in Nature, yet not annihilations or perishings, for if any -one motion or figure should perish, the matter must perish also; and if -any one part of matter can perish, all the matter in nature may perish -also; and if there can any new thing be made or created in nature, -which hath not been before, there may also be a new Nature, and so by -perishings and new Creations, this World would not have continued an -age; But surely whatsoever is in Nature, hath been existent always. -Wherefore to conclude, it is not the generation and perishing of an -Accident that makes its subject to be changed, but the production and -alteration of the Form, makes it said to be generated or destroyed, -for matter will change its motions and figures without perishing or -annihilating; and whether there were words or not, there would be such -causes and effects; But having not the art of Logick to dispute with -artificial words, nor the art of Geometry to demonstrate my opinions -by Mathematical Figures, I fear they will not be so well received by -the Learned; However, I leave them to any mans unprejudiced Reason and -Judgment, and devote my self to your service, as becomes, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble and faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Elem. of Philos. c._ 8. _art._ 2. - -[2] _Art._ 3. - -[3] _Art._ 20. - -[4] _Art._ 2. - -[5] _Art._ 21. - - - - -XVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ concerning Place and Magnitude says,[1], that _Place -is nothing out of the mind, nor Magnitude any thing within it; for -Place is a meer Phantasme of a body of such quantity and figure, and -Magnitude a peculiar accident of the body_; but this doth not well -agree with my reason, for I believe that Place, Magnitude and Body are -but one thing, and that Place is as true an extension as Magnitude, -and not a feigned one; Neither am I of his opinion, _that Place is -Immoveable_, but that place moves, according as the body moveth, for -not any body wants place, because place and body is but one thing, and -wheresoever is body, there is also place, and wheresoever is place, -there is body, as being one and the same; Wherefore _Motion cannot be a -relinquishing of one place and acquiring another_,[2] for there is no -such thing as place different from body, but what is called change of -place, is nothing but change of corporeal motions; for, say an house -stands in such a place, if the house be gone, the place is gone also, -as being impossible that the place of the house should remain, when the -house is taken away; like as a man when he is gone out of his chamber, -his place is gone too; 'Tis true, if the ground or foundation do yet -remain, one may say, there stood such an house heretofore, but yet the -place of the house is not there really at that present, unless the same -house be built up again as it was before, and then it hath its place -as before; Nevertheless the house being not there, it cannot be said -that either place or house are annihilated, _viz._, when the materials -are dissolved, no not when transformed into millions of several other -figures, for the house remains still in the power of all those several -parts of matter; and as for _space_, it is onely a distance betwixt -some parts or bodies; But an _Empty place_ signifies to my opinion -Nothing, for if place and body are one and the same, and empty is -as much as nothing; then certainly these two words cannot consist -together, but are destructive to one another. Concerning, that your -_Author_ says,[3] _Two bodies cannot be together in the same place, nor -one body in two places at the same time_, is very true, for there are -no more places then bodies, nor more bodies then places, and this is to -be understood as well of the grosser, as the purest parts of nature, of -the mind as well as of the body, of the rational and sensitive animate -matter as well as of the inanimate, for there is no matter, how pure -and subtil soever, but is imbodied, and all that hath body hath place. -Likewise I am of his opinion,[4] _That one body hath always one and -the same magnitude_; for, in my opinion, magnitude, place and body do -not differ, and as place, so magnitude can never be separated from -body. But when he speaks of _Rest_, I cannot believe there is any such -thing truly in Nature, for it is impossible to prove, that any thing -is without Motion, either consistent, or composing, or dissolving, or -transforming motions, or the like, although not altogether perceptible -by our senses, for all the Matter is either moving or moved, and -although the moved parts are not capable to receive the nature of -self-motion from the self-moving parts, yet these self-moving parts, -being joyned and mixt with all other parts of the moved matter, do -always move the same; for the Moved or Inanimate part of Matter, -although it is a Part of it self, yet it is so intermixt with the -self-moving Animate Matter, as they make but one Body; and though some -parts of the Inanimate may be as pure as the Sensitive Animate Matter, -yet they are never so subtil as to be self-moving; Wherefore the -Sensitive moves in the Inanimate, and the Rational in the Sensitive, -but often the Rational moves in it self. And, although there is no rest -in nature, nevertheless Matter could have been without Motion, when as -it is impossible that Matter could be without place or magnitude, no -more then Variety can be without motion; And thus much at this present: -I conclude, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Part._ 2. _c._ 8. _a._ 5. - -[2] _Art._ 10. - -[3] _Art._ 8. - -[4] _Art._ 5. - - - - -XVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Passing by those Chapters of your _Authors_, that treat of _Power and -Act, Identy and Difference, Analogisme, Angle and Figure, Figures -deficient, dimension of Circles_, and several others, most of which -belong to art, as to Geometry, and the like; I am come to that wherein -he discourses of _Sense_ and _Animal Motion_, saying,[1] _That some -Natural bodies have in themselves the patterns almost of all things, -and others of none at all_; Whereof my opinion is, that the sensitive -and rational parts of Matter are the living and knowing parts of -Nature, and no part of nature can challenge them onely to it self, nor -no creature can be sure, that sense is onely in Animal-kind, and reason -in Man-kind; for can any one think or believe that Nature is ignorant -and dead in all her other parts besides Animals? Truly this is a very -unreasonable opinion; for no man, as wise as he thinks himself, nay -were all Man-kind joyned into one body, yet they are not able to know -it, unless there were no variety of parts in nature, but onely one -whole and individeable body, for other Creatures may know and perceive -as much as Animals, although they have not the same Sensitive Organs, -nor the same manner or way of Perception. Next your _Author_ says,[2] -_The cause of Sense or Perception consists herein, that the first organ -of sense is touched and pressed; For when the uttermost part of the -organ is pressed, it no sooner yields, but the part next within it is -pressed also, and in this manner the pressure or motion is propagated -through all the parts of the organ to the innermost. And thus also the -pressure of the uttermost part proceeds from the pressure of some more -remote body, and so continually, till we come to that, from which, as -from its fountain, we derive the Phantasme or Idea, that is made in -us by our sense: And this, whatsoever it be, is that we commonly call -the object; Sense therefore is some Internal motion in the Sentient, -generated by some Internal motion of the Parts of the object, and -propagated through all the media to the innermost part of the organ. -Moreover there being a resistance or reaction in the organ, by reason -of its internal motion against the motion propagated from the object, -there is also an endeavour in the organ opposite to the endeavour -proceeding from the object, and when that endeavour inwards is the last -action in the act of sense, then from the reaction a Phantasme or Idea -has its being._ This is your _Authors_ opinion, which if it were so, -perception could not be effected so suddenly, nay I think the sentient -by so many pressures in so many perceptions, would at last be pressed -to death, besides the organs would take a great deal of hurt, nay -totally be removed out of their places, so as the eye would in time be -prest into the centre of the brain; And if there were any Resistance, -Reaction or Indeavour in the organ, opposite to the Endeavour of the -object, there would, in my opinion, be always a war between the animal -senses and the objects, the endeavour of the objects pressing one way, -and the senses pressing the other way, and if equal in their strengths, -they would make a stop, and the sensitive organs would be very much -pained. Truly, _Madam_, in my opinion, it would be like that Custom -which formerly hath been used at _Newcastle_, when a man was married, -the guests divided themselves, behind and before the Bridegroom, the -one party driving him back, the other forwards, so that one time a -Bridegroom was killed in this fashion; But certainly Nature hath a -more quick and easie way of giving intelligence and knowledg to her -Creatures, and doth not use such constraint and force in her actions; -Neither is sense or sensitive perception a meer Phantasme or Idea, but -a Corporeal action of the sensitive and rational matter, and according -to the variation of the objects or patterns, and the sensitive and -rational motions, the perception also is various, produced not by -external pressure, but by internal self-motion, as I have declared -heretofore; and to prove, that the sensitive and rational corporeal -motions are the onely cause of perception; I say, if those motions -in an animal move in another way, and not to such perceptions, then -that animal can neither hear, see, taste, smell nor touch, although -all his sensitive organs be perfect, as is evident in a man falling -into a swoon, where all the time he is in a swoon, the pressure of the -objects is made without any effect; Wherefore, as the sensitive and -rational corporeal motions make all that is in nature; so likewise -they make perception, as being perception it self, for all self-motion -is perception, but all perception is not animal perception; or after -an animal way; and therefore sense cannot decay nor die, but what is -called a decay or death, is nothing else but a change or alteration of -those Motions. But you will say, _Madam_, it may be, that one body, -as an object, leaves the print of its figure, in the next adjoyning -body, until it comes to the organ of sense, I answer that then soft -bodies onely must be pressed, and the object must be so hard as to -make a print, and as for rare parts of matter, they are not able to -retain a print without self-motion; Wherefore it is not probable that -the parts of air should receive a print, and print the same again -upon the adjoyning part, until the last part of the air print it -upon the eye; and that the exterior parts of the organ should print -upon the interior, till it come to the centre of the Brain, without -self-motion. Wherefore in my opinion, Perception is not caused either -by the printing of objects, nor by pressures, for pressures would -make a general stop of all natural motions, especially if there were -any reaction or resistence of sense; but according to my reason, the -sensitive and rational corporeal motions in one body, pattern out the -Figure of another body, as of an exterior object, which may be done -easily without any pressure or reaction; I will not say, that there -is no pressure or reaction in Nature, but pressure and reaction doth -not make perception, for the sensitive and rational parts of matter -make all perception and variety of motion, being the most subtil parts -of Nature, as self-moving, as also divideable, and composeable, and -alterable in their figurative motions, for this Perceptive matter can -change its substance into any figure whatsoever in nature, as being not -bound to one constant figure. But having treated hereof before, and -being to say more of it hereafter, this shall suffice for the present, -remaining always, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - -[1] _C._ 25. _a._ 1. - -[2] _Art._ 2. - - - - -XIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -To discourse of the World and Stars, is more then I am able to do, -wanting the art of Astronomy and Geometry; wherefore passing by that -Chapter of your Author, I am come to that[1] wherein he treats of -Light, Heat and Colours; and to give you my opinion of Light, I say, -it is not the light of the Sun, that makes an Animal see, for we can -see inwardly in Dreams without the Suns light, but it is the sensitive -and rational Motions in the Eye and Brain that make such a figure as -Light; For if Light did press upon the Eye, according to your _Authors_ -opinion, it might put the Eye into as much pain as Fire doth, when -it sticks its points into our skin or flesh. The same may be said of -Colours, for the sensitive motions make such a figure, which is such -a Colour, and such a Figure, which is such a Colour; Wherefore Light, -Heat and Colour, are not bare and bodiless qualities, but such figures -made by corporeal self-motions, and are as well real and corporeal -objects as other figures are; and when these figures change or alter, -it is onely that their motions alter, which may alter and change heat -into cold, and light into darkness, and black colour into white. But -by reason the motions of the Sun are so constant, as the motions of -any other kind of Creatures, it is no more subject to be altered then -all the World, unless Nature did it by the command of God; for though -the Parts of self-moving Matter be alterable, yet all are not altered; -and this is the reason, that the figure of Light in our eye and brain -is altered, as well as it is alterable, but not the real figure of the -Sun, neither doth the Sun enter our eyes; and as the Light of the Sun -is made or patterned in the eye, so is the light of Glow-worms-tails, -and Cats-eyes, that shine in the dark, made not by the Sun's, but their -own motions in their own parts; The like when we dream of Light, the -sensitive corporeal motions working inwardly, make the figure of light -on the inside of the eye, as they did pattern out the figure of light -on the outside of the eye when awake, and the objects before them; for -the sensitive motions of the eye pattern out the figure of the object -in the eye, and the rational motions make the same figure in their own -substance. But there is some difference between those figures that -perceive light, and those that are light themselves; for when we sleep, -there is made the figure of light, but not from a copy; but when the -eye seeth light, that figure is made from a copy of the real figure of -the Sun; but those lights which are inherent, as in Glow-worms-tails, -are original lights, in which is as much difference as between a Man -and his Picture; and as for the swiftness of the Motions of light, and -the violence of the Motions of fire, it is very probable they are so, -but they are a certain particular kind or sort of swift and violent -motions; neither will all sorts of swift and violent motions make fire -or light, as for example the swift and violent Circular motion of a -Whirlewind neither makes light nor fire; Neither is all fire light, -nor all light fire, for there is a sort of dead fire, as in Spices, -Spirits, Oyles, and the like; and several sorts of lights, which are -not hot, as the light which is made in Dreams, as also the inherent -lights in Glow-worms, Cats-eyes, Fish-bones, and the like; all which -several fires and lights are made by the self-moving matter and motions -distinguishable by their figures, for those Motions make such a figure -for the Suns light, such a figure for Glow-worms light, such a figure -for Cats-eyes light, and so some alteration in every sort of light; -The same for Fire, onely Fire-light is a mixt figure, as partly of the -figure of Fire, and partly of the figure of Light: Also Colours are -made after the like manner, _viz._ so many several Colours, so many -several Figures; and as these Figures are less or more different, so -are the Colours. - -Thus, _Madam_, whosoever will study Nature, must consider the Figures -of every Creature, as well as their Motions, and must not make -abstractions of Motion and Figure from Matter, nor of Matter from -Motion and Figure, for they are inseparable, as being but one thing, -_viz._ Corporeal Figurative Motions; and whosoever conceives any of -them as abstract, will, in my opinion, very much erre; but men are apt -to make more difficulties and enforcements in nature then nature ever -knew. But to return to Light: There is no better argument to prove -that all objects of sight are figured in the Eye, by the sensitive, -voluntary or self-motions, without the pressure of objects, but that -not onely the pressure of light would hurt the tender Eye, but that -the eye doth not see all objects according to their Magnitude, but -sometimes bigger, sometimes less: as for example, when the eye looks -through a small passage, as a Perspective-glass, by reason of the -difficulty of seeing a body through a small hole, and the double -figure of the glass being convex and concave, the corporeal motions -use more force, by which the object is enlarged, like as a spark of -fire by force is dilated into a great fire, and a drop of water by -blowing into a bubble; so the corporeal motions do double and treble -their strength, making the Image of the object exceeding large in the -eye; for though the eye be contracted, yet the Image in the eye is -enlarged to a great extension; for the sensitive and rational matter is -extremely subtil, by reason it is extreamly pure, by which it hath more -means and ways of magnifying then the Perspective-glass. But I intend -to write more of this subject in my next, and so I break off here, -resting, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ 27. - - - - -XX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Some perhaps will question the truth or probability of my saying, that -Light is a Body, objecting that if light were a body, when the Sun is -absent or retires under our Horizon, its light would leave an empty -place, or if there were no empty place but all full, the light of the -Sun at its return would not have room to display it self, especially in -so great a compass as it doth, for two bodies cannot be in one place at -one time. I _answer_, all bodies carry their places along with them, -for body and place go together and are inseparable, and when the light -of the Sun is gone, darkness succeeds, and when darkness is gone, light -succeeds, so that it is with light and darkness as with all Creatures -else; For you cannot believe, that if the whole World were removed, -there would be a place of the world left, for there cannot be an empty -nothing, no more then there can be an empty something; but if the world -were annihilated, the place would be annihilated too, place and body -being one and the same thing; and therefore in my opinion, there be no -more places then there are bodies, nor no more bodies then there are -places. - -Secondly, They will think it absurd that I say, the eye can see without -light; but in my opinion it seems not absurd, but very rational, -for we may see in dreams, and some do see in the dark, not in their -fancy or imagination, but really; and as for dreams, the sensitive -corporeal motions make a light on the inside of the organ of sight -really, as I have declared in my former Letter. But that we do not see -ordinarily without exterior Light, the reason is, that the sensitive -Motions cannot find the outward objects to pattern out without exterior -light, but all perception doth not proceed from light, for all other -perception besides animal sight requires not light. Neither in my -opinion, doth the Perception of sight in all Creatures but Animals, but -yet Animals do often see in the dark, and in sleep: I will not say but -that the animate matter which by self-motion doth make the Perception -of light with other perceptive Figures, and so animal perceptive light -may be the presenter or ground perceptive figure of sight; yet the -sensitive corporeal motions can make other figures without the help of -light, and such as light did never present: But when the eye patterns -out an exterior object presented by light, it patterns also out the -object of light; for the sensitive motions can make many figures -by one act, not onely in several organs, but in one organ; as for -example, there is presented to sight a piece of Imbroydery, wherein -is silk, silver and gold upon Sattin in several forms or figures, as -several flowers, the sensitive motions streight by one and the same -act, pattern out all those several figures of flowers, as also the -figures of Silk, Silver, Gold and Sattin, without any pressure of these -objects, or motions in the medium, for if they all should press, the -eye would no more see the exterior objects, then the nose, being stopt, -could smell a presented perfume. - -_Thirdly_, They may ask me, if sight be made in the eye, and proceeds -not from the outward object, what is the reason that we do not see -inwardly, but outwardly as from us? I answer, when we see objects -outwardly, as from us, then the sensitive motions work on the outside -of the organ, which organ being outwardly convex, causes us to see -outwardly, as from us, but in dreams we see inwardly; also the -sensitive motions do pattern out the distance together with the object: -But you will say, the body of the distance, as the air, cannot be -perceived, and yet we can perceive the distance; I answer, you could -not perceive the distance, but by such or such an object as is subject -to your sight; for you do not see the distance more then the air, or -the like rare body, that is between grosser objects; for if there were -no stars, nor planets, nor clouds, nor earth, nor water, but onely air, -you would not see any space or distance; but light being a more visible -body then air, you might figure the body of air by light, but so, as in -an extensive or dilating way; for when the mind or the rational matter -conceives any thing that hath not such an exact figure, or is not -so perceptible by our senses; then the mind uses art, and makes such -figures, which stand like to that; as for example, to express infinite -to it self, it dilates it parts without alteration, and without -limitation or circumference; Likewise, when it will conceive a constant -succession of Time, it draws out its parts into the figure of a line; -and if eternity, it figures a line without beginning, and end. But as -for Immaterial, no mind can conceive that, for it cannot put it self -into nothing, although it can dilate and rarifie it self to an higher -degree, but must stay within the circle of natural bodies, as I within -the circle of your Commands, to express my self - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and obedient Servant._ - - - - -XXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Heat and Cold, according to your _Authors_ opinion, are made by -Dilation and Contraction: for says he,[1] _When the Motion of the -ambient æthereal substance makes the spirits and fluid parts of our -bodies tend outwards, we acknowledg heat, but by the indeavour inwards -of the same spirits and humors we feel cold: so that to cool is to -make the exterior parts of the body endeavour inwards, by a motion -contrary to that of calefaction, by which the internal parts are -called outwards. He therefore that would know the cause of Cold, must -find by what motion the exterior parts of any body endeavour to retire -inwards._ But I desire you to consider, _Madam_, that there be moist -Colds, and dry Heats, as well as dry Colds, and moist Heats; wherefore -all sorts of Cold are not made by the retyring of parts inwards, which -is contraction or attraction; neither are all sorts of Heat made by -parts tending outwards, which is dilation or rarefaction; for a moist -cold is made by dilation, and a dry heat by contraction, as well as a -moist heat is made by dilation, and a dry cold by contraction: But your -_Author_ makes not this difference, but onely a difference between a -dilated heat, and a contracted cold; but because a cold wind is made -by breath blown thorow pinched or contracted lips, and an hot wind by -breath through opened and extended lips, should we judg that all heat -and cold must be made after one manner or way? The contracted mouth -makes Wind as well as the dilated, but yet Wind is not made that way, -as heat and cold; for it may be, that onely the air pressed together -makes wind, or it may be that the corporeal motions in the air may -change air into wind, as they change water into vapour, and vapour -into air; or it may be something else that is invisible and rare, as -air; and there may be several sorts of wind, air, heat, cold, as of -all other Creatures, more then man is capable to know. As for your -_Authors_ opinion concerning the congealing of Water, and how Ice is -made, I will not contradict it, onely I think nature hath an easier -way to effect it, then he describes; Wherefore my opinion is, that it -is done by altering motions; as for example, the corporeal motions -making the figure of water by dilation in a Circle figure, onely alter -from such a dilating circular figure into a contracted square, which -is Ice, or into such a contracted triangle, as is snow: And thus water -and vapour may be changed with ease, without any forcing, pressing, -raking, or the like. The same may be said of hard and bent bodies; and -of restitution, as also of air, thunder and lightning, which are all -done by an easie change of motion, and changing into such or such a -figure is not the motion of Generation, which is to build a new house -with old materials, but onely a Transformation; I say a new house with -old materials; not that I mean there is any new Creation in nature, of -any thing that was not before in nature; for nature is not God, to make -new beings out of nothing, but any thing may be called new, when it is -altered from one figure into another. I add no more at this time, but -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _C._ 28. _a._ 1. - - - - -XXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -The Generation of sound, according to your worthy _Authors_ opinion, is -as follows: _As Vision,_ says he,[1] _so hearing is Generated by the -medium, but not in the same manner; for sight is from pressure, that -is, from an endeavour, in which there is no perceptible progression -of any of the parts of the medium, but one part urging or thrusting -on another, propagateth that action successively to any distance -whatsoever; whereas the motion of the medium, by which sound is made, -is a stroke; for when we hear, the drum of the Ear, which is the first -organ of hearing, is strucken, and the drum being stricken, the_ Pia -Mater _is also shaken, and with it the arteries inserted into it, by -which the action propagated to the heart it self, by the reaction of -the heart a Phantasme is made which we call Sound._ Thus far your -_Author_: To which give me leave to reply, that I fear, if the Ear was -bound to hear any loud Musick, or another sound a good while, it would -soundly be beaten, and grow sore and bruised with so many strokes; but -since a pleasant sound would be rendred very unpleasant in this manner, -my opinion is, that like as in the Eye, so in the Ear the corporeal -sensitive motions do pattern out as many several figures, as sounds are -presented to them; but if these motions be irregular, then the figure -of the sound in the ear is not perfect according to the original; for -if it be, that the motions are tyred with figuring, or the object of -sound be too far distant from the sensitive organ, then they move -slowly and weakly, not that they are tyred or weak in strength, but -with working and repeating one and the same object, and so through -love to variety, change from working regularly to move irregularly, -so as not to pattern outward objects as they ought, and then there are -no such patterns made at all, which we call to be deaf; and sometimes -the sensitive motions do not so readily perceive a soft sound near, -as a stronger farther off. But to prove it is not the outward object -of sound with its striking or pressing motion, nor the medium, that -causes this perception of sense, if there be a great solid body, as -a wall, or any other partition betwixt two rooms, parting the object -and the sensitive organ, so, as the sound is not able to press it, -nevertheless the perception will be made; And as for pipes to convey -sounds, the perception is more fixt and perfecter in united then in -dilated or extended bodies, and then the sensitive motions can make -perfecter patterns; for the stronger the objects are, the more perfect -are the figures and patterns of the objects, and the more perfect is -the perception. But when the sound is quite out of the ear, then the -sensitive motions have altered the patterning of such figures to some -other action; and when the sound fadeth by degrees, then the figure -or pattern alters by degrees; but for the most part the sensitive -corporeal motions alter according as the objects are presented, or -the perception patterns out. Neither do they usually make figures -of outward objects, if not perceived by the senses, unless through -Irregularities as in Mad men, which see such and such things, when -as these things are not neer, and then the sensitive motions work by -rote, or after their own voluntary invention. As for Reflexion, it is -a double perception, and so a double figure of one object; like as -many pictures of one man, where some are more perfect then others, for -a copy of a copy is not so perfect as a copy of an original. But the -recoyling of sound is, that the sensitive motions in the ear begin -a new pattern, before they dissolved the former, so as there is no -perfect alteration or change, from making to dissolving, but pattern -is made upon pattern, which causes a confusion of figures, the one -being neither perfectly finished, nor the other perfectly made. But -it is to be observed, that not always the sensitive motions in the -organs take their pattern from the original, but from copies; as for -example, the sensitive motions in the eye, pattern out the figure of -an eye in a glass, and so do not take a pattern from the original it -self, but by an other pattern, representing the figure of the eye in -a Looking-glass; The same doth the Ear, by patterning out Ecchoes, -which is but a pattern of a pattern; But when as a man hears himself -speak or make a sound, then the corporeal sensitive motions in the Ear, -pattern out the object or figure made by the motions of the tongue -and the throat, which is voice; By which we may observe, that there -may be many figures made by several motions from one original; as -for example, the figure of a word is made in a mans mouth, then the -copy of that figure is made in the ear, then in the brain, and then -in the memory, and all this in one Man: Also a word being made in a -mans mouth, the air takes a copy or many copies thereof; but the Ear -patterns them both out, first the original coming from the mouth, and -then the copy made in the air, which is called an Eccho, and yet not -any strikes or touches each others parts, onely perceives and patterns -out each others figure. Neither are their substances the same, although -the figures be alike; for the figure of a man may be carved in wood, -then cut in brass, then in stone, and so forth, where the figure may -be always the same, although the substances which do pattern out the -figure are several, _viz._ Wood, Brass, Stone, &c. and so likewise -may the figure of a stone be figured in the fleshy substance of the -Eye, or the figure of light or colour, and yet the substance of the -Eye remains full the same; neither doth the substantial figure of a -stone, or tree, patterned out by the sensitive corporeal motions, in -the flesh of an animal eye, change from being a vegetable or mineral, -to an animal, and if this cannot be done by nature, much less by art; -for if the figure of an animal be carved in wood or stone, it doth not -give the wood or stone any animal knowledg, nor an animal substance, -as flesh, bones, blood, &c. no more doth the patterning or figuring -of a Tree give a vegetable knowledg, or the substance of wood to the -eye, for the figure of an outward object doth not alter the substance -that patterns it out or figures it, but the patterning substance doth -pattern out the figure, in it self, or in its own substance, so as the -figure which is pattern'd, hath the same life and knowledg with the -substance by and in which it is figured or pattern'd, and the inherent -motions of the same substance; and according as the sensitive and -rational self-moving matter moves, so figures are made; and thus we -see, that lives, knowledges, motions and figures are all material, and -all Creatures are indued with life, knowledg, motion and figure, but -not all alike or after the same manner. But to conclude this discourse -of perception of Sound, the Ear may take the object of sound afar off, -as well as at a near distance; not onely if many figures of the same -sound be made from that great distance, but if the interposing parts -be not so thick, close, or many as to hinder or obscure the object from -the animal Perception in the sensitive organ; for if a man lays his -Ear near to the Ground, the Ear may hear at a far distance, as well -as the Eye can see, for it may hear the noise of a troop afar off, -perception being very subtil and active; Also there may several Copies -be made from the Original, and from the last Copy nearest to the Ear, -the Ear may take a pattern, and so pattern out the noise in the organ, -without any strokes to the Ear, for the subtil matter in all Creatures -doth inform and perceive. But this is well to be observed, that the -figures of objects are as soon made, as perceived by the sensitive -motions in their work of patterning. And this is my Opinion concerning -the Perception of Sound, which together with the rest I leave to your -Ladyships and others wiser Judgment, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ 29. _a._ 1. - - - - -XXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I perceive by your last, that you cannot well apprehend my meaning, -when I say that the print or figure of a Body Printed or Carved, is -not made by the motions of the body Printing or Carving it, but by the -motions of the body or substance Printed or Carved; for say you, Doth -a piece of Wood carve it self, or a black Patch of a Lady cut its own -figure by its own motions? Before I answer you, _Madam_, give me leave -to ask you this question, whether it be the motion of the hand, or the -Instrument, or both, that print or carve such or such a body? Perchance -you will say, that the motion of the hand moves the Instrument, and the -Instrument moves the Wood which is to be carved: Then I ask, whether -the motion that moves the Instrument, be the Instruments, or the Hands? -Perchance you will say the Hands; but I answer, how can it be the Hands -motion, if it be in the Instrument? You will say, perhaps, the motion -of the hand is transferred out of the hand into the instrument, and so -from the instrument into the carved figure; but give me leave to ask -you, was this motion of the hand, that was transferred, Corporeal or -Incorporeal? If you say, Corporeal, then the hand must become less and -weak, but if Incorporeal, I ask you, how a bodiless motion can have -force and strength to carve and cut? But put an Impossible proposition, -as that there is an Immaterial motion, and that this Incorporeal motion -could be transferred out of one body into another; then I ask you, when -the hand and instrument cease to move, what is become of the motion? -Perhaps you will say, the motion perishes or is annihilated, and when -the hand and the instrument do move again, to the carving or cutting of -the figure, then a new Incorporeal Motion is created; Truly then there -will be a perpetual creation and annihilation of Incorporeal motions, -that is, of that which naturally is nothing; for an Incorporeal being -is as much as a natural No-thing, for Natural reason cannot know nor -have naturally any perception or Idea of an Incorporeal being: besides, -if the motion be Incorporeal, then it must needs be a supernatural -Spirit, for there is not any thing else Immaterial but they, and then -it will be either an Angel or a Devil, or the Immortal Soul of man; but -if you say it is the supernatural Soul, truly I cannot be perswaded -that the supernatural Soul should not have any other imployment then -to carve or cut prints, or figures, or move in the hands, or heels, -or legs, or arms of a Man; for other animals have the same kind of -Motions, and then they might have a Supernatural Soul as well as Man, -which moves in them. But if you say, that these transferrable motions -are material, then every action whereby the hand moves to the making -or moving of some other body, would lessen the number of the motions -in the hand, and weaken it, so that in the writing of one letter, -the hand would not be able to write a second letter, at least not -a third. But I pray, _Madam_, consider rationally, that though the -Artificer or Workman be the occasion of the motions of the carved -body, yet the motions of the body that is carved, are they which put -themselves into such or such a figure, or give themselves such or such -a print as the Artificer intended; for a Watch, although the Artist -or Watch-maker be the occasional cause that the Watch moves in such -or such an artificial figure, as the figure of a Watch, yet it is the -Watches own motion by which it moves; for when you carry the Watch -about you, certainly the Watch-makers hand is not then with it as to -move it; or if the motion of the Watch-makers hand be transferred into -the Watch, then certainly the Watch-maker cannot make another Watch, -unless there be a new creation of new motions made in his hands; so -that God and Nature would be as much troubled and concerned in the -making of Watches, as in the making of a new World; for God created -this World in six days, and rested the seventh day, but this would be a -perpetual Creation; Wherefore I say that some things may be Occasional -causes of other things, but not the Prime or Principal causes; and this -distinction is very well to be considered, for there are no frequenter -mistakes then to confound these two different causes, which make so -many confusions in natural Philosophy; and this is the Opinion of, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In answer to your question, What makes Eccho, I say, it is that which -makes all the effects of Nature, _viz._ self-moving matter; I know, the -common opinion is, that Eccho is made like as the figure of a Face, or -the like, in a Looking-glass, and that the Reverberation of sound is -like the Reflection of sight in a Looking-glass; But I am not of that -opinion, for both Eccho, and that which is called the Reflection in a -Looking-glass, are made by the self-moving matter, by way of patterning -and copying out. But then you will ask me, whether the glass takes the -copy of the face, or the face prints its copy on the glass, or whether -it be the _medium_ of light and air that makes it? I answer, although -many Learned men say, that as all perception, so also the seeing of -ones face in a Looking-glass, and Eccho, are made by impression and -reaction; yet I cannot in my simplicity conceive it, how bodies that -come not near, or touch each other, can make a figure by impression -and reaction: They say it proceeds from the motions of the _Medium_ of -light, or air, or both, _viz._ that the _Medium_ is like a long stick -with two ends, whereof one touches the object, the other the organ of -sense, and that one end of it moving, the other moves also at the same -point of Time, by which motions it may make many several figures; But -I cannot conceive, how this motion of pressing forward and backward -should make so many figures, wherein there is so much variety and -curiosity. But, say light and air are as one figure, and like as a -seal do print another body; I answer, if any thing could print, yet it -is not probable, that so soft and rare bodies as light and air, could -print such solid bodies as glass, nor could air by reverberation make -such a sound as Eccho. But mistake me not, for, _I do not say_, that -the Corporeal motions of light or air, cannot, or do not pencil, copie, -or pattern out any figure, for both light and air are very active in -such sorts of Motions, but I say, they cannot do it on any other bodies -but their own. But to cut off tedious and unnecessary disputes, I -return to the expressing of my own opinion, and believe, that the glass -in its own substance doth figure out the copy of the face, or the like, -and from that copy the sensitive motions in the eyes take another copy, -and so the rational from the sensitive; and in this manner is made both -rational and sensitive perception, sight and knowledg. The same with -Ecchoes; for the air patterns out the copy of the sound, and then the -sensitive corporeal motions in the ear pattern again this copy from -the air, and so do make the perception and sense of hearing. You may -ask me, _Madam_, if it be so, that the glass and the air copy out the -figure of the face and of sound, whether the Glass may be said to see -and the Air to speak? I answer, I cannot tell that; for though I say, -that the air repeats the words, and the glass represents the face, yet -I cannot guess what their perceptions are, onely this I may say, that -the air hath an elemental, and the glass a mineral, but not an animal -perception. But if these figures were made by the pressures of several -objects or parts, and by reaction, there could not be such variety as -there is, for they could but act by one sort of motion: Likewise is -it improbable, that sounds, words or voices, should like a company of -Wild-Geese fly in the air, and so enter into the ears of the hearers, -as they into their nests: Neither can I conceive, how in this manner -a word can enter so many ears, that is, be divided into every ear, and -yet strike every ear with an undivided vocal sound; You will say, as -a small fire doth heat and warm all those that stand by; for the heat -issues from the fire, as the light from the Sun. I answer, all what -issues and hath motion, hath a Body, and yet most learned men deny that -sound, light and heat have bodies: But if they grant of light that it -has a body, they say it moves and presses the air, and the air the eye, -and so of heat; which if so, then the air must not move to any other -motion but light, and onely to one sort of light, as the Suns light; -for if it did move in any other motion, it would disturb the light; for -if a Bird did but fly in the air, it would give all the region of air -another motion, and so put out, or alter the light, or at least disturb -it; and wind would make a great disturbance in it. Besides, if one body -did give another body motion, it must needs give it also substance, for -motion is either something or nothing, body or no body, substance or no -substance; if nothing, it cannot enter into another body; if something, -it must lessen the bulk of the body it quits, and increase the bulk -of the body it enters, and so the Sun and Fire with giving light and -heat, would become less, for they cannot both give and keep at once, -for this is as impossible, as for a man to give to another creature -his human Nature, and yet to keep it still. Wherefore my opinion is -for heat, that when many men stand round about a fire, and are heated -and warmed by it, the fire doth not give them any thing, nor do they -receive something from the fire, but the sensitive motions in their -bodies pattern out the object of the fires heat, and so they become -more or less hot according as their patterns are numerous or perfect; -And as for air, it patterns out the light of the Sun, and the sensitive -motions in the eyes of animals pattern out the light in the air. The -like for Ecchoes, or any other sound, and for the figures which are -presented in a Looking-glass. And thus millions of parts or creatures -may make patterns of one or more objects, and the objects neither -give nor loose any thing. And this I repeat here, that my meaning of -Perception may be the better understood, which is the desire of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXV. - - -_MADAM_ - -I perceive you are not fully satisfied with my former Letter concerning -Eccho, and a figure presented in a Looking-glass; for you say, how is -it possible, if Eccho consists in the ears patterning out of a voice -or sound, but that it will make a confusion in all the parts of the -air? My answer is, that I doe not say that Eccho is onely made by the -patterning out of the voice or sound, but by repeating the same voice -or sound, which repetition is named an Eccho, for millions of ears in -animals may pattern out a voice or words, and yet never repeat them, -and so may millions of parts of the air; wherefore Eccho doth not -consist in the bare patterning out, but in the repetition of the same -sound or words, which are pattern'd out; and so some parts of the air -may at one and the same time pattern out a sound and not repeat it, -and some may both pattern out, and repeat it, but some may neither -pattern out, nor repeat it, and therefore the Repetition, not the -bare Patterning out is called Eccho: Just as when two or more men do -answer or mock each other, and repeat each others words, it is not -necessary, if there were a thousand standers by, that they should all -do the same. And as for the figure presented in a Looking-glass, I -cannot conceive it to be made by pressure and reaction; for although -there is both pressure and reaction in nature, and those very frequent -amongst natures Parts, yet they do neither make perception nor -production, although both pressure and reaction are made by corporeal -self-motions; Wherefore the figure presented in a Looking-glass, or -any other smooth glassie body, is, in my opinion, onely made by the -motions of the Looking-glass, which do both pattern out, and present -the figure of an external object in the Glass: But you will say, why do -not the motions of other bodies pattern out, and present the figures -of external objects, as well as smooth glassie bodies do? I answer, -they may pattern out external objects, for any thing I know; but the -reason that their figures are not presented to our eyes, lies partly -in the presenting subject it self, partly in our sight; for it is -observed, that two things are chiefly required in a subject that will -present the figure of an external object; first it must be smooth, even -and glassie, next it must not be transparent: the first is manifest -by experience; for the subject being rough and uneven, will never be -able to present such a figure; as for example, A piece of steel rough -and unpolished, although it may perhaps pattern out the figure of an -external object, yet it will never present its figure, but as soon as -it is polished, and made smooth and glassie, the figure is presently -perceived. But this is to be observed, that smooth and glassie bodies -do not always pattern out exterior objects exactly, but some better, -some worse; like as Painters have not all the same ingenuity; neither -do all eyes pattern out all objects exactly; which proves that the -perception of sight is not made by pressure and reaction, otherwise -there would be no difference, but all eyes would see alike. Next I -say, it is observed, that the subject which will present the figure -of an external object, must not be transparent; the reason is, that -the figure of Light being a substance of a piercing and penetrating -quality, hath more force on transparent, then on other solid dark -bodies, and so disturbs the figure of an external object pattern'd out -in a transparent body, and quite over-masters it. But you will say, you -have found by experience, that if you hold a burning Candle before a -Transparent-glass, although it be in an open Sun-light, yet the figure -of light and flame of the Candle will clearly be seen in the Glass. I -answer, that it is an other thing with the figure of Candle-light, then -of a duskish or dark body; for a Candle-light, though it is not of the -same sort as the Suns light, yet it is of the same nature and quality, -and therefore the Candle-light doth resist and oppose the light of the -Sun, so that it cannot have so much power over it, as over the figures -of other bodies patterned out and presented in Transparent-glass. -Lastly, I say, that the fault oftentimes lies in the perceptive -motions of our sight, which is evident by a plain and Concave-glass; -for in a plain Looking-glass, the further you go from it, the more -your figure presented in the glass seems to draw backward; and in a -Concave-glass, the nearer you go to it, the more seems your figure -to come forth: which effects are like as an house or tree appears to -a Traveller; for, as the man moves from the house or tree, so the -house or tree seems to move from the man; or like one that sails upon -a Ship, who imagines that the Ship stands still, and the Land moves; -when as yet it is the Man and the Ship that moves, and not the House, -or Tree, or the Land; so when a Man turns round in a quick motion, -or when his head is dizzie, he imagines the room or place, where he -is, turns round. Wherefore it is the Inherent Perceptive motions in -the Eye, and not the motions in the Looking-glass, which cause these -effects. And as for several figures that are presented in one glass, -it is absurd to imagine that so many several figures made by so many -several motions should touch the eye; certainly this would make such -a disturbance, if all figures were to enter or but to touch the eye, -as the eye would not perceive any of them, at lead not distinctly; -Wherefore it is most probable that the glass patterns out those -figures, and the sensitive corporeal motions in the eye take again a -pattern from those figures patterned out by the glass, and so make -copies of copies; but the reason why several figures are presented in -one glass in several places, is, that two perfect figures cannot be in -one point, nor made by one motion, but by several corporeal motions. -Concerning a Looking-glass, made in the form or shape of a Cylinder, -why it represents the figure of an external object in an other shape -and posture then the object is, the cause is the shape and form of the -Glass, and not the patterning motions in the Glass. But this discourse -belongs properly to the Opticks, wherefore I will leave it to those -that are versed in that Art, to enquire and search more after the -rational truth thereof. In the mean time, my opinion is, that though -the object is the occasion of the figure presented in a Looking-glass, -yet the figure is made by the motions of the glass or body that -presents it, and that the figure of the glass perhaps may be patterned -out as much by the motions of the object in its own substance, as the -figure of the object is patterned out and presented by the motions of -the glass in its own body or substance. And thus I conclude and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since I mentioned in my last that Light did disturb the figures of -External objects presented in Transparent bodies; you were pleased -to ask, Whether light doth penetrate transparent bodies? I answer, -for anything I know, it may; for when I consider the subtil, piercing -and penetrating nature of light, I believe it doth; but again, when I -consider that light is presented to our sight by transparent bodies -onely, and not by duskish and dark bodies, and yet that those duskish -bodies are more porous then the transparent bodies, so that the light -hath more passage to pass through them, then through transparent -bodies; but that on the contrary, those dark bodies, as Wood, and the -like, do quite obscure the light, when as transparent bodies, as Glass, -&c. transmit it, I am half perswaded that the transparent bodies, as -Glass, rather present the Light by patterning it out, then by giving it -passage: Also I am of a mind, that the air in a room may pattern out -the Light from the Glass, for the Light in a room doth not appear so -clear as in the Glass; also if the Glass be any way defective, it doth -not present the Light so perfectly, whereas, if it were the penetration -of light through the glass, the light would pass through all sorts of -glass alike, which it doth not, but is more clearly seen through some, -and more obscurely through others, according to the goodness or purity -of the glass. But you may say, that the light divulges the imperfection -or goodness of the glass; I answer, so it doth of any other objects -perceived by our sight; for light is the presenter of objects to the -sense and perception of sight, and for any thing I know, the corporeal -optick motions make the figure of light, the ground figure of all other -figures patterned out by the corporeal optick motions, as in dreams, or -when as some do see in the dark, that is, without the help of exterior -light. But you may say, That if the glass and the air in a room did -pattern out the figure of light, those patterns of light would remain -when light is absent: I answer, That is not usual in nature; for when -the object removes, the Pattern alters; I will not say but that the -corporeal optick motions may work by rote without objects, but that is -irregular, as in some distempers. And thus, _Madam_, I have given you -my opinion also to this your question; if you have any more scruples, -I pray let me know of them, and assure your self that I shall be ready -upon all occasions to express my self, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and faithful Servant._ - - - - -XXVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your desire is to know, why sound is louder in a Vault, and in a large -Room then in a less? I answer, A Vault or arched Figure is the freest -from obstruction, as being without corners and points, so as the -sensitive and rational corporeal motions of the Ear can have a better -perception; like as the Eye can see farthest from a hill then being -upon a level ground, because the prospect is freer from the hill, as -without obstruction, unless it be so cloudy that the clouds do hinder -the perception; And as the eye can have a better prospect upon a hill, -so the ear a stronger perception in a Vault; And as for sound, that it -is better perceived in a large, then in a little close room or place, -it is somewhat like the perception of sent, for the more the odorous -parts are bruised, the stronger is that perception of sent, as being -repeated double or treble, which makes the perception stronger, like as -a thick body is stronger then a thin one; So likewise the perception -of sound in the air; for though not all the parts of the air make -repetitions, yet some or many make patterns of the sound; the truth -is, Air is as industrious to divulge or present a sound, by patterns -to the Ear, as light doth objects to the Eye. But then you may ask me, -Why a long hollow pipe doth convey a voice to the ear more readily, -then any large and open place? My answer is, That the Parts of the -air in a long pipe are more Composed and not at liberty to wander, so -that upon necessity they must move onely to the patterning out of the -sound, having no choice, which makes the sound much stronger, and the -perception of the Ear perfecter; But as for Pipes, Vaults, Prospects, -as also figures presented in a room through a little hole, inverted, -and many the like, belongs more to Artists then to my study, for though -Natural Philosophy gives or points out the Ground, and shews the -reason, yet it is the Artist that Works; Besides it is more proper for -Mathematicians to discourse of, which study I am not versed in; and so -leaving it to them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -From Sound I am come to Sent, in the discourse whereof, your -_Author_[1] is pleased to set down these following propositions: 1. -_That smelling is hindred by cold and helped by heat_: 2. _That when -the Wind bloweth from the object, the smell is the stronger, and when -it blows from the sentient towards the object, the weaker, which by -experience is found in dogs, that follow the track of beasts by the -Sent_: 3. _That such bodies as are last pervious to the fluid medium, -yield less smell then such as are more pervious_: 4. _That such bodies -as are of their own nature odorous, become yet more odorous, when -they are bruised_: 5. _That when the breath is stopped (at least in -man) nothing can be smelt_: 6. _That the Sense of smelling is also -taken away by the stopping of the nostrils, though the mouth be left -open._ To begin from the last, I say, that the nose is like the other -sensitive organs, which if they be stopt, the corporeal sensitive -motions cannot take copies of the exterior objects, and therefore must -alter their action of patterning to some other, for when the eye is -shut and cannot perceive outward objects then it works to the Sense -of Touch, or on the inside of the organ to some phantasmes; and so do -the rest of the Senses. As for the stopping of breath, why it hinders -the Sent, the cause is, that the nostrils and the mouth are the chief -organs, to receive air and to let out breath: but though they be common -passages for air and breath, yet taste is onely made in the mouth -and tongue, and sent in the nose; not by the pressure of meat, and -the odoriferous object, but by patterning out the several figures or -objects of sent and taste, for the nose and the mouth will smell and -taste one, nay several things at the same time, like as the eye will -see light, colour, and other objects at once, which I think can hardly -be done by pressures; and the reason is, that the sensitive motions -in the sensitive organs make patterns of several objects at one time, -which is the cause, that when flowers, and such like odoriferous bodies -are bruised, there are as many figures made as there are parts bruised -or divided, and by reason of so many figures the sensitive knowledg is -stronger; but that stones, minerals, and the like, seem not so strong -to our smell, the reason is, that their parts being close and united, -the sensitive motions in the organ cannot so readily perceive and -pattern them out, as those bodies which are more porous and divided. -But as for the wind blowing the sent either to or from the sentient, it -is like a window or door that by the motion of opening and shutting, -hinders or disturbeth the sight; for bodies coming between the object -and the organ, make a stop of that perception. And as for the Dogs -smelling out the track of Beasts, the cause is, that the earth or -ground hath taken a copy of that sent, which copy the sensitive motions -in the nose of the Dog do pattern out, and so long as that figure or -copy lasts, the Dog perceives the sent, but if he doth not follow or -hunt readily, then there is either no perfect copy made by the ground, -or otherwise he cannot find it, which causes him to seek and smell -about until he hath it; and thus smell is not made by the motion of the -air, but by the figuring motions in the nose: Where it is also to be -observed, that not onely the motions in one, but in millions of noses, -may pattern out one little object at one time, and therefore it is not, -that the object of sent fills a room by sending out the sent from its -substance, but that so many figures are made of that object of sent -by so many several sensitive motions, which pattern the same out; and -so the air, or ground, or any other creature, whose sensitive motions -pattern out the object of sent, may perceive the same, although their -sensitive organs are not like to those of animal Creatures; for if -there be but such sensitive motions and perceptions, it is no matter -for such organs. Lastly, it is to be observed, That all Creatures -have not the same strength of smelling, but some smell stronger, some -weaker, according to the disposition of their sensitive motions: Also -there be other parts in the body, which pattern out the object of -sent, besides the nose, but those are interior parts, and take their -patterns from the nose as the organ properly designed for it; neither -is their resentment the same, because their motions are not alike, for -the stomack may perceive and pattern out a sent with aversion, when the -nose may pattern it out with pleasure. And thus much also of Sent; I -conclude and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ 29. _art._ 12. - - - - -XXIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning your Learned Authors discourse of Density and Rarity, he -defines[1] _Thick to be that, which takes up more parts of a space -given; and thin, which containes fewer parts of the same magnitude: not -that there is more matter in one place then in an other equal place, -but a greater quantity of some named body; wherefore the multitude and -paucity of the parts contained within the same space do constitute -density and rarity._ Whereof my opinion is, That there is no more nor -less space or place then body according to its dilation or contraction, -and that space and place are dilated and contracted with the body, -according to the magnitude of the body, for body, place and magnitude -are the same thing, only place is in regard of the several parts of the -body, and there is as well space betwixt things distant a hairs breadth -from one another, as betwixt things distant a million of miles, but yet -this space is nothing from the body; but it makes, that that body has -not the same place with this body, that is, that this body is not that -body, and that this bodies place is not that bodies place. Next your -_Author_ sayes,[2] _He hath already clearly enough demonstrated, that -there can be no beginning of motion, but from an external and moved -body, and that heavy bodies being once cast upwards cannot be cast -down again, but by external motion._ Truly, _Madam_, I will not speak -of your _Authors_ demonstrations, for it is done most by art, which I -have no knowledg in, but I think I have probably declared, that all -the actions of nature are not forced by one part, driving, pressing, -or shoving another, as a man doth a wheel-barrow, or a whip a horse; -nor by reactions, as if men were at foot-ball or cuffs, or as men with -carts meeting each other in a narrow lane. But to prove there is no -self-motion in nature, he goes on and says; _To attribute to created -bodies the power to move themselves, what is it else, then to say that -there be creatures which have no dependance upon the Creator?_ To which -I answer, That if man (who is but a single part of nature) hath given -him by God the power and a free will of moving himself, why should -not God give it to Nature? Neither can I see, how it can take off the -dependance upon God, more then Eternity; for, if there be an Eternal -Creator, there is also an Eternal Creature, and if an Eternal Master, -an Eternal Servant, which is Nature; and yet Nature is subject to Gods -Command, and depends upon him; and if all Gods Attributes be Infinite, -then his Bounty is Infinite also, which cannot be exercised but by an -Infinite Gift, but a Gift doth not cause a less dependance. I do not -say, That man hath an absolute Free-will, or power to move, according -to his desire; for it is not conceived, that a part can have an -absolute power: nevertheless his motion both of body and mind is a free -and self-motion, and such a self-motion hath every thing in Nature -according to its figure or shape; for motion and figure, being inherent -in matter, matter moves figuratively. Yet do I not say, That there is -no hindrance, obstruction and opposition in nature; but as there is -no particular Creature, that hath an absolute power of self-moving; -so that Creature which hath the advantage of strength, subtilty, or -policy, shape, or figure, and the like, may oppose and over-power -another which is inferior to it, in all this; yet this hinderance and -opposition doth not take away self-motion. But I perceive your _Author_ -is much for necessitation, and against free-will, which I leave to -Moral Philosophers and Divines. And as for the ascending of light, -and descending of heavy bodies, there may be many causes, but these -four are perceiveable by our senses, as bulk, or quantity of body, -grossness of substance, density, and shape or figure, which make heavy -bodies descend: But little quantity, purity of substance, rarity, and -figure or shape make light bodies ascend. Wherefore I cannot believe, -that there are[3] _certain little bodies as atoms, and by reason of -their smallness, invisible, differing from one another in consistence, -figure, motion and magnitude, intermingled with the air_, which should -be the cause of the descending of heavy bodies. And concerning air,[4] -_whether it be subject to our senses or not_, I say, that if air be -neither hot, nor cold, it is not subject; but if it be, the sensitive -motions will soon pattern it out, and declare it. I'le conclude with -your _Authors_ question,[5] _What the cause is, that a man doth not -feel the weight of Water in Water?_ and answer, it is the dilating -nature of Water. But of this question and of Water I shall treat more -fully hereafter, and so I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _C._ 30. _a._ 1. - -[2] _Art._ 2. - -[3] _Art._ 3. - -[4] _Art._ 14. - -[5] _Art._ 6. - - - - -XXX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am reading now the works of that Famous and most Renowned _Author, -Des Cartes,_ out of which I intend to pick out onely those discourses -which I like best, and not to examine his opinions, as they go along -from the beginning to the end of his books; And in order to this, I -have chosen in the first place, his discourse of motion, and do not -assent to his opinion,[1] when he defines _Motion to be onely a Mode -of a thing, and not the thing or body it selfe_; for, in my opinion, -there can be no abstraction made of motion from body, neither really, -nor in the manner of our conception, for how can I conceive that -which is not, nor cannot be in nature, that is, to conceive motion -without body? Wherefore Motion is but one thing with body, without -any separation or abstraction soever. Neither doth it agree with my -reason, that[2] _one body can give or transferr motion into another -body; and as much motion it gives or transfers into that body, as -much loses it: As for example, in two hard bodies thrown against one -another, where one, that is thrown with greater force, takes the other -along with it, and loses as much motion as it gives it._ For how -can motion, being no substance, but onely a mode, quit one body, and -pass into another? One body may either occasion, or imitate anothers -motion, but it can neither give nor take away what belongs to its own -or another bodies substance, no more then matter can quit its nature -from being matter; and therefore my opinion is, that if motion doth -go out of one body into another, then substance goes too; for motion, -and substance or body, as afore-mentioned, are all one thing, and -then all bodies that receive motion from other bodies, must needs -increase in their substance and quantity, and those bodies which impart -or transferr motion, must decrease as much as they increase: Truly, -_Madam_, that neither Motion nor Figure should subsist by themselves, -and yet be transferable into other bodies, is very strange, and as much -as to prove them to be nothing, and yet to say they are something. The -like may be said of all others, which they call accidents, as skill, -learning, knowledge, &c. saying, they are no bodies, because they -have no extension, but inherent in bodies or substances as in their -subjects; for although the body may subsist without them, yet they -being always with the body, body and they are all one thing: And so is -power and body, for body cannot quit power, nor power the body, being -all one thing. But to return to Motion, my opinion is, That all matter -is partly animate, and partly inanimate, and all matter is moving and -moved, and that there is no part of Nature that hath not life and -knowledg, for there is no Part that has not a comixture of animate and -inanimate matter; and though the inanimate matter has no motion, nor -life and knowledg of it self, as the animate has, nevertheless being -both so closely joyned and commixed as in one body, the inanimate -moves as well as the animate, although not in the same manner; for the -animate moves of it self, and the inanimate moves by the help of the -animate, and thus the animate is moving and the inanimate moved; not -that the animate matter transfers, infuses, or communicates its own -motion to the inanimate; for this is impossible, by reason it cannot -part with its own nature, nor alter the nature of inanimate matter, -but each retains its own nature; for the inanimate matter remains -inanimate, that is, without self-motion, and the animate loses nothing -of its self-motion, which otherwise it would, if it should impart or -transferr its motion into the inanimate matter; but onely as I said -heretofore, the inanimate works or moves with the animate, because of -their close union and commixture; for the animate forces or causes -the inanimate matter to work with her; and thus one is moving, the -other moved, and consequently there is life and knowledg in all parts -of nature, by reason in all parts of nature there is a commixture of -animate and inanimate matter: and this Life and Knowledg is sense and -reason, or sensitive and rational corporeal motions, which are all one -thing with animate matter without any distinction or abstraction, and -can no more quit matter, then matter can quit motion. Wherefore every -creature being composed of this commixture of animate and inanimate -matter, has also selfe-motion, that is life and knowledg, sense and -reason, so that no part hath need to give or receive motion to or from -another part; although it may be an occasion of such a manner of motion -to another part, and cause it to move thus or thus: as for example, -A Watch-maker doth not give the watch its motion, but he is onely the -occasion, that the watch moves after that manner, for the motion of the -watch is the watches own motion, inherent in those parts ever since -that matter was, and if the watch ceases to move after such a manner or -way, that manner or way of motion is never the less in those parts of -matter, the watch is made of, and if several other figures should be -made of that matter, the power of moving in the said manner or mode, -would yet still remain in all those parts of matter as long as they are -body, and have motion in them. Wherefore one body may occasion another -body to move so or so, but not give it any motion, but every body -(though occasioned by another, to move in such a way) moves by its own -natural motion; for self-motion is the very nature of animate matter, -and is as much in hard, as in fluid bodies, although your _Author_ -denies it, saying,[3] _The nature of fluid bodies consists in the -motion of those little insensible parts into which they are divided, -and the nature of hard bodies, when those little particles joyned -closely together, do rest_; for there is no rest in nature; wherefore -if there were a World of Gold, and a World of Air, I do verily believe, -that the World of Gold would be as much interiously active, as the -World of Air exteriously; for Natures motions are not all external or -perceptible by our senses, neither are they all circular, or onely of -one sort, but there is an infinite change and variety of motions; for -though I say in my Philosophical opinions,[4] _As there is but one -onely Matter, so there is but one onely Motion_; yet I do not mean, -there is but one particular sort of motions, as either circular, or -straight, or the like, but that the nature of motion is one and the -same, simple and intire in it self, that is, it is meer motion, or -nothing else but corporeal motion; and that as there are infinite -divisions or parts of matter, so there are infinite changes and -varieties of motions, which is the reason that I call motion as well -infinite as matter; first that matter and motion are but one thing, and -if matter be infinite, motion must be so too; and secondly, that motion -is infinite in its changes and variations, as matter is in its parts. -And thus much of motion for this time; I add no more, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Philos. p._ 2. _Art._ 25. - -[2] _Art._ 40. - -[3] _Philos. part._ 2. _a._ 54. - -[4] _Part._ 1. _c._ 5. - - - - -XXXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I observe your _Author_ in his discourse of Place makes a difference[1] -betwixt an _Interior and Exterior place_, and that according to this -distinction, _one body may be said to change, and not to change its -place at the same time, and that one body may succeed into anothers -place_. But I am not of this opinion, for I believe not that there -is any more place then body; as for example, Water being mix'd with -Earth, the water doth not take the Earths place, but as their parts -intermix, so do their places, and as their parts change, so do their -places, so that there is no more place, then there is water and earth; -the same may be said of Air and Water, or Air and Earth, or did they -all mix together; for as their bodies join, so do their places, and -as they are separated from each other, so are their places. Say a man -travels a hundred miles, and so a hundred thousand paces; but yet this -man has not been in a hundred thousand places, for he never had any -other place but his own, he hath joined and separated himselfe from -a hundred thousand, nay millions of parts, but he has left no places -behind him. You will say, if he travel the same way back again, then -he is said to travel thorow the same places. I answer, It may be the -vulgar way of expression, or the common phrase; but to speak properly, -after a Philosophical way, and according to the truth in nature, he -cannot be said to go back again thorow the same places he went, because -he left none behind him, or els all his way would be nothing but place -after place, all the hundred miles along; besides if place should be -taken so, as to express the joyning to the neerest bodies which compass -him about, certainly he would never find his places again; for the -air being fluid, changes or moves continually, and perchance the same -parts of the air, which compassed him once, will never come near him -again. But you may say, If a man be hurt, or hath some mischance in his -body, so as to have a piece of flesh cut out, and new flesh growing -there; then we say, because the adjoyning parts do not change, that a -new piece of flesh is grown in the same place where the former flesh -was, and that the place of the former flesh cut or fallen out, is the -same of this new grown flesh. I answer, In my opinion, it is not, -for the parts being not the same, the places are not, but every one -hath its own place. But if the wound be not filled or closed up with -other new flesh, you will say, that according to my opinion there is -no place then at all. I say, Yes, for the air or any thing else may be -there, as new parts joyning to the other parts; nevertheless, the air, -or that same body which is there, hath not taken the fleshes place, -which was there before, but hath its own; but, by reason the adjoyning -parts remain, man thinks the place remains there also which is no -consequence. 'Tis true, a man may return to the same adjoining bodies, -where he was before, but then he brings his place with him again, and -as his body, so his place returnes also, and if a mans arm be cut off, -you may say, there was an arm heretofore, but you cannot say properly, -this is the place where the arm was. But to return to my first example -of the mixture of Water, and Earth or Air; Suppose water is not porous, -but onely dividable, and hath no other place but what is its own -bodies, and that other parts of water intermix with it by dividing and -composing; I say, there is no more place required, then what belongs -to their own parts, for if some contract, others dilate, some divide, -others joyn, the places are the same according to the magnitude of each -part or body. The same may be said of all kinds or sorts of mixtures, -for one body hath but one place; and so if many parts of the same -nature joyn into one body and increase the bulk of the body, the place -of that same body is accordingly; and if they be bodies of different -natures which intermix and joyne, each several keeps its place; And so -each body and each particular part of a body hath its place, for you -cannot name body or part of a body, but you must also understand place -to be with them, and if a point should dilate to a world, or a world -contract to a point, the place would always be the same with the body. -And thus I have declared my opinion of this subject, which I submit to -the correction of your better judgment, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_faithful Friend and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Philos. p._ 2. _a._ 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. - - - - -XXXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In my last, I hope, I have sufficiently declared my opinion, That to -one body belongs but one place, and that no body can leave a place -behind it, but wheresoever is body, there is place also. Now give me -leave to examine this question: when a bodies figure is printed on -snow, or any other fluid or soft matter, as air, water, and the like; -whether it be the body, that prints its own figure upon the snow, or -whether it be the snow, that patterns the figure of the body? My answer -is, That it is not the body, which prints its figure upon the snow, -but the snow that patterns out the figure of the body; for if a seal -be printed upon wax, 'tis true, it is the figure of the seal, which is -printed on the wax, but yet the seal doth not give the wax the print -of its own figure, but it is the wax that takes the print or pattern -from the seal, and patterns or copies it out in its own substance, -just as the sensitive motions in the eye do pattern out the figure of -an object, as I have declared heretofore. But you will say, perhaps, A -body being printed upon snow, as it leaves its print, so it leaves also -its place with the print in the snow. I answer, That doth not follow; -For the place remains still the bodies place, and when the body removes -out of the snow, it takes its place along with it: Just like a man, -whose picture is drawn by a Painter, when he goes away, he leaves not -his place with his picture, but his place goes with his body; and as -the place of the picture is the place of the colour or paint, and the -place of the copie of an exterior object patterned out by the sensitive -corporeal motions is the place of the sensitive organ, so the place -of the print in snow, is the snows place; or else, if the print were -the bodies place that is printed, and not the snow's, it might as well -be said, that the motion and shape of a watch were not the motion and -shape of the watch, but of the hand of him that made it. And as it is -with snow, so it is with air, for a mans figure is patterned out by the -parts and motions of the air, wheresoever he moveth; the difference is -onely, that air being a fluid body doth not retain the print so long, -as snow or a harder body doth, but when the body removes, the print -is presently dissolved. But I wonder much, your _Author_ denies, that -there can be two bodies in one place, and yet makes two places for one -body, when all is but the motions of one body: Wherefore a man sailing -in a Ship, cannot be said to keep place, and to change his place; for -it is not place he changes, but onely the adjoyning parts, as leaving -some, and joyning to others; and it is very improper, to attribute -that to place which belongs to parts, and to make a change of place -out of change of parts. I conclude, repeating once again, that figure -and place are still remaining the same with body; For example; let -a stone be beat to dust, and this dust be severally dispersed, nay, -changed into numerous figures; I say, as long as the substance of the -stone remains in the power of those dispersed and changed parts, and -their corporeal motions, the place of it continues also; and as the -corporeal motions change and vary, so doth place, magnitude and figure, -together with their parts or bodies, for they are but one thing. And so -I conclude, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am absolutely of your _Authors_ opinion, when he sayes,[1] _That all -bodies of this Universe are of one and the same matter, really divided -into many parts, and that these parts are diversly moved_: But that -these motions should be circular more then of any other sort, I cannot -believe, although he thinks that this is the most probable way, to find -out the causes of natural effects: for nature is not bound to one sort -of motions more then to another, and it is but in vain to indeavour to -know how, and by what motions God did make the World, since Creation -is an action of God, and Gods actions are incomprehensible; Wherefore -his æthereal Whirlpools, and little particles of matter, which he -reduceth to three sorts and calls them the three elements of the -Universe, their circular motions, several figures, shavings, and many -the like, which you may better read, then I rehearse to you, are to -my thinking, rather Fancies, then rational or probable conceptions; -for how can we imagine that the Universe was set a moving as a Top by -a Whip, or a Wheele by the hand of a Spinster, and that the vacuities -were fill'd up with shavings? for these violent motions would rather -have disturbed and disordered Nature; and though Nature uses variety -in her motions or actions, yet these are not extravagant, nor by force -or violence, but orderly, temperate, free, and easie, which causes -me to believe, the Earth turns about rather then the Sun; and though -corporeal motions for variety make Whirl-winds, yet Whirl-winds are -not constant, Neither can I believe that the swiftness of motion could -make the matter more subtil and pure then it was by nature, for it is -the purity and subtilty of the matter, that causes motion, and makes it -swifter or slower, and not motion the subtilty and purity of matter; -motion being onely the action of matter; and the self-moving part of -matter is the working part of nature, which is wise, and knows how to -move and form every creature without instruction; and this self-motion -is as much her own as the other parts of her body, matter and figure, -and is one and the same with her self, as a corporeal, living, knowing, -and inseparable being, and a part of her self. As for the several -parts of matter, I do believe, that they are not all of one and the -same bigness, nor of one and the same figure, neither do I hold their -figures to be unalterable; for if all parts in nature be corporeal, -they are dividable, composable, and intermixable, and then they cannot -be always of one and the same sort of figure; besides nature would not -have so much work if there were no change of figures: and since her -onely action is change of motion, change of motion must needs make -change of figures: and thus natural parts of matter may change from -lines to points, and from points to lines, from squares to circles, -and so forth, infinite ways, according to the change of motions; but -though they change their figures, yet they cannot change their matter; -for matter as it has been, so it remaines constantly in each degree, as -the Rational, Sensitive and Inanimate, none becomes purer, none grosser -then ever it was, notwithstanding the infinite changes of motions, -which their figures undergo; for Motion changes onely the figure, not -the matter it self, which continues still the same in its nature, and -cannot be altered without a confusion or destruction of Nature. And -this is the constant opinion of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Philos. part._ 3. _a._ 40. - - - - -XXXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -That _Rarefaction_ is onely a _change of figure_, according to your -_Authors_ opinion,[1] is in my reason very probable; but when he sayes, -that _in rarified bodies are little intervals or pores filled up with -some other subtil matter_, if he means that all rarified bodies are -porous, I dissent from him; for it is not necessary that all rarified -bodies should be porous, and all hard bodies without pores: but if -there were a probability of pores, I am of opinion, it would be more -in dense and hard, than in rare and soft bodies; as for example, -rarifying and dilating motions are plaining, smoothing, spreading and -making all parts even, which could not well be, if there were holes -or pores; Earth is dense and hard, and yet is porous, and flame is -rare and dilating, and yet is not porous; and certainly Water is not -so porous as Earth. Wherefore pores, in my opinion, are according to -the nature or form of the figure, and not according to the rarity or -thinness, and density or thickness of the substance. As for his thin -and subtil matter filling up the pores of porous bodies, I assent to -your _Author_ so far, that I meane, thin and thick, or rare and dense -substances are joyned and mixed together. As for plaining, smoothing -and spreading, I do not mean so much artificial plaining and spreading; -as for example, when a piece of gold is beaten into a thin plate, and -a board is made plain and smooth by a Joyners tool, or a napkin folded -up is spread plain and even, although, when you observe these arts, you -may judge somewhat of the nature of natural dilations; for a folded -cloth is fuller of creases then when plain, and the beating of a thin -plate is like to the motion of dilation, which is to spread out, and -the forme of rarifying is thinning and extending. I add onely this, -that I am not of your _Authors_ opinion, that Rest is the Cause or -Glue which keeps the parts of dense or hard bodies together, but it is -retentive motions. And so I conclude, resting, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Philos. part._ 2. _a._ 6, 7. - - - - -XXXV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -_That the Mind_, according to your _Authors_ opinion, _is a substance -really distinct from the body, and may be actually separated from -it and subsist without it_: If he mean the natural mind and soul of -Man, not the supernatural or divine, I am far from his opinion; for -though the mind moveth onely in its own parts, and not upon, or with -the parts of inanimate matter, yet it cannot be separated from these -parts of matter, and subsist by its self as being a part of one and -the same matter the inanimate is of, (for there is but one onely -matter, and one kind of matter, although of several degrees,) onely -it is the self-moving part; but yet this cannot impower it, to quit -the same natural body, whose part it is. Neither can I apprehend, -that the Mind's or Soul's seat should be in the _Glandula_ or kernel -of the Brain, and there sit like a Spider in a Cobweb, to whom the -least motion of the Cobweb gives intelligence of a Flye, which he is -ready to assault, and that the Brain should get intelligence by the -animal spirits as his servants, which run to and fro like Ants to -inform it; or that the Mind should, according to others opinions, be -a light, and imbroidered all with Ideas, like a Heraulds Coat; and -that the sensitive organs should have no knowledg in themselves, but -serve onely like peeping-holes for the mind, or barn-dores to receive -bundles of pressures, like sheaves of Corn; For there being a thorow -mixture of animate, rational and sensitive, and inanimate matter, we -cannot assign a certain seat or place to the rational, another to the -sensitive, and another to the inanimate, but they are diffused and -intermixt throughout all the body; And this is the reason, that sense -and knowledg cannot be bound onely to the head or brain; But although -they are mixt together, nevertheless they do not lose their interior -nature, by this mixture, nor their purity and subtilty, nor their -proper motions or actions, but each moves according to its nature and -substance, without confusion; The actions of the rational part in -Man, which is the Mind or Soul, are called Thoughts, or thoughtful -perceptions, which are numerous, and so are the sensitive perceptions; -for though Man, or any other animal hath but five exterior sensitive -organs, yet there be numerous perceptions made in these sensitive -organs, and in all the body; nay, every several Pore of the flesh is -a sensitive organ, as well as the Eye, or the Ear. But both sorts, as -well the rational as the sensitive, are different from each other, -although both do resemble another, as being both parts of animate -matter, as I have mentioned before: Wherefore I'le add no more, onely -let you know, that I constantly remain, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXXVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -That all other animals, besides man, want reason, your _Author_ -endeavours to prove in his _discourse of method_, where his chief -argument is, That other animals cannot express their mind, thoughts or -conceptions, either by speech or any other signs, as man can do: For, -sayes he, _it is not for want of the organs belonging to the framing -of words, as we may observe in Parrats and Pies, which are apt enough -to express words they are taught, but understand nothing of them._ My -answer is, That one man expressing his mind by speech or words to an -other, doth not declare by it his excellency and supremacy above all -other Creatures, but for the most part more folly, for a talking man -is not so wise as a contemplating man. But by reason other Creatures -cannot speak or discourse with each other as men, or make certain -signs, whereby to express themselves as dumb and deaf men do, should we -conclude, they have neither knowledge, sense, reason, or intelligence? -Certainly, this is a very weak argument; for one part of a mans body, -as one hand, is not less sensible then the other, nor the heel less -sensible then the heart, nor the legg less sensible then the head, -but each part hath its sense and reason, and so consequently its -sensitive and rational knowledg; and although they cannot talk or give -intelligence to each other by speech, nevertheless each hath its own -peculiar and particular knowledge, just as each particular man has his -own particular knowledge, for one man's knowledge is not another man's -knowledge; and if there be such a peculiar and particular knowledg in -every several part of one animal creature, as man, well may there be -such in Creatures of different kinds and sorts: But this particular -knowledg belonging to each creature, doth not prove that there is no -intelligence at all betwixt them, no more then the want of humane -Knowledg doth prove the want of Reason; for Reason is the rational -part of matter, and makes perception, observation, and intelligence -different in every creature, and every sort of creatures, according -to their proper natures, but perception, observation and intelligence -do not make reason, Reason being the cause, and they the effects. -Wherefore though other Creatures have not the speech, nor Mathematical -rules and demonstrations, with other Arts and Sciences, as Men; yet may -their perceptions and observations be as wise as Men's, and they may -have as much intelligence and commerce betwixt each other, after their -own manner and way, as men have after theirs: To which I leave them, -and Man to his conceited prerogative and excellence, resting, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXXVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning _Sense_ and _Perception_, your _Authors_ opinion is,[1] -That it is made by a _motion or impression from the object upon the -sensitive organ, which impression, by means of the nerves, is brought -to the brain, and so to the mind or soul, which onely perceives in -the brain_: Explaining it by the example[2] of a Man being blind, or -walking in dark, who by the help of his stick can perceive when he -touches a Stone, a Tree, Water, Sand, and the like; which example he -brings to make a comparison with the perception of Light; _For_, says -he, _Light in a shining body, is nothing else but a quick and lively -motion or action, which through the air and other transparent bodies -tends towards the eye, in the same manner as the motion or resistance -of the bodies, the blind man meets withal, tends thorow the stick -towards the hand; wherefore it is no wonder that the Sun can display -its rays so far in an instant, seeing that the same action, whereby -one end of the stick is moved, goes instantly also to the other end, -and would do the same if the stick were as long as Heaven is distant -from Earth._ To which I answer first, That it is not onely the Mind -that perceives in the kernel of the Brain, but that there is a double -perception, rational and sensitive, and that the mind perceives by -the rational, but the body and the sensitive organs by the sensitive -perception; and as there is a double perception, so there is also a -double knowledg, rational and sensitive, one belonging to the mind, the -other to the body; for I believe that the Eye, Ear, Nose, Tongue, and -all the Body, have knowledg as well as the Mind, onely the rational -matter, being subtil and pure, is not incumbred with the grosser part -of matter, to work upon, or with it, but leaves that to the sensitive, -and works or moves onely in its own substance, which makes a difference -between thoughts, and exterior senses. Next I say, That it is not the -Motion or Reaction of the bodies, the blind man meets withal, which -makes the sensitive perception of these objects, but the sensitive -corporeal motions in the hand do pattern out the figure of the Stick, -Stone, Tree, Sand, and the like. And as for comparing the perception -of the hand, when by the help of the stick it perceives the objects, -with the perception of light, I confess that the sensitive perceptions -do all resemble each other, because all sensitive parts of matter are -of one degree, as being sensible parts, onely there is a difference -according to the figures of the objects presented to the senses; and -there is no better proof for perception being made by the sensitive -motions in the body, or sensitive organs, but that all these sensitive -perceptions are alike, and resemble one another; for if they were not -made in the body of the sentient, but by the impression of exterior -objects, there would be so much difference betwixt them, by reason of -the diversity of objects, as they would have no resemblance at all. -But for a further proof of my own opinion, did the perception proceed -meerly from the motion, impression and resistance of the objects, the -hand could not perceive those objects, unless they touched the hand it -self, as the stick doth; for it is not probable, that the motions of -the stone, water, sand, &c. should leave their bodies and enter into -the stick, and so into the hand; for motion must be either something -or nothing; if something, the stick and the hand would grow bigger, -and the objects touched less, or else the touching and the touched must -exchange their motions, which cannot be done so suddenly, especially -between solid bodies; But if motion has no body, it is nothing, and -how nothing can pass or enter or move some body, I cannot conceive. -'Tis true there is no part that can subsist singly by it self, without -dependance upon each other, and so parts do always joyn and touch -each other, which I am not against; but onely I say perception is not -made by the exterior motions of exterior parts of objects, but by -the interior motions of the parts of the body sentient. But I have -discoursed hereof before, and so I take my leave, resting, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Philos. part._ 4. _a._ 189. - -[2] _Diopt. c._ 1. _a._ 2, 3. & _c._ 4. _a._ 1. - - - - -XXXVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I cannot conceive why your _Author_ is so much for little and -insensible parts, out of which the Elements and all other bodies are -made; for though Nature is divideable, yet she is also composeable; and -I think there is no need to dissect every creature into such little -parts, to know their nature, but we can do it by another way as well; -for we may dissect or divide them into never so little parts, and yet -gain never the more knowledg by it. But according to these principles -he describing amongst the rest the nature of Water, says,[1] _That -those little parts, out of which Water consists, are in figure somewhat -long, light and slippery like little Eeles, which are never so closely -joyned and entangled, but may easily be separated._ To which I answer, -That I observe the nature and figure of water to be flowing, dilating, -divideable and circular; for we may see, in Tides, overflowings, and -breaking into parts, as in rain, it will always move in a round and -circular figure; And I think, if its parts were long and entangled -like a knot of Eeles, it could never be so easily contracted and -denced into snow or ice. Neither do I think, That _Salt-water hath a -mixture of somewhat grosser parts, not so apt to bend_;[2] for to my -observation and reason, the nature of salt-water consists herein, that -its circle-lines are pointed, which sharp and pointed figure makes it -so penetrating; yet may those points be separated from the circle lines -of water, as it is seen in the making of Salt. But I am not of your -_Authors_ opinion, That those little points do stick so fast in flesh, -as little nails, to keep it from putrefaction; for points do not always -fasten; or else fire, which certainly is composed of sharp-pointed -parts, would harden, and keep other bodies from dissolving, whereas on -the contrary, it separates and divides them, although after several -manners. But Putrefaction is onely a dissolving and separating of -parts, after the manner of dilation; and the motion of salt is -contracting as well as penetrating, for we may observe, what flesh -soever is dry-salted, doth shrink and contract close together; I will -not say, but the pointed parts of salt may fasten like nayls in some -sorts of bodies, but not in all they work on. And this is the reason -also, that Sea-water is of more weight then fresh-water, for being -composed of points, those points stick within each other, and so become -more strong; But yet do they not hinder the circular dilating motion -of water, for the circle-lines are within, and the points without, but -onely they make it more strong from being divided by other exterior -bodies that swim upon it. And this is the cause that Salt-water is not -so easily forced or turned to vapour, as Fresh, for the points piercing -into each other, hold it more strongly together; but this is to be -considered, that the points of salt are on the outside of the watery -Circle, not on the inside, which causes it to be divideable from the -watery Circles. I will conclude, when I have given the reason why water -is so soon suckt up by sand, lime, and the like bodies, and say that it -is the nature of all spongy, dry and porous bodies, meeting with liquid -and pliable bodies as water, do draw and suck them up, like as animal -Creatures being thirsty, do drink: And so I take my leave, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of Meteor. c._ 1. _a._ 3. - -[2] _C._ 3. _a._ 1. - - - - -XXXIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning Vapour, Clouds, Wind and Rain, I am of your _Authors_ -opinion,[1] That _Water is changed into Vapour, and Vapour into Air, -and that dilated Vapours make Wind, and condensed Vapours, Clouds and -Mists_; But I am not for his little particles, _whereof_, he says, -_Vapours are made, by the motion of a rare and subtil matter in the -pores of terrestrial bodies_; which certainly I should conceive to be -loose atoms, did he not make them of several figures and magnitude: -for, in my opinion, there are no such things in nature, which like -little Flyes or Bees do fly up into the air; and although I grant, that -in Nature are several parts, whereof some are more rare, others more -dense, according to the several degrees of matter, yet they are not -single, but all mixt together in one body, and the change of motions in -those joyned parts, is the cause of all changes of figures whatever, -without the assistance of any forreign parts: And thus Water of it self -is changed to Snow, Ice, or Hail, by its inherent figurative Motions; -that is, the circular dilation of Water by contraction, changes into -the figure of Snow, Ice, or Hail or by rarifying motions it turns into -the figure of Vapour, and this Vapour again by contracting motions into -the figure of hoar frost; and when all these motions change again into -the former, then the figure of Ice, Snow, Hail, Vapour and Frost, turns -again into the figure of Water: And this in all sense and reason is -the most facil and probable way of making Ice, Snow, Hail, &c. As for -rarefaction and condensation, I will not say that they may be forced by -forreign parts, but yet they are made by change and alteration of the -inherent motions of their own parts, for though the motions of forreign -parts, may be the occasion of them, yet they are not the immediate -cause or actors thereof. And as for _Thunder_, that clouds of Ice and -Snow, the uppermost being condensed by heat, and so made heavy, should -fall upon another and produce the noise of thunder, is very improbable; -for the breaking of a little small string, will make a greater noise -then a huge shower of snow with falling, and as for Ice being hard, it -may make a great noise, one part falling upon another, but then their -weight would be as much as their noise, so that the clouds or roves of -Ice would be as soon upon our heads, if not sooner, as the noise in our -Eares; like as a bullet shot out of a Canon, we may feel the bullet -as soon as we hear the noise. But to conclude, all densations are not -made by heat, nor all noises by pressures, for sound is oftener made by -division then pressure, and densation by cold then by heat: And this is -all for the present, from, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of Meteor., c._ 2, 4, 5, 6. - - - - -XL. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I cannot perceive the Rational Truth of your _Authors_ opinion, -concerning _Colours_, made _by the agitation of little spherical bodies -of an Æthereal matter, transmitting the action of Light_; for if -colours were made after this manner, there would, in my opinion, not -be any fixed or lasting colour, but one colour would be so various, -and change faster then every minute; the truth is, there would be -no certain or perfect colour at all: wherefore it seems altogether -improbable, that such liquid, rare and disunited bodies should either -keep or make inherent and fixed colours; for liquid and rare bodies, -whose several parts are united into one considerable bulk of body, -their colours are more apt to change then the colours of those bodies -that are dry, solid and dense; the reason is, that rare and liquid -bodies are more loose, slack, and agil, then solid and dry bodies, in -so much, as in every alteration of motion their colours are apt to -change: And if united rare and liquid bodies be so apt to alter and -change, how is it probable, that those bodies, which are small and -not united, should either keep or make inherent fixed colours? I will -not say, but that such little bodies may range into such lines and -figures, as make colours, but then they cannot last, being not united -into a lasting body, that is, into a solid, substantial body, proper -to make such figures as colours. But I desire you not to mistake me, -_Madam_, for I do not mean, that the substance of colours is a gross -thick substance, for the substance may be as thin and rare as flame or -light, or in the next degree to it; for certainly the substance of -light, and the substance of colours come in their degrees very neer -each other; But according to the contraction of the figures, colours -are paler or deeper, or more or less lasting. And as for the reason, -why colours will change and rechange, it is according as the figures -alter or recover their forms; for colours will be as animal Creatures, -which sometimes are faint, pale, and sick, and yet recover; but when -as a particular colour is, as I may say, quite dead, then there is no -recovering of it. But colours may seem altered sometimes in our eyes, -and yet not be altered in themselves; for our eyes, if perfect, see -things as they are presented; and for proof, if any animal should be -presented in an unusual posture or shape, we could not judg of it; -also if a Picture, which must be viewed side-wards, should be looked -upon forwards, we could not know what to make of it; so the figures -of colours, if they be not placed rightly to the sight, but turned -topsie-turvie as the Phrase is, or upside-down, or be moved too quick, -and this quick motion do make a confusion with the lines of Light, we -cannot possibly see the colour perfectly. Also several lights or shades -may make colours appear otherwise then in themselves they are, for -some sorts of lights and shades may fall upon the substantial figures -of colours in solid bodies, in such lines and figures, as they may -over-power the natural or artificial inherent colours in solid bodies, -and for a time make other colours, and many times the lines of light -or of shadows will meet and sympathize so with inherent colours, and -place their lines so exactly, as they will make those inherent colours -more splendorous then in their own nature they are, so that light and -shadows will add or diminish or alter colours very much. Likewise some -sorts of colours will be altered to our sight, not by all, but onely by -some sorts of light, as for example, blew will seem green, and green -blew by candle light, when as other colours will never appear changed, -but shew constantly as they are; the reason is, because the lines of -candle light fall in such figures upon the inherent colours, and so -make them appear according to their own figures; Wherefore it is onely -the alteration of the exterior figures of light and shadows, that make -colours appear otherwise, and not a change of their own natures; And -hence we may rationally conclude, that several lights and shadows by -their spreading and dilating lines may alter the face or out-side of -colours, but not suddenly change them, unless the power of heat, and -continuance of time, or any other cause, do help and assist them in -that work of metamorphosing or transforming of colours; but if the -lines of light be onely, as the phrase is, Skin-deep; that is, but -lightly spreading and not deeply penetrating, they may soon wear out or -be rubbed off; for though they hurt, yet they do not kill the natural -colour, but the colour may recover and reassume its former vigour and -lustre: but time and other accidental causes will not onely alter, but -destroy particular colours as well as other creatures, although not all -after the same manner, for some will last longer then others. And thus, -_Madam_, there are three sorts of Colours, Natural, Artificial, and -Accidental; but I have discoursed of this subject more at large in my -Philosophical Opinions, to which I refer you, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XLI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -My answer to your _Authors_ question, _Why flame ascends in a pointed -figure?_[1] is, That the figure of fire consists in points, and being -dilated into a flame, it ascends in lines of points slope-wayes from -the fired fuel; like as if you should make two or more sticks stand -upright and put the upper ends close together, but let the lower ends -be asunder, in which posture they will support each other, which, if -both their ends were close together, they could not do. The second -question is, _Why fire doth not alwayes flame?_[2] I answer, Because -all fuel is not flameable, some being so moist, as it doth oppose -the fires dryness, and some so hard and retentive, as fire cannot so -soon dissolve it; and in this contest, where one dissipates, and the -other retains, a third figure is produced, _viz._ smoak, between the -heat of one, and the moisture of the other; and this smoak is forced -by the fire out of the fuel, and is nothing else but certain parts of -fuel, raised to such a degree of rarefaction; and if fire come near, -it forces the smoak into flame, the smoak changing it self by its -figurative motions into flame; but when smoak is above the flame, the -flame cannot force the smoak to fire or enkindle it self, for the flame -cannot so well encounter it; which shews, as if smoak had a swifter -motion then flame, although flame is more rarified then smoak; and if -moisture predominate, there is onely smoak, if fire, then there is -flame: But there are many figures, that do not flame, until they are -quite dissolved, as Leather, and many other things. Neither can fire -work upon all bodies alike, but according to their several natures, -like as men cannot encounter several sorts of creatures after one and -the same manner; for not any part in nature hath an absolute power, -although it hath self-motion; and this is the reason, that wax by fire -is melted, and clay hardened. The third question is, _Why some few -drops of water sprinkled upon fire, do encrease its flame?_ I answer, -by reason of their little quantity, which being over-powred by the -greater quantity and force of fire, is by its self-motions converted -into fire; for water being of a rare nature, and fire, for the most -part, of a rarifying quality, it cannot suddenly convert it self into a -more solid body then its nature is, but following its nature by force -it turns into flame. The fourth question is, _Why the flame of spirit -of Wine doth consume the Wine, and yet cannot burn or hurt a linnen -cloth?_ I answer, The Wine is the fuel that feeds the flame, and upon -what it feeds, it devoureth, and with the food, the feeder; but by -reason Wine is a rarer body then Oyle, or Wood, or any other fuel, its -flame is also weaker. And thus much of these questions, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _P._ 4. _art._ 97. - -[2] _Art._ 107. - - - - -XLII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -To conclude my discourse upon the Opinions of these two famous and -learned Authors, which I have hitherto sent you in several Letters, -I could not chuse but repeat the ground of my own opinions in this -present; which I desire you to observe well, lest you mistake any -thing, whereof I have formerly discoursed. First I am for self-moving -matter, which I call the sensitive and rational matter, and the -perceptive and architectonical part of nature, which is the life and -knowledg of nature. Next I am of an opinion, That all Perception is -made by corporeal, figuring self-motions, and that the perception of -forreign objects is made by patterning them out: as for example, The -sensitive perception of forreign objects is by making or taking copies -from these objects, so as the sensitive corporeal motions in the eyes -copy out the objects of sight, and the sensitive corporeal motions in -the ears copy out the objects of sound; the sensitive corporeal motions -in the nostrils, copy out the objects of sent; the sensitive corporeal -motions in the tongue and mouth, copy out the objects of taste, and -the sensitive corporeal motions in the flesh and skin of the body copy -out the forreign objects of touch; for when you stand by the fire, it -is not that the fire, or the heat of the fire enters your flesh, but -that the sensitive motions copy out the objects of fire and heat. As -for my Book of Philosophy, I must tell you, that it treats more of the -production and architecture of Creatures then of their perceptions, and -more of the causes then the effects, more in a general then peculiar -way, which I thought necessary to inform you of, and so I remain, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XLIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I received your questions in your last: the first was, _Whether there -be more body compact together in a heavy then in a light thing?_ I -answer, That purity, rarity, little quantity, exteriour shape, as also -motion cause lightnesse; and grossness of bulk, density, much quantity, -exterior figure and motion cause heaviness, as it may be confirmed by -many examples: but lightness and heaviness are onely conceptions of -man, as also ascent and descent; and it may be questioned, whether -there be such things really in nature; for change of motions of one -and the same body will make lightness, and heaviness, as also rarity -and density: besides, the several figures and compositions of bodies -will cause them to ascend or descend, for Snow is a light body and yet -descends from the clouds, and Water is a heavie body, and yet ascends -in springs out of the Earth; Dust is a dense body and yet is apt to -ascend, Rain or Dew is a rare body and yet is apt to descend; Also -a Bird ascends by his shape, and a small worm although of less body -and lighter will fall down; and there can be no other proof of light -and heavy bodies but by their ascent and descent; But as really there -is no such thing as heavie or light in nature more then words, and -comparisons of different corporeal motions, so there is no such thing, -as high or low, place or time, but onely words to make comparisons and -to distinguish different corporeal motions. The second question was; -_When a Bason with water is wasted into smoak, which fills up a whole -Room, Whether the air in the room doth, as the sensitive motions of the -eye, pattern out the figure of the smoak; or whether all the room is -really fill'd with the vapour or smoak?_ I answer, If it be onely the -pattern or figure of smoak or vapour, the extension and dilation is not -so much as man imagines; but why may not the air, which in my opinion -hath self-motion, pattern out the figure of smoak as well as the eye; -for that the eye surely doth it, may be proved; because smoak, if it -enter the eye, makes it not onely smart and water much, but blinds it -quite for the present; wherefore smoak doth not enter the eye, when the -eye seeth it, but the eye patterns out the figure of smoak, and this is -perception; In the same manner may the air pattern out the figure of -smoak. The third question was, _Whether all that they name qualities -of bodies, as thickness, thinness, hardness, softness, gravity, -levity, transparentness and the like, be substances?_ I answer, That -all those, they call qualities, are nothing else but change of motion -and figure of the same body, and several changes of motions are not -several bodies, but several actions of one body; for change of motion -doth not create new matter or multiply its quantity: for though -corporeal motions may divide and compose, contract and dilate, yet they -cannot create new matter, or make matter any otherwise then it is by -nature, neither can they add or substract any thing from its nature. -And therefore my opinion is, not that they are things subsisting by -themselves without matter, but that there can no abstraction be made -of motion and figure from matter, and that matter and motion being but -one thing and inseparable, make but one substance. Wherefore density -and rarity, gravity and levity, &c. being nothing else but change of -motions, cannot be without matter, but a dense or rare, heavie or -light matter is but one substance or body; And thus having obeyed your -commands, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XLIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am very ready to give you my opinion of those two questions you sent -me, whereof the first was, _Whether that, which is rare and subtil, -be not withal pure?_ To which I answer, That all rare bodies are not -subtil, nor pure, and that all which is dense is not gross and dull: -As for example, Puddle-water, or also clear water, is rarer then -Quicksilver, and yet not so subtil and pure as Quicksilver; the like of -Gold; for Quicksilver and Gold may be rarified to a transparentness, -and yet be so dense, as not to be easily dissolved; and Quicksilver is -very subtil and searching, so as to be able to force other bodies to -divide as well as it can divide and compose its own parts. Wherefore my -opinion is, that the purest and subtilest degree of matter in nature, -is that degree of matter which can dilate and contract, compose and -divide into any figure by corporeal self-motion. Your second question -was, _Why a man's hand cannot break a little hard body, as a little -nail, whereas yet it is bigger then the nail?_ I answer, It is not -because the hand is softer then the nail, for one hard body will not -break suddenly another hard body, and a man may easily break an iron -nail with his hand, as I have bin informed; but it is some kind of -motion which can easier do it, then another: for I have seen a strong -cord wound about both a man's hands, who pulled his hands as hard and -strongly asunder as he could, and yet was not able to break it; when -as a Youth taking the same cord, and winding it about his hands as the -former did, immediately broke it; the cause was, that he did it with -another kind of motion or pulling, then the other did, which though he -used as much force and strength, as he was able, yet could not break -it, when the boy did break it with the greatest ease, and turning onely -his hands a little, which shews, that many things may be done by a -slight of motion, which otherwise a great strength and force cannot do. -This is my answer and opinion concerning your proposed questions; if -you have any more, I shall be ready to obey you, as, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -XLV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I understand by your last, that you are very desirous to know, _Whether -there be not in nature such animal creatures both for purity and size, -as we are not capable to perceive by our sight._ Truly, _Madam_, in -my opinion it is very probable there may be animal creatures of such -rare bodies as are not subject to our exterior senses, as well, as -there are elements which are not subject to all our exterior senses: -as for example, fire is onely subject to our sight and feeling, and -not to any other sense, water is subject to our sight, taste, touch -and hearing, but not to smelling; and earth is subject to our sight, -taste, touch and smelling, but not to our hearing; and vapour is onely -subject to our sight, and wind onely to our hearing; but pure air -is not subject to any of our senses, but onely known by its effects: -and so there may likewise be animal creatures which are not subject -to any of our senses both for their purity and life; as for example, -I have seen pumpt out of a water pump small worms which could hardly -be discerned but by a bright Sun-light, for they were smaller then -the smallest hair, some of a pure scarlet colour and some white, but -though they were the smallest creatures that ever I did see, yet they -were more agil and fuller of life, then many a creature of a bigger -size, and so small they were, as I am confident, they were neither -subject to tast, smell, touch nor hearing, but onely to sight, and -that neither without difficulty, requiring both a sharp sight and a -clear light to perceive them; and I do verily believe that these small -animal creatures may be great in comparison to others which may be -in nature. But if it be probable that there may be such small animal -creatures in nature, as are not subject to our exterior senses, by -reason of their littleness; it is also probable, that there may be -such great and big animal creatures in nature as are beyond the reach -and knowledg of our exterior senses; for bigness and smallness are not -to be judged by our exterior senses, onely; but as sense and reason -inform us, that there are different degrees in Purity and Rarity, so -also in shapes, figures and sizes in all natural creatures. Next you -desired to know, _Whether there can be an artificial Life, or a Life -made by Art?_ My answer is, Not; for although there is Life in all -natures parts, yet not all the parts are life, for there is one part of -natural matter which in its nature is inanimate or without life, and -though natural Life doth produce Art, yet Art cannot produce natural -Life, for though Art is the action of Life, yet it is not Life it self: -not but that there is Life in Art, but not art in life, for Life is -natural, and not artificial; and thus the several parts of a watch -may have sense and reason according to the nature of their natural -figure, which is steel, but not as they have an artificial shape, for -Art cannot put Life into the watch, Life being onely natural, not -artificial. Lastly your desire was to know, _Whether a part of matter -may be so small, as it cannot be made less?_ I answer, there is no such -thing in nature as biggest or least, nature being Infinite as well in -her actions as in her substance; and I have mentioned in my book of -Philosophy, and in a letter, I sent you heretofore concerning Infinite, -that there are several sorts of Infinites, as Infinite in quantity or -bulk, Infinite in number, Infinite in quality, as Infinite degrees -of hardness, softness, thickness, thinness, swiftness, slowness, &c. -as also Infinite compositions, divisions, creations, dissolutions, -&c. in nature; and my meaning is, that all these Infinite actions -do belong to the Infinite body of nature, which being infinite in -substance must also of necessity be infinite in its actions; but -although these Infinite actions are inherent in the power of the -Infinite substance of nature, yet they are never put in act in her -parts, by reason there being contraries in nature, and every one of -the aforementioned actions having its opposite, they do hinder and -obstruct each other so, that none can actually run into infinite; for -the Infinite degrees of compositions hinder the infinite degrees of -divisions; and the infinite degrees of rarity, softness, swiftness, -&c. hinder the infinite degrees of density, hardness, slowness, &c. -all which nature has ordered with great wisdom and Prudence to make an -amiable combination between her parts; for if but one of these actions -should run into infinite, it would cause a horrid confusion between -natures parts, nay an utter destruction of the whole body of nature, if -I may call it whole: as for example, if one part should have infinite -compositions, without the hinderance or obstruction of division, it -would at last mount and become equal to the Infinite body of nature, -and so from a part change to a whole, from being finite to infinite, -which is impossible; Wherefore, though nature hath an Infinite natural -power, yet she doth not put this power in act in her particulars; -and although she has an infinite force or strength, yet she doth not -use this force or strength in her parts. Moreover when I speak of -Infinite divisions and compositions, creations and dissolutions, &c. -in nature, I do not mean so much the infinite degrees of compositions -and divisions, as the actions themselves to be infinite in number; -for there being infinite parts in nature, and every one having its -compositions and divisions, creations and dissolutions, these actions -must of necessity be infinite too, to wit, in number, according to the -Infinite number of parts, for as there is an Infinite number of parts -in nature, so there is also an infinite number and variety of motions -which are natural actions. However let there be also infinite degrees -of these natural actions, in the body or substance of infinite nature; -yet, as I said, they are never put in act, by reason every action -hath its contrary or opposite, which doth hinder and obstruct it from -running actually into infinite. And thus I hope, you conceive cleerly -now, what my opinion is, and that I do not contradict my self in my -works, as some have falsly accused me, for they by misapprehending my -meaning, judge not according to the truth of my sense, but according -to their own false interpretation, which shews not onely a weakness in -their understandings and passions, but a great injustice and injury -to me, which I desire you to vindicate when ever you chance to hear -such accusations and blemishes laid upon my works, by which you will -Infinitely oblige, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and faithful Servant._ - - - - -Sect. II. - -I. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Being come now to the Perusal of the Works of that learned _Author_ Dr. -_Moor_, I find that the onely design of his Book called _Antidote_, is -_to prove the Existence_ of a God, and to refute, or rather convert -Atheists; which I wonder very much at, considering, he says himself,[1] -That _there is no man under the cope of Heaven but believes a God_; -which if so, what needs there to make so many arguments to no purpose? -unless it be to shew Learning and wit; In my opinion, it were better -to convert Pagans to be Christians, or to reform irregular Christians -to a more pious life, then to prove that, which all men believe, which -is the way to bring it into question. For certainly, according to the -natural Light of Reason, there is a God, and no man, I believe, doth -doubt it; for though there may be many vain words, yet I think there -is no such atheistical belief amongst man-kind, nay, not onely amongst -men, but also, amongst all other creatures, for if nature believes -a God, all her parts, especially the sensitive and rational, which -are the living and knowing parts, and are in all natural creatures, -do the like, and therefore all parts and creatures in nature do adore -and worship God, for any thing man can know to the contrary; for no -question, but natures soule adores and worships God as well as man's -soule; and why may not God be worshipped by all sorts and kinds of -creatures as well, as by one kind or sort? I will not say the same way, -but I believe there is a general worship and adoration of God; for as -God is an Infinite Deity, so certainly he has an Infinite Worship and -Adoration, and there is not any part of nature, but adores and worships -the only omnipotent God, to whom belongs Praise and Glory from and to -all eternity: For it is very improbable, that God should be worshipped -onely in part, and not in whole, and that all creatures were made to -obey man, and not to worship God, onely for man's sake, and not for -God's worship, for man's use, and not God's adoration, for mans spoil -and not God's blessing. But this Presumption, Pride, Vain-glory and -Ambition of man, proceeds from the irregularity of nature, who being a -servant, is apt to commit errors; and cannot be so absolute and exact -in her devotion, adoration and worship, as she ought, nor so well -observant of God as God is observing her: Nevertheless, there is not -any of her parts or creatures, that God is not acknowledged by, though -not so perfectly as he ought, which is caused by the irregularities of -nature, as I said before. And so God of his mercy have mercy upon all -Creatures; To whose protection I commend your Ladiship, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antidote, Book_ I. _c._ 10. _a._ 5. - - - - -II. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since I spake in my last of the adoration and worship of God, you -would faine know, whether we can have an Idea of God? I answer, That -naturally we may, and really have a knowledge of the existence of -God, as I proved in my former letter, to wit, that there is a God, -and, that he is the _Author_ of all things, who rules and governs all -things, and is also the God of Nature: but I dare not think, that -naturally we can have an Idea of the essence of God, so as to know what -God is in his very nature and essence; for how can there be a finite -Idea of an Infinite God? You may say, As well as of Infinite space. I -answer, Space is relative, or has respect to body, but there is not -any thing that can be compared to God; for the Idea of Infinite nature -is material, as being a material creature of Infinite material Nature. -You will say, How can a finite part have an Idea of infinite nature? I -answer, Very well, by reason the Idea is part of Infinite Nature, and -so of the same kind, as material; but God being an Eternal, Infinite, -Immaterial, Individable Being, no natural creature can have an Idea of -him. You will say, That the Idea of God in the mind is immaterial; I -answer, I cannot conceive, that there can be any immaterial Idea in -nature; but be it granted, yet that Immaterial is not a part of God, -for God is individable, and hath no parts; wherefore the Mind cannot -have an Idea of God, as it hath of Infinite nature, being a part of -nature; for the Idea of God cannot be of the essence of God, as the -Idea of nature is a corporeal part of nature: and though nature may be -known in some parts, yet God being Incomprehensible, his Essence can by -no wayes or means be naturally known; and this is constantly believed, -by - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -III. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Although I mentioned in my last, that it is impossible to have an Idea -of God, yet your _Author_ is pleased to say,[1] That _he will not stick -to affirm, that the Idea or notion of God is as easie, as any notion -else whatsoever, and that we may know as much of him as of any thing -else in the world_. To which I answer, That in my opinion, God is not -so easily to be known by any creature, as man may know himself; nor -his attributes so well, as man can know his own natural proprieties: -for Gods Infinite attributes are not conceivable, and cannot be -comprehended by a finite knowledg and understanding, as a finite part -of nature; for though nature's parts may be Infinite in number, and as -they have a relation to the Infinite whole, if I may call it so, which -is Infinite nature, yet no part is infinite in it self, and therefore -it cannot know so much as whole nature: and God being an Infinite -Deity, there is required an Infinite capacity to conceive him; nay, -Nature her self although Infinite, yet cannot possibly have an exact -notion of God, by reason of the disparity between God and her self; and -therefore it is not probable, if the Infinite servant of God is not -able to conceive him, that a finite part or creature of nature, of what -kind or sort soever, whether Spiritual, as your _Author_ is pleased to -name it, or Corporeal, should comprehend God. Concerning my belief of -God, I submit wholly to the Church, and believe as I have bin informed -out of the _Athanasian_ Creed, that the Father is Incomprehensible, -the Sonne Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible; and -that there are not three, but one Incomprehensible God; Wherefore if -any man can prove (as I do verily believe he cannot) that God is not -Incomprehensible, he must of necessity be more knowing then the whole -Church, however he must needs dissent from the Church. But perchance -your _Author_ may say, I raise new and prejudicial opinions, in saying -that matter is eternal. I answer, The Holy Writ doth not mention Matter -to be created, but onely Particular Creatures, as this Visible World, -with all its Parts, as the history or description of the Creation of -the World in _Genesis_ plainly shews; For _God said, Let it be Light, -and there was Light; Let there be a Firmament in the midst of the -Waters, and let it divide the Waters from the Waters; and Let the -Waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let -the dry Land appear; and let the Earth bring forth Grass, the Herb -yielding Seed, and the Fruit-tree yielding Fruit after his kind; and -let there be Lights in the Firmament of the Heaven, to divide the Day -from the Night,_ &c. Which proves, that all creatures and figures -were made and produced out of that rude and desolate heap or chaos -which the Scripture mentions, which is nothing else but matter, by the -powerful Word and Command of God, executed by his Eternal Servant, -Nature; as I have heretofore declared it in a Letter I sent you in the -beginning concerning Infinite Nature. But least I seem to encroach -too much upon Divinity, I submit this Interpretation to the Church; -However, I think it not against the ground of our Faith; for I am so -far from maintaining any thing either against Church or State, as I am -submitting to both in all duty, and shall do so as long as I live, and -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, pt._ 1., _c._ 4. - - - - -IV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since your _Worthy_ and _Learned Author_ is pleased to mention,[1] -That an _ample experience both of Men and Things doth enlarge our -Understanding_, I have taken occasion hence to enquire, how a mans -Understanding may be encreased or inlarged. The Understanding must -either be in Parts, or it must be Individable as one; if in Parts, then -there must be so many Understandings as there are things understood; -but if Individable, and but one Understanding, then it must dilate it -self upon so many several objects. I for my part, assent to the first, -That Understanding increases by Parts, and not by Dilation, which -Dilation must needs follow, if the Mind or Understanding of man be -indivisible and without parts; but if the Mind or Soul be Individable, -then I would fain know, how Understanding, Imagination, Conception, -Memory, Remembrance, and the like, can be in the mind? You will say, -perhaps, they are so many faculties or properties of the Incorporeal -Mind, but, I hope, you do not intend to make the Mind or Soul a Deity, -with so many attributes, Wherefore, in my opinion, it is safer to say, -That the Mind is composed of several active Parts: but of these Parts -I have treated in my Philosophy, where you will find, that all the -several Parts of Nature are Living and Knowing, and that there is no -part that has not Life and Knowledg, being all composed of rational -and sensitive matter, which is the life and soul of Nature; and that -Nature being Material, is composable and dividable, which is the cause -of so many several Creatures, where every Creature is a part of -Nature, and these Infinite parts or creatures are Nature her self; for -though Nature is a self-moving substance, and by self-motion divides -and composes her self several manners or ways into several forms and -figures, yet being a knowing, as well as a living substance, she knows -how to order her parts and actions wisely; for as she hath an Infinite -body or substance, so she has an Infinite life and knowledg; and as she -hath an Infinite life and knowledg, so she hath an infinite wisdom: -But mistake me not, _Madam_; I do not mean an Infinite Divine Wisdom, -but an Infinite Natural Wisdom, given her by the Infinite bounty of -the Omnipotent God; but yet this Infinite Wisdom, Life and Knowledg in -Nature make but one Infinite. And as Nature hath degrees of matter, so -she has also degrees and variety of corporeal motions; for some parts -of matter are self-moving, and some are moved by these self-moving -parts of matter; and all these parts, both the moving and moved, are -so intermixed, that none is without the other, no not in any the least -Creature or part of Nature we can conceive; for there is no Creature or -part of Nature, but has a comixture of those mentioned parts of animate -and inanimate matter, and all the motions are so ordered by Natures -wisdom, as not any thing in Nature can be otherwise, unless by a -Supernatural Command and Power of God; for no part of corporeal matter -and motion can either perish, or but rest; one part may cause another -part to alter its motions, but not to quit motion, no more then one -part of matter can annihilate or destroy another; and therefore matter -is not meerly Passive, but always Active, by reason of the thorow -mixture of animate and inanimate matter; for although the animate -matter is onely active in its nature, and the inanimate passive, yet -because they are so closely united and mixed together that they make -but one body, the parts of the animate or self-moving matter do bear -up and cause the inanimate parts to move and work with them; and thus -there is an activity in all parts of matter moving and working as one -body, without any fixation or rest, for all is moveable, moving and -moved. All which, _Madam_, if it were well observed, there would not -be so many strange opinions concerning nature and her actions, making -the purest and subtillest part of matter immaterial or incorporeal, -which is as much, as to extend her beyond nature, and to rack her -quite to nothing. But I fear the opinion of Immaterial substances in -Nature will at last bring in again the Heathen Religion, and make us -believe a god _Pan, Bacchus, Ceres, Venus,_ and the like, so as we -may become worshippers of Groves and shadows, Beans and Onions, as -our Forefathers. I say not this, as if I would ascribe any worship to -Nature, or make her a Deity, for she is onely a servant to God, and so -are all her parts or creatures, which parts or creatures, although they -are transformed, yet cannot be annihilated, except Nature her self be -annihilated, which may be, whensoever the Great God pleases; for her -existence and resolution, or total destruction, depends upon Gods Will -and Decree, whom she fears, adores, admires, praises and prayes unto, -as being her God and Master; and as she adores God, so do all her parts -and creatures, and amongst the rest Man, so that there is no Atheist in -Infinite Nature, at least not in the opinion of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. Book._ 2. _Ch._ 2. _a._ 1. - - - - -V. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I cannot well conceive what your _Author_ means by the _Common Laws of -Nature_;[1] But if you desire my opinion how many Laws Nature hath, -and what they are; I say Nature hath but One Law, which is a wise Law, -to keep Infinite matter in order, and to keep so much Peace, as not to -disturb the Foundation of her Government: for though Natures actions -are various, and so many times opposite, which would seem to make -wars between several Parts, yet those active Parts, being united into -one Infinite body, cannot break Natures general Peace; for that which -Man names War, Sickness, Sleep, Death, and the like, are but various -particular actions of the onely matter; not, as your _Author_ imagines, -in a confusion, like Bullets, or such like things juggled together in a -mans Hat, but very orderly and methodical; And the Playing motions of -nature are the actions of Art, but her serious actions are the actions -of Production, Generation and Transformation in several kinds, sorts -and particulars of her Creatures, as also the action of ruling and -governing these her several active Parts. Concerning the Pre-eminence -and Prerogative of _Man_, whom your _Author_ calls[2] _The flower and -chief of all the products of nature upon this Globe of the earth_; I -answer, That Man cannot well be judged of himself, because he is a -Party, and so may be Partial; But if we observe well, we shall find -that the Elemental Creatures are as excellent as Man, and as able to -be a friend or foe to Man, as Man to them, and so the rest of all -Creatures; so that I cannot perceive more abilities in Man then in the -rest of natural Creatures; for though he can build a stately House, yet -he cannot make a Honey-comb; and though he can plant a Slip, yet he -cannot make a Tree; though he can make a Sword, or Knife, yet he cannot -make the Mettal. And as Man makes use of other Creatures, so other -Creatures make use of Man, as far as he is good for any thing: But Man -is not so useful to his neighbour or fellow-creatures, as his neighbour -or fellow-creatures to him, being not so profitable for use, as apt to -make spoil. And so leaving him, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. Book._ 2. _c._ 2. - -[2] _C._ 3. - - - - -VI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ demands,[1] _Whether there was ever any man, that was -not mortal, and whether there be any mortal that had not a beginning?_ -Truly, if nature be eternal, all the material figures which ever were, -are, and can be, must be also eternal in nature; for the figures cannot -be annihilated, unless nature be destroyed; and although a Creature -is dissolved and transformed into numerous different figures, yet all -these several figures remain still in those parts of matter, whereof -that creature was made, for matter never changes, but is always one -and the same, and figure is nothing else but matter transposed or -transformed by motion several modes or ways. But if you conceive -Matter to be one thing, Figure another, and Motion a third, several, -distinct and dividable from each other, it will produce gross errors, -for, matter, motion, and figure, are but one thing. And as for that -common question, whether the Egg was before the Chick, or the Chick -before the Egg, it is but a thred-bare argument, which proves nothing, -for there is no such thing as First in Eternity, neither doth Time -make productions or generations, but Matter; and whatsoever matter can -produce or generate, was in matter before it was produced; wherefore -the question is, whether Matter, which is Nature, had a beginning, or -not? I say not: for put the case, the figures of Earth, Air, Water, -and Fire, Light and Colours, Heat and Cold, Animals, Vegetables and -Minerals, &c. were not produced from all Eternity, yet those figures -have nevertheless been in Matter, which is Nature, from all eternity, -for these mentioned Creatures are onely made by the corporeal motions -of Matter, transforming Matter into such several figures; Neither can -there be any perishing or dying in Nature, for that which Man calls so, -is onely an alteration of Figure. And as all other productions are but -a change of Matters sensitive motions, so all irregular and extravagant -opinions are nothing but a change of Matters rational motions; onely -productions by rational motions are interior, and those by sensitive -motions exterior. For the Natural Mind is not less material then the -body, onely the Matter of the Mind is much purer and subtiller then the -Matter of the Body. And thus there is nothing in Nature but what is -material; but he that thinks it absurd to say, the World is composed -of meer self-moving Matter, may consider, that it is more absurd to -believe Immaterial substances or spirits in Nature, as also a spirit of -Nature, which is the Vicarious power of God upon Matter; For why should -it not be as probable, that God did give Matter a self-moving power to -her self, as to have made another Creature to govern her? For Nature -is not a Babe, or Child, to need such a Spiritual Nurse, to teach her -to go, or to move; neither is she so young a Lady as to have need of a -Governess, for surely she can govern her self; she needs not a Guardian -for fear she should run away with a younger Brother, or one that cannot -make her a Jointure. But leaving those strange opinions to the fancies -of their Authors, I'le add no more, but that I am, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. l._ 3. _c._ 15. _a._ 3. - - - - -VII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ being very earnest in arguing against those that maintain -the opinion of Matter being self-moving, amongst the rest of his -arguments brings in this:[1] _Suppose_, says he, _Matter could move it -self, would meer Matter with self-motion amount to that admirable wise -contrivance of things which we see in the World?--All the evasion I can -imagine, our adversaries may use here, will be this: That Matter is -capable of sense, and the finest and most subtil of the most refined -sense; and consequently of Imagination too, yea happily of Reason and -Understanding._ I answer, it is very probable, that not onely all the -Matter in the World or Universe hath Sense, but also Reason; and that -the sensitive part of matter is the builder, and the rational the -designer; whereof I have spoken of before, and you may find more of it -in my Book of Philosophy. _But,_ says your Author, _Let us see, if all -their heads laid together can contrive the anatomical Fabrick of any -Creature that liveth?_ I answer, all parts of Nature are not bound to -have heads or tayls; but if they have, surely they are wiser then many -a man's. _I demand_, says he, _Has every one of these Particles, that -must have a hand in the framing of the body of an animal, the whole -design of the work by the Impress of some Phantasme upon it? or as -they have several offices, so have they several parts of the design?_ -I answer, All the actions of self-moving Matter are not Impresses, nor -is every part a hand-labourer, but every part unites by degrees into -such or such a Figure. Again, says he, _How is it conceiveable that -any one Particle of Matter, or many together, (there not existing, yet -in Nature an animal) can have the Idea Impressed of that Creature they -are to frame?_ I answer, all figures whatsoever have been, are, or can -be in Nature, are existent in nature. _How_, says he, _can they in -framing several parts confer notes? by what language or speech can they -communicate their Counsels one to another?_ I answer, Knowledg doth -not always require speech, for speech is an effect and not a cause, -but knowledg is a cause and not an effect; and nature hath infinite -more ways to express knowledg then man can imagine, _Wherefore_, he -concludes, _that they should mutually serve one another in such a -design, is more impossible, then that so many men, blind and dumb from -their nativity, should joyn their forces and wits together to build a -Castle, or carve a statue of such a Creature, as none of them knew any -more in several, then some one of the smallest parts thereof, but not -the relation it bore to the whole._ I answer, Nature is neither blind -nor dumb, nor any ways defective, but infinitely wise and knowing; -for blindness and dumbness are but effects of some of her particular -actions, but there is no defect in self-moving matter, nor in her -actions in general; and it is absurd to conceive the Generality of -wisdom according to an Irregular effect or defect of a particular -Creature; for the General actions of Nature are both life and knowledg, -which are the architects of all Creatures, and know better how to frame -all kinds and sorts of Creatures then man can conceive; and the several -parts of Matter have a more easie way of communication, then Mans head -hath with his hand, or his hand with pen, ink, and paper, when he is -going to write; which later example will make you understand my opinion -the better, if you do but compare the rational part of Matter to the -head, the sensitive to the hand, the inanimate to pen, ink and paper, -their action to writing, and their framed figures to those figures or -letters which are written; in all which is a mutual agreement without -noise or trouble. But give me leave, _Madam_, to tell you, That -self-moving Matter may sometimes erre and move irregularly, and in some -parts not move so strong, curious, or subtil at sometimes, as in other -parts, for Nature delights in variety; Nevertheless she is more wise -then any Particular Creature or part can conceive, which is the cause -that Man thinks Nature's wise, subtil and lively actions, are as his -own gross actions, conceiving them to be constrained and turbulent, not -free and easie, as well as wise and knowing; Whereas Nature's Creating, -Generating and Producing actions are by an easie connexion of parts to -parts, without Counterbuffs, Joggs and Jolts, producing a particular -figure by degrees, and in order and method, as humane sense and reason -may well perceive: And why may not the sensitive and rational part of -Matter know better how to make a Bee, then a Bee doth how to make Honey -and Wax? or have a better communication betwixt them, then Bees that -fly several ways, meeting and joyning to make their Combes in their -Hives? But pardon, _Madam_, for I think it a Crime to compare the -Creating, Generating and producing Corporeal Life and Wisdom of Nature -unto any particular Creature, although every particular Creature hath -their share, being a part of Nature. Wherefore those, in my opinion, do -grossly err, that bind up the sensitive matter onely to taste, touch, -hearing, seeing, and smelling; as if the sensitive parts of Nature had -not more variety of actions, then to make five senses; for we may well -observe, in every Creature there is difference of sense and reason -according to the several modes of self-motion; For the Sun, Stars, -Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Plants, Animals, Minerals; although they have -all sense and knowledg, yet they have not all sense and knowledg alike, -because sense and knowledg moves not alike in every kind or sort of -Creatures, nay many times very different in one and the same Creature; -but yet this doth not cause a general Ignorance, as to be altogether -Insensible or Irrational, neither do the erroneous and irregular -actions of sense and reason prove an annihilation of sense and reason; -as for example, a man may become Mad or a Fool through the irregular -motions of sense and reason, and yet have still the Perception of sense -and reason, onely the alteration is caused through the alteration of -the sensitive and rational corporeal motions or actions, from regular -to irregular; nevertheless he has Perceptions, Thoughts, Ideas, -Passions, and whatsoever is made by sensitive and rational Matter, -neither can Perception be divided from Motion, nor Motion from Matter; -for all sensation is Corporeal, and so is Perception. I can add no -more, but take my leave, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 1. _c._ 12. - - - - -VIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ is pleased to say,[1] that _Matter is a Principle purely -passive, and no otherwise moved or modified, then as some other thing -moves and modifies it, but cannot move it self at all; which is most -demonstrable to them that contend for sense and perception in it: For -if it had any such perception, it would, by vertue of its self-motion -withdraw its self from under the knocks of hammers, or fury of the -fire; or of its own accord approach to such things as are most -agreeable to it, and pleasing, and that without the help of muscles, it -being thus immediately endowed with a self-moving power._ By his leave, -_Madam_, I must tell you, that I see no consequence in this argument; -Because some parts of matter cannot withdraw themselves from the force -and power of other parts, therefore they have neither sense, reason, -nor perception: For put the case, a man should be over-powr'd by some -other men, truely he would be forced to suffer, and no Immaterial -Spirits, I think, would assist him. The very same may be said of other -Creatures or parts of Nature; for some may over-power others, as the -fire, hammer and hand doth over-power a Horse-shooe, which cannot -prevail over so much odds of power and strength; And so likewise it is -with sickness and health, life and death; for example, some corporeal -motions in the body turning Rebels, by moving contrary to the health -of an animal Creature, it must become sick; for not every particular -creature hath an absolute power, the power being in the Infinite whole, -and not in single divided parts: Indeed, to speak properly, there is -no such thing as an absolute power in Nature; for though Nature hath -power to move it self, yet not beyond it self. But mistake me not, for -I mean by an absolute Power; not a circumscribed and limited, but an -unlimited power, no ways bound or confined, but absolutely or every way -Infinite, and there is not anything that has such an absolute power -but God alone: neither can Nature be undividable, being Corporeal or -Material; nor rest from motion being naturally self-moving, and in a -perpetual motion. Wherefore though Matter is self-moving, and very -wise, (although your _Author_ denies it, calling those Fools that -maintain this opinion)[2] yet it cannot go beyond the rules of its -Nature, no more then any Art can go beyond its Rules and Principles: -And as for what your _Author_ says, That every thing would approach to -that, which is agreeable and pleasant; I think I need no demonstration -to prove it; for we may plainly see it in all effects of Nature, that -there is Sympathy and Antipathy, and what is this else, but approaching -to things agreeable and pleasant, and withdrawing it self from things -disagreeable, and hurtful or offensive? But of this subject I shall -discourse more hereafter, wherefore I finish here, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 2., _c._ 1. _a._ 3. - -[2] _In the Append. to the Antid. c._ 3. _a._ 10. - - - - -IX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Authors_ opinion is,[1] That _Matter being once actually divided -as far as possibly it can, it is a perfect contradiction it should -be divided any further._ I answer, Though Nature is Infinite, yet -her actions are not all dilative nor separative, but some divide and -some compose, some dilate and some contract, which causes a mean -betwixt Natures actions or motions. Next your _Author_ says, That -_as Infinite Greatness has no Figure, so Infinite Littleness hath -none also._ I answer, Whatsoever hath a body, has a figure; for it -is impossible that _substance_, or _body_, and _figure_, should be -separated from each other, but wheresoever is body or substance, -there is also figure, and if there be an infinite substance, there -must also be an infinite figure, although not a certain determined -or circumscribed figure, for such a figure belongs onely to finite -particulars; and therefore I am of your _Authors_ mind, That it is a -contradiction to say an Infinite Cube or Triangle, for a Cube and a -Triangle is a perfect circumscribed figure, having its certain compass -and circumference, be it never so great or little; wherefore to say -an Infinite Cube, would be as much as to say a Finite Infinite. But -as for your _Authors_ example of _Infinite matter, space or duration, -divided into three equal parts, all which he says must needs be -Infinite, or else the whole will not be so, and then the middle part -of them will seem both Finite and Infinite._ I answer, That Matter is -not dividable into three equal parts, for three is a finite number -and so are three equal parts; but I say that Matter being an Infinite -body, is dividable into Infinite parts, and it doth not follow, as -your _Author_ says, That one of those infinite parts must be infinite -also, for else there would be no difference betwixt the whole and its -parts; I say whole for distinctions and better expressions sake, and -do not mean such a whole which hath a certain number of parts, and -is of a certain and limited figure, although never so great; but an -Infinite whole, which expression I must needs use, by reason I speak -of Infinite parts; and that each one of these Infinite parts in number -may be finite in substance or figure, is no contradiction, but very -probable and rational; nay, I think it rather absurd to say that each -part is infinite; for then there would be no difference betwixt parts -and whole, as I said before. Onely this is to be observed, that the -Infinite whole is Infinite in substance or bulk, but the parts are -Infinite in number, and not in bulk, for each part is circumscribed, -and finite in its exterior figure and substance. But mistake me not, -when I speak of circumscribed and finite single parts; for I do not -mean, that each part doth subsist single and by it self, there being no -such thing as an absolute single part in Nature, but Infinite Matter -being by self-motion divided into an infinite number of parts, all -these parts have so near a relation to each other, and to the infinite -whole, that one cannot subsist without the other; for the Infinite -parts in number do make the Infinite whole, and the Infinite whole -consists in the Infinite number of parts; wherefore it is onely their -figures which make a difference betwixt them; for each part having its -proper figure different from the other, which is circumscribed and -limited, it is called a finite single part; and such a part cannot -be said Infinitely dividable, for infinite composition and division -belong onely to the Infinite body of Nature, which being infinite in -substance may also be infinitely divided, but not a finite and single -part: Besides, Infinite composition doth hinder the Infinite division, -and Infinite division hinders the Infinite composition; so that one -part cannot be either infinitely composed, or infinitely divided; -and it is one thing to be dividable, and another to be divided. And -thus, when your _Author_ mentions in another place,[2] That _if a -body be divisible into Infinite Parts, it hath an Infinite number of -extended parts:_ If by extension he mean corporeal dimension, I am of -his opinion; for there is no part, be it never so little in Nature, -but is material; and if material, it has a body; and if a body, it -must needs have a bodily dimension; and so every part will be an -extended part: but since there is no part but is finite in its self, -it cannot be divisible into infinite parts; neither can any part be -infinitely dilated or contracted; for as composition and division do -hinder and obstruct each other from running into Infinite, so doth -dilation hinder the Infinite contraction, and contraction the Infinite -dilation, which, as I said before, causes a mean betwixt Nature's -actions; nevertheless, there are Infinite dilations and contractions in -Nature, because there are Infinite contracted and dilated parts, and so -are infinite divisions because there are infinite divided parts; but -contraction, dilation, extension, composition, division, and the like, -are onely Nature's several actions; and as there can be no single part -in Nature that is Infinite, so there can neither be any single Infinite -action. But as for Matter, Motion and Figure, those are Individable -and inseparable, and make but one body or substance; for it is as -impossible to divide them, as impossible it is to your _Author_ to -separate the essential proprieties, which he gives, from an Immortal -Spirit; And as Matter, Motion and Figure are inseparable; so is -likewise Matter, Space, Place and Duration; For Parts, Motion, Figure, -Place and Duration, are but one Infinite body; onely the Infinite parts -are the Infinite divisions of the Infinite body, and the Infinite -body is a composition of the Infinite parts; but figure, place and -body are all one, and so is time, and duration, except you will call -time the division of duration, and duration the composition of time; -but infinite time, and infinite duration is all one in Nature: and -thus Nature's Principal motions and actions are dividing, composing, -and disposing or ordering, according to her Natural wisdom, by the -Omnipotent God's leave and permission. Concerning the _Sun_, which your -_Author_ speaks of in the same place, and denies him to be a _Spectator -of our particular affairs upon Earth_; saying, there is no such divine -Principle in him, whereby he can do it. I will speak nothing again -it, nor for it; but I may say, that the Sun hath such a Principle as -other Creatures have, which is, that he has sensitive and rational -corporeal motions, as well as animals or other Creatures, although not -in the same manner, nor the same organs; and if he have sensitive and -rational motions, he may also have sensitive and rational knowledg or -perception, as well as man, or other animals and parts of Nature have, -for ought any body knows; for it is plain to humane sense and reason, -that all Creatures must needs have rational and sensitive knowledg, -because they have all sensitive and rational matter and motions. But -leaving the Sun for Astronomers to contemplate upon, I take my leave, -and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _In the Preface before the Imm. of the Soul._ - -[2] _Antid. Book._ 2. _c._ 4. - - - - -X. - -_MADAM,_ - - -Your _Author_ in his arguments against _Motion_, being a _Principle of -Nature_,[1] endeavours to prove, that Beauty, Colour, Symmetry, and -the like, in Plants, as well as in other Creatures, are no result from -the meer motion of the matter; and forming this objection, _It may be -said_, says he, _That the regular motion of the matter made the first -plant of every kind; but we demand, What regulated the motion of it, -so as to guide it, to form it self into such a state?_ I answer, The -Wisdom of Nature or infinite Matter did order its own actions so, as -to form those her Parts into such an exact and beautiful figure, as -such a Tree, or such a Flower, or such a Fruit, and the like; and some -of her Parts are pleased and delighted with other parts, but some of -her parts are afraid or have an aversion to other parts; and hence is -like and dislike, or sympathy and antipathy, hate and love, according -as nature, which is infinite self-moving matter, pleases to move; for -though Natural Wisdom is dividable into parts, yet these parts are -united in one infinite Body, and make but one Being in it self, like -as the several parts of a man make up but one perfect man; for though -a man may be wise in several causes or actions, yet it is but one -wisdom; and though a Judg may shew Justice in several causes, yet it -is but one Justice; for Wisdom and Justice, though they be practised -in several causes, yet it is but one Wisdom, and one Justice; and so, -all the parts of a mans body, although they move differently, yet are -they but one man's bodily actions; Just as a man, if he carve or cut -out by art several statues, or draw several Pictures, those statues or -pictures are but that one man's work. The like may be said of Natures -Motions and Figures; all which are but one self-active or self-moving -Material Nature. But Wise Nature's Ground or Fundamental actions -are very Regular, as you may observe in the several and distinct -kinds, sorts and particulars of her Creatures, and in their distinct -Proprieties, Qualities, and Faculties, belonging not onely to each kind -and sort, but to each particular Creature; and since man is not able -to know perfectly all those proprieties which belong to animals, much -less will he be able to know and judg of those that are in Vegetables, -Minerals and Elements; and yet these Creatures, for any thing Man -knows, may be as knowing, understanding, and wise as he; and each as -knowing of its kind or sort, as man is of his; But the mixture of -ignorance and knowledg in all Creatures proceeds from thence, that they -are but Parts; and there is no better proof, that the mind of man is -dividable, then that it is not perfectly knowing; nor no better proof -that it is composeable, then that it knows so much: but all minds are -not alike, but some are more composed then others, which is the cause, -some know more then others; for if the mind in all men were alike, all -men would have the same Imaginations, Fancies, Conceptions, Memories, -Remembrances, Passions, Affections, Understanding, and so forth: The -same may be said of their bodies; for if all mens sensitive parts -were as one, and not dividable and composeable, all their Faculties, -Proprieties, Constitutions, Complexions, Appetites, would be the same -in every man without any difference; but humane sense and reason doth -well perceive, that neither the mind, life nor body are as one piece, -without division and composition. Concerning the divine Soul, I do not -treat of it; onely this I may say, That all are not devout alike, nor -those which are, are not at all times alike devout. But to conclude: -some of our modern Philosophers think they do God good service, when -they endeavour to prove Nature, as Gods good Servant, to be stupid, -ignorant, foolish and mad, or any thing rather then wise, and yet they -believe themselves wise, as if they were no part of Nature; but I -cannot imagine any reason why they should rail on her, except Nature -had not given them as great a share or portion, as she hath given to -others; for children in this case do often rail at their Parents, for -leaving their Brothers and Sisters more then themselves. However, -Nature can do more then any of her Creatures: and if Man can Paint, -Imbroider, Carve, Ingrave curiously; why may not Nature have more -Ingenuity, Wit and Wisdom then any of her particular Creatures? The -same may be said of her Government. And so leaving Wise Nature, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Append. to the Antid. c._ 11. - - - - -XI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -To your _Authors_ argument,[1] That _if Motion belong naturally to -Matter, Matter being Uniform, it must be alike moved in every part or -particle imaginable of it, by reason this Motion being natural and -essential to Matter, is alike every way._ I answer, That this is no -more necessary, then that the several actions of one body, or of one -part of a body should be alike; for though Matter is one and the same -in its Nature, and never changes, yet the motions are various, which -motions are the several actions of one and the same Natural Matter; and -this is the cause of so many several Creatures; for self-moving matter -by its self-moving power can act several ways, modes or manners; and -had not natural matter a self-acting power, there could not be any -variety in Nature; for Nature knows of no rest, there being no such -thing as rest in Nature; but she is in a perpetual motion, I mean -self-motion, given her from God: Neither do I think it Atheistical -(as your _Author_ deems) to maintain this opinion of self-motion, as -long as I do not deny the Omnipotency of God; but I should rather -think it Irreligious to make so many several Creatures as Immaterial -Spirits, like so many severall Deities, to rule and govern Nature and -all material substances in Nature; for what Atheism doth there lie -in saying, that natural matter is naturally moving, and wise in her -self? Doth this oppose the omnipotency and Infinite wisdom of God? It -rather proves and confirms it; for all Natures free power of moving and -wisdom is a gift of God, and proceeds from him; but I must confess, -it destroys the power of Immaterial substances, for Nature will not -be ruled nor governed by them, and to be against Natural Immaterial -substances, I think, is no Atheisme, except we make them Deities; -neither is Atheisme to contradict the opinion of those, that believe -such natural incorporeal Spirits, unless man make himself a God. But -although Nature is wise, as I said before, and acts methodically, -yet the variety of motions is the cause of so many Irregularities in -Nature, as also the cause of Irregular opinions; for all opinions are -made by self-moving matters motions, or (which is all one) by corporeal -self-motion, and some in their opinions do conceive Nature according -to the measure of themselves, as that Nature can, nor could not do -more, then they think, nay, some believe they can do as much as Nature -doth; which opinions, whether they be probable or regular, I'le let -any man judg; adding onely this, that to humane sense and reason it -appears plainly, that as God has given Nature a power to act freely, so -he doth approve of her actions, being wise and methodical in all her -several Productions, Generations, Transformations and Designs: And so I -conclude for the present, onely subscribe my self, as really I am, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. l._ 2. _c._ 1. - - - - -XII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am of your _Authors_ opinion, concerning self-activity or -self-motion,[1] _That what is Active of it self, can no more cease to -be active then to be_: And I have been always of this opinion, even -from the first beginning of my conceptions in natural Philosophy, as -you may see in my first Treatise of Natural Philosophy, which I put -forth eleven years since; where I say, That self-moving Matter is in a -Perpetual motion; But your _Author_ endeavors from thence to conclude, -That _Matter is not self active, because it is reducible to rest._ To -which I answer, That there is no such thing as Rest in Nature: Not do -I say, that all sorts of motions are subject to our senses, for those -that are subject to our sensitive Perceptions, are but gross Motions, -in comparison to those that are not subject to our exterior senses: -as for example; We see some bodies dilate, others consume, others -corrupt; yet we do not see how they dilate, nor how they consume, nor -how they corrupt: Also we see some bodies contract, some attract, -some condense, some consist, &c. yet we do not see their contracting, -attracting, condensing, consisting or retenting motions; and yet we -cannot say, they are not corporeal motions, because not subject to -our exterior senses; for if there were not contracting, attracting, -retenting or consistent corporeal self-motions, it had been impossible -that any creature could have been composed into one united figure, -much less stayed and continued in the same figure without a general -alteration. But your _Author_ says, _If Matter, as Matter, had Motion, -nothing would hold together, but Flints, Adamants, Brass, Iron, yea, -this whole Earth, would suddenly melt into a thinner substance then -the subtil Air, or rather it never had been condensated together to -this consistency we find it._ But I would ask him, what reason he can -give, that corporeal self-motion should make all matter rare and fluid, -unless he believe there is but one kind of motion in Nature, but this, -human sense and reason will contradict; for we may observe there are -Infinite changes of Motion, and there is more variety and curiosity in -corporeal motions, then any one single Creature can imagine, much less -know; but I suppose he conceives all corporeal matter to be gross, and -that not any corporeal motion can be subtil, penetrating, contracting -and dilating; and that whatsoever is penetrating, contracting and -dilating, is Individable: But by his leave, _Madam_, this doth not -follow; for though there be gross degrees of Matter, and strong degrees -of Corporeal Motions, yet there are also pure and subtil degrees -of Matter and Motions; to wit, that degree of Matter, which I name -sensitive and rational Matter, which is natural Life and Knowledg, as -sensitive Life and rational Knowledg. Again, your _Author_ askes, _What -glue or cement holds the parts of hard matter in Stones and Metals -together?_ I answer, Consistent or retentive corporeal motions, by an -agreeable union and conjunction in the several parts of Metal or Stone; -and these retentive or consistent motions, are as strong and active, -if not more, then some dilative or contractive motions; for I have -mentioned heretofore, that, as sensitive and rational corporeal motions -are in all Creatures, so also in Stone, Metal, and any other dense body -whatsoever; so that not any one Creature or part of Matter is without -Motion, and therefore not any thing is at rest. But, _Madam_, I dare -say, I could bring more reason and sense to prove, that sensitive and -rational Matter is fuller of activity, and has more variety of motion, -and can change its own parts of self-moving Matter more suddenly, and -into more exterior figures, then Immaterial Spirits can do upon natural -Matter. But your _Author_ says, That Immaterial Spirits are endued with -Sense and Reason; I say, My sensitive and rational corporeal Matter -is Sense and Reason it self, and is the Architect or Creator of all -figures of Natural matter, for though all the parts of Matter are not -self-moving, yet there is not any part that is not moving or moved, by -and with the mover, which is animate matter. And thus I conclude, and -rest constantly, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 1. _c._ 7. - - - - -XIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -That Matter is uncapable of Sense, your _Author_ proves by the example -of dead Carcasses;[1] _For,_ says he, _Motion and Sense being really -one and the same thing, it must needs follow, that where there is -motion, there is also sense and perception; but on the contrary, there -is Reaction in dead Carcasses, and yet no Sense._ I answer shortly, -That it is no consequence, because there is no animal sense nor -exterior perceptible local motion in a dead Carcass, therefore there -is no sense at all in it; for though it has not animal sense, yet it -may nevertheless have sense according to the nature of that figure, -into which it did change from being an animal. Also he says, _If any -Matter have sense, it will follow, that upon reaction all shall have -the like; and that a Bell while it is ringing, and a Bow while it is -bent, and every Jack-in-a-box, that School-boys play with, shall be -living animals._ I answer, It is true, if reaction made sense; but -reaction doth not make sense, but sense makes reaction; and though the -Bell hath not an animal knowledg, yet it may have a mineral life and -knowledg, and the Bow, and the Jack-in-a-box a vegetable knowledg; for -the shape and form of the Bell, Bow, and Jack-in-a-box, is artificial; -nevertheless each in its own kind may have as much knowledg as an -animal in his kind; onely they are different according to the different -proprieties of their Figures: And who can prove the contrary that they -have not? For certainly Man cannot prove what he cannot know; but Mans -nature is so, that knowing but little of other Creatures, he presently -judges there is no more knowledg in Nature, then what Man, at least -Animals, have; and confines all sense onely to Animal sense, and all -knowledg to Animal knowledg. Again says your Author, _That Matter is -utterly uncapable of such operations as we find in our selves, and -that therefore there is something in us Immaterial or Incorporeal; -for we find in our selves that one and the same thing, both hears, -and sees, and tastes, and perceives all the variety of objects that -Nature manifests unto us._ I answer, That is the reason there is but -one matter, and that all natural perception is made by the animate -part of matter; but although there is but one matter in Nature, yet -there are several parts or degrees, and consequently several actions -of that onely matter, which causes such a variety of perceptions, -both sensitive and rational: the sensitive perception is made by the -sensitive corporeal motions, copying out the figures of forreign -objects in the sensitive organs of the sentient; and if those sensitive -motions do pattern out forreign objects in each sensitive organ alike -at one and the same time, then we hear, see, taste, touch and smell, -at one and the same time: But Thoughts and Passions, as Imagination, -Conception, Fancy, Memory, Love, Hate, Fear, Joy, and the like, are -made by the rational corporeal motions in their own degree of matter, -to wit, the rational. And thus all perception is made by one and the -same matter, through the variety of its actions or motions, making -various and several figures, both sensitive and rational. But all this -variety in sense and reason, or of sensitive and rational perceptions, -is not made by parts pressing upon parts, but by changing their own -parts of matter into several figures by the power of self-motion: For -example, I see a Man or Beast; that Man or Beast doth not touch my -eye, in the least, neither in it self, nor by pressing the adjoyning -parts: but the sensitive corporeal motions streight upon the sight of -the Man or Beast make the like figure in the sensitive organ, the Eye, -and in the eyes own substance or matter, as being in the eye as well -as the other degrees of matter, to wit, the rational and inanimate, -for they are all mixt together. But this is to be observed, That the -rational matter can and doth move in its own substance, as being the -purest and subtillest degree of matter; but the sensitive being not so -pure and subtil, moves always with the inanimate Matter, and so the -perceptive figures which the rational Matter, or rational corporeal -Motions make, are made in their own degree of Matter; but those figures -which the sensitive patterns out, are made in the organs or parts of -the sentient body proper to such or such a sense or perception: as in -an animal Creature, the perception of sight is made by the sensitive -corporeal motions in the Eye; the perception of hearing, in the Ear, -and so forth. As for what your _Author_ says, _That we cannot conceive -any portion of Matter, but is either hard or soft_; I answer, That -these are but effects of Matters actions, and so is rare, and dense, -and the like; but there are some Creatures which seem neither perfectly -rare, nor dense, nor hard, nor soft, but of mixt qualities; as for -example, Quicksilver seems rare, and yet is dense; soft, and yet is -hard; for though liquid Quicksilver is soft to our touch, and rare to -our sight, yet it is so dense and hard, as not to be readily dissolved -from its nature; and if there be such contraries and mixtures in -one particular creature made of self-moving Matter, what will there -not be in Matter it self, according to the old saying: _If the Man -such praise shall have; What the Master that keeps the knave?_ So if -a particular Creature hath such opposite qualities and mixtures of -corporeal motions, what will the Creator have which is self-moving -Matter? Wherefore it is impossible to affirm, that self-moving Matter -is either all rare, or all dense, or all hard, or all soft; because by -its self-moving power it can be either, or both, and so by the change -and variety of motion, there may be soft and rare Points, and hard and -sharp Points, hard and contracted Globes, and soft and rare Globes; -also there may be pressures of Parts without printing, and printing -without pressures. Concerning that part of Matter which is the _Common -Sensorium_, your _Author_ demands, _Whether some point of it receive -the whole Image of the object, or whether it be wholly received into -every point of it?_ I answer, first, That all sensitive Matter is not -in Points; Next, That not any single part can subsist of it self; and -then that one Part doth not receive all parts or any part into it self; -but that Parts by the power of self-motion can and do make several -figures of all sizes and sorts, and can Epitomize a great object into -a very little figure; for outward objects do not move the body, but -the sensitive and rational matter moves according to the figures of -outward objects: I do not say always, but most commonly; _But_, says -your Author, _How can so smal a Point receive the Images of so vast -or so various objects at once, without obliteration or confusion._ -First, I answer, That, as I said before, sensitive Matter is not bound -up to a Point, nor to be a single self-subsisting Part. Next, as for -confusion, I say, that the sensitive matter makes no more confusion, -then an Engraver, when he engraves several figures in a small stone, -and a Painter draws several figures in a small compass; for a Carver -will cut out several figures in a Cherry-stone, and a Lady in a little -black Patch; and if gross and rude Art is able to do this, what may -not Ingenious and Wise Nature do? And as Nature is ingenious and -knowing in her self, so in her Parts, and her Parts in her; for neither -whole nor Parts are ignorant, but have a knowledg, each according to -the motion of its own Parts; for knowledg is in Motion, and Motion -in Matter; and the diversity and variety of motion is the diversity -and variety of knowledg, so that every particular figure and motion -hath its particular knowledg, as well as its proper and peculiar -parts; and as the parts join or divide, so doth knowledg, which many -times causes Arts to be lost and found, and memory and remembrance in -Particular Creatures: I do not say, they are utterly lost in nature, -but onely in respect to particular Creatures, by the dissolving and -dividing of their particular figures. For the rational matter, by -reason it moves onely in its own parts, it can change and rechange -into several figures without division of parts, which makes memory -and remembrance: But men not considering or believing there might -be such a degree of onely matter, namely rational, it has made them -erre in their judgments. Nevertheless there is a difference between -sensitive and rational parts and motions, and yet they are agreeable -most commonly in their actions, though not always. Also the rational -can make such figures as the sensitive cannot, by reason the rational -has a greater power and subtiler faculty in making variety, then the -sensitive; for the sensitive is bound to move with the inanimate, but -the rational moves onely in its own parts; for though the sensitive -and rational oftentimes cause each other to move, yet they are not of -one and the same degree of matter, nor have they the same motions. -And this rational Matter is the cause of all Notions, Conceptions, -Imaginations, Deliberation, Determination, Memory, and any thing else -that belongs to the Mind; for this matter is the mind of Nature, and -so being dividable, the mind of all Creatures, as the sensitive is the -life; and it can move, as I said, more subtilly, and more variously -then the sensitive, and make such figures as the sensitive cannot, -without outward examples and objects. But all diversity comes by -change of motion, and motions are as sympathetical and agreeing, as -antipathetical and disagreeing; And though Nature's artificial motions, -which are her Playing motions, are sometimes extravagant, yet in her -fundamental actions there is no extravagancy, as we may observe by her -exact rules in the various generations, the distinct kinds and sorts, -the several exact measures, times, proportions and motions of all her -Creatures, in all which her wisdom is well exprest, and in the variety -her wise pleasure: To which I leave her, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 2. _c._ 2. - - - - -XIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -_If there be any sense and perception in Matter_, says your Author,[1] -_it must needs be Motion or Reaction of one part of matter against -another; and that all diversity of sense and perception doth -necessarily arise from the diversity of the Magnitude, Figure, -Posture, Vigour and Direction of Motion in Parts of the Matter; In -which variety of perceptions, Matter hath none, but such, as are -impressed by corporeal motions, that is to say, that are perceptions -of some actions, or modificated Impressions of parts of matter -bearing one against another._ I have declared, _Madam_, my opinion -concerning Perception in my former Letters, that all Perception is -not Impression and Reaction, like as a Seal is printed on Wax: For -example, the corporeal rational motions in the mind do not print, -but move figuratively; but the sensitive motions do carve, print, -engrave, and, as it were, pencil out, as also move figuratively in -productions, and do often take patterns from the rational figures, as -the rational motions make figures according to the sensitive patterns; -But the rational can move without patterns, and so the sensitive: For -surely, were a man born blind, deaf, dumb, and had a numb palsie in his -exterior parts, the sensitive and rational motions would nevertheless -move both in body and mind according to the nature of his figure; for -though no copies were taken from outward objects, yet he would have -thoughts, passions, appetites, and the like; and though he could not -see exterior objects, nor hear exterior sounds, yet no question but -he would see and hear interiously after the manner of dreams, onely -they might not be any thing like to what is perceiveable by man in the -World; but if he sees not the Sun-light, yet he would see something -equivalent to it; and if he hears not such a thing as Words, yet he -would hear something equivalent to words; for it is impossible, that -his sensitive and rational faculties should be lost for want of an Ear, -or an Eye; so that Perception may be without exterior object, or marks, -or patterns: for although the sensitive Motions do usually pattern out -the figures of exterior objects, yet that doth not prove, but they can -make interior figures without such objects. Wherefore Perception is not -always Reaction, neither is Perception and Reaction really one thing; -for though Perception and Action is one and the same, yet not always -Reaction; but did Perception proceed from the reaction of outward -objects, a blind and deaf man would not so much as dream; for he would -have no interior motion in the head, having no other exterior sense but -touch, which, if the body was troubled with a painful disease, he would -neither be sensible of, but to feel pain, and interiously feel nothing -but hunger and fulness; and his Mind would be as Irrational as some -imagine Vegetables and Minerals are. To which opinion I leave them, -and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 2. _c._ 1. _a._ 1, 6, 7. - - - - -XV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ is pleased, in Mirth, and to disgrace the opinion of -those which hold, that Perception is made by figuring, to bring in -this following example:[1] _Suppose_, says he, _one Particle should -shape it self into a_ George on Horse-back _with a Lance in his hand, -and another into an Inchanted Castle; this_ George on Horse-back -_must run against the Castle, to make the Castle receive his impress -and similitude: But what then? Truly the Encounter will be very -Unfortunate, for S._ George _indeed may easily break his Lance, but -it is impossible that he should by justling against the Particle in -the form of a Castle, conveigh the intire shape of himself and his -Horse thereby, such as we find our selves able to imagine of a man -on Horse-back; which is a Truth as demonstrable as any Theorem in -Mathematicks._ I answer, first, That there is no Particle single and -alone by it self; Next, I say, It is more easie for the rational -matter to put it self into such figures, and to make such encounters, -then for an Immaterial mind or substance to imagine it; for no -imagination can be without figure, and how should an Immaterial created -substance present such Figures, but by making them either in it self -or upon matter? For S. _George_ and the _Castle_ are figures, and -their encounters are real fighting actions, and how such figures and -actions can be in the mind or memory, and yet not be, is impossible -to conceive; for, as I said, those figures and actions must be either -in the incorporeal mind, or in the corporeal parts of matter; and if -the figures and motions may be in an incorporeal substance, much more -is it probable for them to be in a corporeal; nay if the figures and -their actions can be in gross corporeal matter, why should they not be -in the purest part of matter, which is the rational matter? And as for -being made known to the whole body, and every part thereof, it is not -necessary, no more then it is necessary, that the private actions of -every Man or Family should be made known to the whole Kingdom, or Town, -or Parish: But my opinion of self-corporeal motion and perception, may -be as demonstrable as that of Immaterial Natural Spirits, which, in -my mind, is not demonstrable at all, by reason it is not corporeal or -material; For how can that be naturally demonstrable, which naturally -is nothing? But your _Author_ believes the Mind or rational Soul -to be individable, and therefore concludes, that the Parts of the -same Matter, although at great distance, must of necessity know each -Particular act of each several Part; but that is not necessary; for -if there were not ignorance through the division of Parts, every man -and other creatures would know alike; and there is no better proof, -that matter, or any particular creature in nature is not governed by -a created Immaterial Spirit, then that knowledg is in parts; for the -hand doth not know what pain the head feels, which certainly it would -do, if the mind were not dividable into parts, but an individable -substance. But this is well to be observed, that some parts in some -actions agree generally in one body, and some not; as for example, -temperance and appetite do not agree; for the corporeal actions of -appetite desire to join with the corporeal actions of such or such -other parts, but the corporeal actions of temperance do hinder and -forbid it; whereupon there is a faction amongst the several parts: for -example, a Man desires to be drunk with Wine; this desire is made by -such corporeal actions as make appetite; the rational corporeal motions -or actions which make temperance, oppose those that make appetite, -and that sort of actions which hath the better, carryes it, the hand -and other parts of the body obeying the strongest side; and if there -be no wine to satisfie the appetite, yet many times the appetite -continues; that is, the parts continue in the same motions that make -such an appetite; but if the appetite doth not continue, then those -parts have changed their motions; or when by drinking, the appetite is -satisfied, and ceases, then those parts that made the appetite, have -altered their former motions. But oftentimes the rational corporeal -motions may so agree with the sensitive, as there may be no opposition -or crossing at all, but a sympathetical mutual agreement betwixt -them, at least an approvement; so that the rational may approve what -the sensitive covet or desire: Also some motions of the rational, as -also of the sensitive matter, may disagree amongst themselves, as we -see, that a man will often have a divided mind; for he will love and -hate the same thing, desire and not desire one and the same thing, as -to be in Heaven, and yet to be in the World: Moreover, this is to be -observed, That all rational perceptions or cogitations, are not so -perspicuous and clear as if they were Mathematical Demonstrations, but -there is some obscurity, more or less in them, at least they are not -so well perceivable without comparing several figures together, which -proves, they are not made by an individable, immaterial Spirit, but -by dividable corporeal parts: As for example, Man writes oftentimes -false, and seldom so exact, but he is forced to mend his hand, and -correct his opinions, and sometimes quite to alter them, according as -the figures continue or are dissolved and altered by change of motion, -and according as the actions are quick or slow in these alterations, -the humane mind is setled or wavering; and as figures are made, or -dissolved and transformed, Opinions, Conceptions, Imaginations, -Understanding, and the like, are more or less; And according as these -figures last, so is constancy or inconstancy, memory or forgetfulness, -and as those figures are repeated, so is remembrance; but sometimes -they are so constant and permanent, as they last as long as the figure -of the body, and sometimes it happens not once in an age, that the -like figures are repeated, and sometimes they are repeated every -moment: As for example; a man remembers or calls to mind the figure of -another man, his friend, with all his qualities, dispositions, actions, -proprieties, and the like, several times in an hour, and sometimes not -once in a year, and so as often as he remembers him, as often is the -figure of that man repeated; and as oft as he forgets him, so often is -his figure dissolved. But some imagine the rational motions to be so -gross as the Trotting of a Horse, and that all the motions of Animate -matter are as rude and course as renting or tearing asunder, or that -all impressions must needs make dents or creases. But as Nature hath -degrees of corporeal matter, so she hath also degrees of corporeal -motions, Matter and Motion being but one substance; and it is absurd to -judg of the interior motions of self-moving matter, by artificial or -exterior gross motions, as that all motions must be like the tearing -of a sheet of Paper, or that the printing and patterning of several -figures of rational and sensitive matter must be like the printing of -Books; nay, all artificial Printings are not so hard, as to make dents -and impresses; witness Writing, Painting, and the like; for they do -not disturb the ground whereon the letters are written, or the picture -drawn, and so the curious actions of the purest rational matter are -neither rude nor rough; but although this matter is so subtil and pure, -as not subject to exterior human senses and organs, yet certainly it -is dividable, not onely in several Creatures, but in the several parts -of one and the same Creature, as well as the sensitive, which is the -Life of Nature, as the other is the Soul; not the Divine, but natural -Soul; neither is this Soul Immaterial, but Corporeal; not composed of -raggs and shreds, but it is the purest, simplest and subtillest matter -in Nature. But to conclude, I desire you to remember, _Madam_, that -this rational and sensitive Matter in one united and finite Figure or -particular Creature, has both common and particular actions, for as -there are several kinds and sorts of Creatures, and particulars in -every kind and sort: so the like for the actions of the rational and -sensitive matter in one particular Creature. Also it is to be noted, -That the Parts of rational matter, can more suddenly give and take -Intelligence to and from each other, then the sensitive; nevertheless, -all Parts in Nature, at least adjoyning parts, have Intelligence -between each other, more or less, because all parts make but one body; -for it is not with the parts of Matter, as with several Constables in -several Hundreds, or several Parishes, which are a great way distant -from each other, but they may be as close as the combs of Bees, and yet -as partable and as active as Bees. But concerning the Intelligence of -Natures Parts, I have sufficiently spoken in other places; and so I'le -add no more, but that I unfeignedly remain; - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _In the second Book of the Immortality of the Soul, ch._ 6. - - - - -XVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -_Sensation in corporeal motion is first, and Perception follows_, sayes -your _Author_:[1] to which opinion I give no assent, but do believe -that Perception and Sensation are done both at one and the same time, -as being one and the same thing without division, either in reason -or sense, and are performed without any knocks, or jolts, or hitting -against. But let me tell you, _Madam_, there arises a great mistake -by many, from not distinguishing well, sensitive Motion, and rational -Motion; for though all motions are in one onely matter, yet that matter -doth not move always in the same manner, for then there could be no -variety in Nature; and truly, if man, who is but a part of Nature, may -move diversly, and put himself into numerous postures; Why may not -Nature? But concerning Motions, and their variety, to avoid tedious -repetitions, I must still referr you to my Book of _Philosophical -Opinions_; I'le add onely this, that it is well to be observed, That -all Motions are not Impressions, neither do all Impressions make -such dents, as to disturb the adjoyning Parts: Wherefore those, in -my opinion, understand _Nature_ best, which say, that Sensation and -Perception are really one and the same; but they are out, that say, -there can be no communication at a distance, unless by pressing and -crowding; for the patterning of an outward object, may be done without -any inforcement or disturbance, jogging or crowding, as I have declared -heretofore; for the sensitive and rational motions in the sensitive -and rational parts of matter in one creature, observing the exterior -motions in outward objects, move accordingly, either regularly or -irregularly in patterns; and if they have no exterior objects, as in -dreams, they work by rote. And so to conclude, I am absolutely of their -opinion, who believe, that there is nothing existent in Nature, but -what is purely Corporeal, for this seems most probable in sense and -reason to me, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _In the Pref. of the Imm. of the Soul._ - - - - -XVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Outward Objects, as I have told you before, do not make Sense and -Reason, but Sense and Reason do perceive and judg of outward objects; -For the Sun doth not make sight, nor doth sight make light; but sense -and reason in a Man, or any other creature, do perceive and know there -are such objects as Sun, and Light, or whatsoever objects are presented -to them. Neither doth Dumbness, Deafness, Blindness, &c. cause an -Insensibility, but Sense through irregular actions causes them; I -say, through Irregular actions, because those effects do not properly -belong to the nature of that kind of Creatures; for every Creature, -if regularly made, hath particular motions proper to its figure; for -natural Matters wisdom makes distinctions by her distinct corporeal -motions, giving every particular Creature their due Portion and -Proportion according to the nature of their figures, and to the rules -of her actions, but not to the rules of Arts, Mathematical Compasses, -Lines, Figures, and the like. And thus the Sun, Stars, Meteors, Air, -Fire, Water, Earth, Minerals, Vegetables and Animals, may all have -Sense and Reason, although it doth not move in one kind or sort of -Creatures, or in one particular, as in another: For the corporeal -motions differ not onely in kinds and sorts, but also in Particulars, -as is perceivable by human sense and reason; Which is the cause, that -Elements have elemental sense and knowledg, and Animals animal sense -and knowledg, and so of Vegetables, Minerals, and the like. Wherefore -the Sun and Stars may have as much sensitive and rational life and -knowledg as other Creatures, but such as is according to the nature -of their figures, and not animal, or vegetable, or mineral sense and -knowledg. And so leaving them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ denying that Fancy, Reason and Animadversion are -seated in the Brain, and that the Brain is figured into this or that -Conception:[1] _I demand_, says he, _in what knot, loop or interval -thereof doth this faculty of free Fancy and active Reason reside?_ My -answer is, that in my opinion, Fancy and Reason are not made in the -Brain, as there is a Brain, but as there is sensitive and rational -matter, which makes not onely the Brain, but all Thoughts, Conceptions, -Imaginations, Fancy, Understanding, Memory, Remembrance, and whatsoever -motions are in the Head, or Brain: neither doth this sensitive and -rational matter remain or act in one place of the Brain, but in every -part thereof; and not onely in every part of the Brain, but in every -part of the Body; nay, not onely in every part of a Mans Body, but in -every part of Nature. But, _Madam_, I would ask those, that say the -Brain has neither sense, reason, nor self-motion, and therefore no -Perception; but that all proceeds from an Immaterial Principle, as an -Incorporeal Spirit, distinct from the body, which moveth and actuates -corporeal matter; I would fain ask them, I say, where their Immaterial -Ideas reside, in what part or place of the Body? and whether they be -little or great? Also I would ask them, whether there can be many, or -but one Idea of God? If they say many, then there must be several, -distinct Deitical Ideas; if but one, Where doth this Idea reside? If -they say in the head, then the heart is ignorant of God; if in the -heart, then the head is ignorant thereof, and so for all parts of the -body; but if they say, in every part, then that Idea may be disfigured -by a lost member; if they say, it may dilate and contract, then I say -it is not the Idea of God, for God can neither contract nor extend; -nor can the Idea it self dilate and contract, being immaterial; for -contraction and dilation belong onely to bodies, or material beings: -Wherefore the comparisons betwixt Nature and a particular Creature, and -between God and Nature, are improper; much more betwixt God and Natures -particular motions and figures, which are various and changeable, -although methodical. The same I may ask of the Mind of Man, as I do of -the Idea in the Mind. Also I might ask them, what they conceive the -natural mind of man to be, whether material or immaterial? If material, -their opinion is rational, and so the mind is dividable and composable; -if immaterial, then it is a Spirit; and if a Spirit, it cannot possibly -dilate nor contract, having no dimension nor divisibility of parts, -(although your _Author_ proves it by the example of Light; but I have -exprest my meaning heretofore, that _light_ is divisible) and if it -have no dimension, how can it be confined in a material body? Wherefore -when your _Author_ says, the mind is a substance, it is to my reason -very probable; but not when he says, it is an immaterial substance, -which will never agree with my sense and reason; for it must be either -something, or nothing, there being no _medium_ between, in Nature. But -pray mistake me not, _Madam_, when I say Immaterial is nothing; for I -mean nothing Natural, or so as to be a part of Nature; for God forbid, -I should deny, that God is a Spiritual Immaterial substance, or Being; -neither do I deny that we can have an Idea, notion, conception, or -thought of the existence of God; for I am of your _Authors_ opinion, -That there is no Man under the cope of Heaven, that doth not by the -light of Nature, know, and believe there is a God; but that we should -have such a perfect Idea of God, as of any thing else in the World, -or as of our selves, as your _Author_ says, I cannot in sense and -reason conceive to be true or possible. Neither am I against those -Spirits, which the holy Scripture mentions, as Angels and Devils, -and the divine Soul of Man; but I say onely, that no Immaterial -Spirit belongs to Nature, so as to be a part thereof; for Nature is -Material, or Corporeal; and whatsoever is not composed of matter or -body, belongs not to Nature; nevertheless, Immaterial Spirits may be -in Nature, although not parts of Nature. But there can neither be an -Immaterial Nature, nor a Natural Immaterial; Nay, our very thoughts and -conceptions of Immaterial are Material, as made of self-moving Matter. -Wherefore to conclude, these opinions in Men proceed from a Vain-glory, -as to have found out something that is not in Nature; to which I leave -them, and their natural Immaterial Substances, like so many Hobgoblins -to fright Children withal, resting in the mean time, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. lib._ 1. _c._ 11. - - - - -XIX. - -_MADAM,_ - -There are various opinions concerning the seat of Common Sense, as -your _Author_ rehearseth them in his Treatise of the Immortality of -the Soul;[1] But my opinion is, That common sense hath also a common -place; for as there is not any part of the body that hath not sense -and reason, so sense and reason is in all parts of the body, as it is -observable by this, that every part is subject to pain and pleasure, -and all parts are moveable, moving and moved; also appetites are in -every part of the body: As for example, if any part itches, it hath -an appetite to be scratched, and every part can pattern out several -objects, and so several touches; and though the rational part of matter -is mixt in all parts of the body, yet it hath more liberty to make -variety of Motions in the head, heart, liver, spleen, stomack, bowels, -and the like, then in the other parts of the body; nevertheless, it is -in every part, together with the sensitive: but they do not move in -every part alike, but differ in each part more or less, as it may be -observed; and although every part hath some difference of knowledg, yet -all have life and knowledg, sense and reason, some more, some less, and -the whole body moves according to each part, and so do all the bodily -Faculties and Proprieties, and not according to one single part; the -rational Soul being in all parts of the body: for if one part of the -body should have a dead Palsie, it is not, that the Soul is gone from -that part, but that the sensitive and rational matter has altered its -motion and figure from animal to some other kind; for certainly, the -rational Soul, and so life, is in every part, as well in the Pores of -the skin, as in the ventricles of the brain, and as well in the heel -as in the head; and every part of the body knows its own office, what -it ought to do, from whence follows an agreement of all the parts: And -since there is difference of knowledg in every part of one body, well -may there be difference between several kinds and sorts, and yet there -is knowledg in all; for difference of knowledg is no argument to prove -they have no knowledg at all. Wherefore I am not of the opinion, that -that which moves the whole body, is as a Point, or some such thing in -a little kernel or _Glandula_ of the Brain, as an Ostrich-egge is hung -up to the roof of a Chamber; or that it is in the stomack like a single -penny in a great Purse; neither is it in the midst of the heart, like a -Lady in a Lobster; nor in the blood, like as a Menow, or Sprat in the -Sea; nor in the fourth Ventricle of the Brain, as a lousie Souldier -in a Watch-tower. But you may say, it is like a farthing Candle in a -great Church: I answer, That Light will not enlighten the by Chappels -of the Church, nor the Quest-house, nor the Belfrey; neither doth the -Light move the Church, though it enlightens it: Wherefore the Soul -after this manner doth not move the corporeal body, no more then the -Candle moves the Church, or the Lady moves the Lobster, or the Sprat -the Sea as to make it ebb and flow. But this I desire you to observe, -_Madam_, that though all the body of man or any other Creature, hath -sense and reason, which is life and knowledg, in all parts, yet these -parts being all corporeal, and having their certain proportions, can -have no more then what is belonging or proportionable to each figure: -As for example; if a Man should feed, and not evacuate some ways or -other, he could not live; and if he should evacuate and not feed, he -could not subsist: wherefore in all Natures parts there is ingress and -egress, although not always perceived by one creature, as Man; but all -exterior objects do not enter into Man, or any other Creature, but are -figured by the rational, and some by the sensitive parts or motions -in the body; wherefore it is not rational to believe, that exterior -objects take up any more room, then if there were none presented to -the sensitive organs: Nor is there any thing which can better prove -the mind to be corporeal, then that there may be several Figures in -several parts of the body made at one time, as Sight, Hearing, Tasting, -Smelling, and Touching, and all these in each several organ, as well at -one, as at several times, either by patterns, or not; which figuring -without Pattern, may be done as well by the sensitive motions in the -organs, as by the rational in the mind, and is called remembrance. As -for example: a Man may hear or see without an object; which is, that -the sensitive and rational matter repeat such figurative actions, or -make others in the sensitive organs, or in the mind: and Thoughts, -Memory, Imagination, as also Passion, are no less corporeal actions -then the motion of the hand or heel; neither hath the rational matter, -being naturally wise, occasion to jumble and knock her parts together, -by reason every part knows naturally their office what they ought to -do, or what they may do. But I conclude, repeating onely what I have -said oft before, that all Perceptions, Thoughts, and the like, are the -Effects, and Life and Knowledg, the Nature and Essence of self-moving -Matter. And so I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Lib._ 2. _c._ 4. - - - - -XX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am not able to conceive how the Mind of Man can be compared to a -Table-book, in which nothing is writ;[1] nor how to a Musician, who -being asleep, doth not so much as dream of any Musick, but being -jogg'd and awakend by another, who tells him two or three words of -a Song, and desires him to sing it, presently recovers himself, and -sings upon so slight an Intimation: For such intimations are nothing -else but outward objects, which the interior sense consents to, and -obeys; for interior sense and reason doth often obey outward objects: -and in my opinion there is no rest in Nature, and so neither in the -Mind or natural Soul of Man, which is in a perpetual motion, and needs -therefore no jogging to put it into any actual motion; for it hath -actual motion and knowledg in it self, because it is a self-moving -substance, actually knowing, and Material or Corporeal, not Immaterial, -as your _Author_ thinks: and this material or corporeal Mind is nothing -else but what I call the rational matter, and the corporeal life is -the sensitive matter. But this is to be observed, that the motions of -the corporeal Mind do often imitate the motions of the sensitive Life, -and these again the motions of the mind: I say oftentimes; for they do -it not always, but each one can move without taking any pattern from -the other. And all this I understand of the Natural Soul of Man; not -of the Divine Soul, and her powers and faculties, for I leave that to -Divines to inform us of; onely this I say, that men not conceiving the -distinction between this natural and divine Soul, make such a confusion -betwixt those two Souls and their actions, which causes so many -disputes and opinions. But if Nature hath power from God to produce -all kinds of Vegetables, Minerals, Elements, Animals, and other sorts -of Creatures, Why not also Man? Truly if all Creatures are natural -Creatures, Man must be so too; and if Man is a natural Creature, he -must needs have natural sense and reason, as well as other Creatures, -being composed of the same matter they are of. Neither is it requisite, -that all Creatures, being of the same matter, must have the same manner -of sensitive and rational knowledg; which if so, it is not necessary -for Corn to have Ears to hear the whistling or chirping of Birds, nor -for Stones to have such a touch of feeling as animals have, and to -suffer pain, as they do, when Carts go over them; as your _Author_ is -pleased to argue out of _Æsopes_ Tales; or for the Heliotrope to have -eyes to see the Sun: for what necessity is there that they should have -humane sense and reason? which is, that the rational and sensitive -matter should act and move in them as she doth in man or animals: -Certainly if there must be any variety in nature, it is requisite she -should not; wherefore all Vegetables, Minerals, Elements, and Animals, -have their proper motions different from each others, not onely in -their kinds and sorts, but also in their particulars. And though Stones -have no progressive motion to withdraw themselves from the Carts going -over them, which your _Author_ thinks they would do, if they had -sense, to avoid pain: nevertheless they have motion, and consequently -sense and reason, according to the nature and propriety of their -figure, as well as man has according to his. But this is also to be -observed, that not any humane Creature, which is accounted to have the -perfectest sense and reason, is able always to avoid what is hurtful or -painful, for it is subject to it by Nature: Nay, the Immaterial Soul -it self, according to your _Author_,[2] cannot by her self-contracting -faculty withdraw her self from pain. Wherefore there is no manner of -consequence to conclude from the sense of Animals to the sense of -Minerals, they being as much different as their Figures are; And saying -this, I have said enough to express the opinion and mind of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. Book_ 1. _c._ 5. - -[2] _Append. to the Antid. ch._ 3. - - - - -XXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ endeavours very much to prove the existency of a _Natural -Immaterial Spirit_, whom he defines to be an _Incorporeal substance, -Indivisible, that can move it self, can penetrate, contract and dilate -it self, and can also move and alter the matter._ Whereof, if you will -have my opinion, I confess freely to you, that in my sense and reason -I cannot conceive it to be possible, that these is any such thing in -Nature; for all that is a substance in Nature, is a body, and what has -a body, is corporeal; for though there be several degrees of matter, -as in purity, rarity, subtilty, activity; yet there is no degree so -pure, rare and subtil, that can go beyond its nature, and change from -corporeal to incorporeal, except it could change from being something -to nothing, which is impossible in Nature. Next, there is no substance -in Nature that is not divisible; for all that is a body, or a bodily -substance, hath extension, and all extension hath parts, and what has -parts, is divisible. As for self-motion, contraction and dilation, -these are actions onely of Natural Matter; for Matter by the Power -of God is self-moving, and all sorts of motions, as contraction, -dilation, alteration, penetration, &c. do properly belong to Matter; -so that natural Matter stands in no need to have some Immaterial or -Incorporeal substance to move, rule, guide and govern her; but she is -able enough to do it all her self, by the free Gift of the Omnipotent -God; for why should we trouble our selves to invent or frame other -unconceivable substances, when there is no need for it, but Matter can -act, and move as well without them and of it self? Is not God able -to give such power to Matter, as to an other Incorporeal substance? -But I suppose this opinion of natural Immaterial Spirits doth proceed -from Chymistry, where the extracts are vulgarly called Spirits; and -from that degree of Matter, which by reason of its purity, subtilty -and activity, is not subject to our grosser senses; However, these are -not Incorporeal, be they never so pure and subtil. And I wonder much -that men endeavour to prove Immaterial Spirits by corporeal Arts, when -as Art is not able to demonstrate Nature and her actions; for Art is -but the effect of Nature, and expresses rather the variety, then the -truth of natural motions; and if Art cannot do this, much less will it -be able to express what is not in Nature, or what is beyond Nature; as -to _trace the Visible_ (or rather Invisible) _footsteps of the divine -Councel and Providence_,[1] or to demonstrate things supernatural, and -which go beyond mans reach and capacity. But to return to Immaterial -Spirits, that they should rule and govern infinite corporeal matter, -like so many demy-Gods, by a dilating nod, and a contracting frown, -and cause so many kinds and sorts of Corporeal Figures to arise, being -Incorporeal themselves, is Impossible for me to conceive; for how can -an Immaterial substance cause a Material corporeal substance, which -has no motion in it self, to form so many several and various figures -and creatures, and make so many alterations, and continue their kinds -and sorts by perpetual successions of Particulars? But perchance the -Immaterial substance gives corporeal matter motion. I answer, My sense -and reason cannot understand, how it can give motion, unless motion -be different, distinct and separable from it; nay, if it were, yet -being no substance or body it self, according to your _Authors_ and -others opinion, the question is, how it can be transmitted or given -away to corporeal matter? Your _Author_ may say, That his Immaterial -and Incorporeal spirit of Nature, having self-motion, doth form Matter -into several Figures: I answer, Then that Immaterial substance must be -transformed and metamorphosed into as many several figures as there -are figures in Matter; or there must be as many spirits, as there are -figures; but when the figures change, what doth become of the spirits? -Neither can I imagine, that an Immaterial substance, being without -body, can have such a great strength, as to grapple with gross, heavy, -dull, and dead Matter; Certainly, in my opinion, no Angel, nor Devil, -except God Impower him, would be able to move corporeal Matter, were -it not self-moving, much less any Natural Spirit. But God is a Spirit, -and Immovable; and if created natural Immaterial participate of that -Nature, as they do of the Name, then they must be Immovable also. -Your _Author, Madam_, may make many several degrees of Spirits; but -certainly not I, nor I think any natural Creature else, will be able -naturally to conceive them. He may say, perchance, There is such a -close conjunction betwixt Body and Spirit, as I make betwixt rational, -sensitive, and inanimate Matter. I answer, That these degrees are -all but one Matter, and of one and the same Nature as meer Matter, -different onely in degrees of purity, subtilty, and activity, whereas -Spirit and Body are things of contrary Natures. In fine, I cannot -conceive, how a Spirit should fill up a place or space, having no body, -nor how it can have the effects of a body, being none it self; for the -effects flow from the cause; and as the cause is, so are its effects: -And so confessing my ignorance, I can say no more, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Antid. lib._ 2. _ch._ 2. - - - - -XXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ having assigned Indivisibility to the Soul or Spirit that -moves and actuates matter, I desire to know, how one Indivisible Spirit -can be in so many dividable parts? For there being Infinite parts in -Nature, they must either have one Infinite Spirit to move them, which -must be dilated infinitely, or this Spirit must move severally in -every part of Nature: If the first, then I cannot conceive, but all -motion must be uniform, or after one and the same manner; nay, I cannot -understand, how there can be any dilation and contraction, or rather -any motion of the same spirit, by reason if it dilate, then, (being -equally spread out in all the parts of Matter,) it must dilate beyond -Matter; and if it contract, it must leave some parts of matter void, -and without motion. But if the Spirit moves every part severally, then -he is divisible; neither can I think, that there are so many Spirits -as there are Parts in Nature; for your _Author_ says, there is but -one Spirit of Nature; I will give an easie and plain example: When a -Worm is cut into two or three parts, we see there is sensitive life -and motion in every part, for every part will strive and endeavour -to meet and joyn again to make up the whole body; now if there were -but one indivisible Life, Spirit, and Motion, I would fain know, how -these severed parts could move all by one Spirit. Wherefore, Matter, -in my opinion, has self-motion in it self, which is the onely soul -and life of Nature, and is dividable as well as composable, and full -of variety of action; for it is as easie for several parts to act -in separation, as in composition, and as easie in composition as in -separation; Neither is every part bound to one kind or sort of Motions; -for we see in exterior local motions, that one man can put his body -into several shapes and postures, much more can Nature. But is it not -strange, _Madam_, that a man accounts it absurd, ridiculous, and a -prejudice to Gods Omnipotency, to attribute self-motion to Matter, -or a material Creature, when it is not absurd, ridiculous, or any -prejudice to God, to attribute it to an Immaterial Creature? What -reason of absurdity lies herein? Surely I can conceive none, except -it be absurd and ridiculous to make that, which no man can know or -conceive what it is, _viz._ an immaterial natural Spirit, (which is -as much as to say, a natural No-thing) to have motion, and not onely -motion, but self-motion; nay, not onely self-motion, but to move, -actuate, rule, govern, and guide Matter, or corporeal Nature, and to -be the cause of all the most curious varieties and effects in nature: -Was not God able to give self-motion as well to a Material, as to an -Immaterial Creature, and endow Matter with a self-moving power? I do -not say, _Madam_, that Matter hath motion of it self, so, that it is -the prime cause and principle of its own self-motion; for that were -to make Matter a God, which I am far from believing; but my opinion -is, That the self-motion of Matter proceeds from God, as well as the -self-motion of an Immaterial Spirit; and that I am of this opinion, the -last Chapter of my Book of Philosophy will enform you, where I treat of -the Deitical Centre, as the Fountain from whence all things do flow, -and which is the supream Cause, Author, Ruler and Governor of all. -Perhaps you will say, it is, because I make Matter Eternal. 'Tis true, -_Madam_, I do so: but I think Eternity doth not take off the dependance -upon God, for God may nevertheless be above Matter, as I have told you -before. You may ask me how that can be? I say, As well as any thing -else that God can do beyond our understanding: For I do but tell you my -opinion, that I think it most probable to be so, but I can give you no -Mathematical Demonstrations for it: Onely this I am sure of, That it is -not impossible for the Omnipotent God; and he that questions the truth -of it, may question Gods Omnipotency. Truly, _Madam_, I wonder how -man can say, God is Omnipotent, and can do beyond our Understanding, -and yet deny all that he is not able to comprehend with his reason. -However, as I said, it is my opinion, That Matter is self-moving by the -power of God; Neither can Animadversion, and Perception, as also the -variety of Figures, prove, that there must be another external Agent or -Power to work all this in Matter; but it proves rather the contrary; -for were there no self-motion in Matter, there would be no Perception, -nor no variety of Creatures in their Figures, Shapes, Natures, -Qualities, Faculties, Proprieties, as also in their Productions, -Creations or Generations, Transformations, Compositions, Dissolutions, -and the like, as Growth, Maturity, Decay, &c. and for Animals, were not -Corporeal Matter self-moving, dividable and composable; there could not -be such variety of Passions, Complexions, Humors, Features, Statures, -Appetites, Diseases, Infirmities, Youth, Age, &c. Neither would they -have any nourishing Food, healing Salves, soveraign Medicines, reviving -Cordials, or deadly Poysons. In short, there is so much variety in -Nature, proceeding from the self-motion of Matter, as not possible to -be numbred, nor thorowly known by any Creature: Wherefore I should -labour in vain, if I endeavoured to express any more thereof; and this -is the cause that I break off here, and onely subscribe my self, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning the comparison, your _Author_ makes between an Immaterial -Spirit, and Light,[1] That, _as Light is contractive and dilative, and -yet not divisible, so is also an Immaterial substance._ Give me leave -to tell you, that in my opinion, all that is contractive and dilative, -is also dividable, and so is light: As for example; when a Candle is -snuff'd, the Snuffers do not onely clip the wick, but also the light: -The like when a dark body is interposed, or crosses the rays of the -Sun; it cuts those rays asunder, which by reason they cannot joyn -together again, because of the interposed body, the light cut off, -suddenly goeth out; that is, the matter of light is altered from the -figure of light, to some other thing, but not annihilated: And since no -more light can flow into the room from the Fountain or Spring of Light, -the Sun, because the passage is stopt close, the room remaineth dark: -For Light is somewhat of the nature of Water; so long as the Spring -is open, the Water flows, and whatsoever is taken away, the Spring -supplies; and if another body onely presses thorow it, it immediately -joyns and closes its severed parts again, without any difficulty or -loss; The same doth Light; onely the difference is, that the substance -of Light is extraordinary rare, and pure; for as Air is so much rarer -then Water, so Light is so much rarer and purer then Air, and its -matter may be of so dilating a nature, as to dilate from a point into -numerous rayes. As for ordinary Fire-light, it doth not last longer, -then it hath fuel to feed it, and so likewise it is with the light -of the Sun; for Light is according to the substance that feeds it; -and though it is a substance it self, yet it increases and decreases, -according as it hath something that succours or nourishes it. But some -may object, that if Light were a body, and did contract and dilate, as -I say, it is impossible that it could display it self in so great and -vast a compass, and remove so suddenly and instantly as it doth. To -which objection, I answer, first, That although I say, Light is a real -corporeal substance, and doth contract and dilate it self from a point -into numerous rayes, as also in another Letter I sent you before,[2] -That Light and Darkness do succeed each other; nevertheless, as for the -perception of Light, I am not so eager in maintaining this opinion, -as if it was an Infallible Truth, and impossible to be otherwise; but -I say onely, That, to my sense and reason, it seems very probable, -that it may be so, that the light of the Sun doth really dilate it -self into so vast a compass as we see, and that light and darkness do -really succeed each other, as all other Creatures do: But yet it seems -also probable to mee, that the parts of the Air may onely pattern -out the figure of light, and that the light we see in the Air may be -onely patterns taken from the real figure of the light of the Sun: And -therefore, if it be according to the former opinion, to wit, That the -light of the Sun doth really dilate it self into so vast a compass, My -answer is, That contraction and dilation are natural corporeal actions -or motions, and that there is no alteration of motion in Nature, but -is done in Time, that is, successively, not instantly; for Time is -nothing else but the alteration of motion: Besides, I do not perceive -any so sudden and swift alteration and succession of light, but that -it is done by degrees: As for example; in the morning, when it begins -to dawn and grow light, it appears clearly to our sight how light doth -come forth, and darkness remove by degrees; and so at night, when it -grows dark, how light removes, and darkness succeeds; nay, if there -be any such sudden change of the motions of Light, I desire you to -consider, _Madam_, that light is a very subtil, rare, piercing and -active body, and therefore its motions are much quicker then those of -grosser bodies, and cannot so well be perceived by our gross exterior -senses. But if it be, that the Air doth pattern out the light of the -Sun, then the framed objection can prove nothing, because there is not -then such a real dilation or succession of light, but the corporeal -figurative motions of the Air do make patterns of the light of the -Sun, and dissolve those patterns or figures again, more suddenly and -quickly then man can shut and open his eyes, as being more subtil -then his gross exterior senses. But it may be said, that if Air did -pattern out the light of the Sun, the light would increase by these -numerous patterns. I answer, that cannot appear to our Eyes; for we -see onely the pattern'd figure of light, and that a great compass is -enlightned; also that the further the air is from the Sun, the darker -it is; nevertheless, I do verily believe, that the body of the Sun is -far brighter then the light we see, and that the substance of light, -and the patterns taken from light, are not one and the same, but very -different. And thus much of light. As for Penetration, I conceive it -to be nothing else but division; as when some parts pierce and enter -through other parts, as Duellers run each other thorow, or as water -runs through a sieve. And this is the opinion of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _In the Append. to the Antid. c._ 3. and _Of the Immortality of the -Soul, l._ 1. _c._ 5. - -[2] _Sect._ 1. _Let._ 20. - - - - -XXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Having given you my opinion, both of the substance and perception -of Light, in my last Letter, I perceive your desire is to know how -_Shadows_ are made. Truly, _Madam_, to my sense and reason, it appears -most probable, that shadows are made by the way of patterning: As for -example; when a Man's, or Trees, or any other the like Creature's -shadow is made upon the Ground, or Wall, or the like; those bodies, as -the Ground, or Wall, do, in my opinion, pattern out the interposing -body that is between the light and them: And the reason that the -shadow is longer or shorter, or bigger or less, is according as the -light is nearer or further off; for when the light is perpendicular, -the interposing body cannot obscure the light, because the light -surrounding the interposing body by its brightness, rather obscures -the body, then the body the light; for the numerous and splendorous -patterns of light taken from the body of the Sun, do quite involve the -interposing body. Next, you desire to know, _Whether the light we see -in the Moon, be the Moons own natural light, or a borrowed light from -the Sun_: I answer, that in my opinion, it is a borrowed light; to -wit, that the Moon doth pattern out the light of the Sun: and the proof -of it is, that when the Sun is in an Eclipse, we do plainly perceive -that so much of the Sun is darkned as the Moon covers; for though those -parts of the Moon, that are next the Sun, may, for any thing we know, -pattern out the light of the Sun, yet the Moon is dark on that side -which is from the Sun. I will not say, but that part of the Moon which -is towards the Earth, may pattern out the Earth, or the shadow of the -Earth, which may make the Moon appear more dark and sullen; But when -the Moon is in an Eclipse, then it is plainly perceived that the Moon -patterns out the Earth, or the shadow of the Earth. Besides, those -parts of the Moon that are farthest from the Sun, are dark, as we may -observe when as the Moon is in the Wane, and enlightened when the Sun -is nearer. But I will leave this argument to observing Astrologers, and -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -If according to your _Authors_ opinion,[1] _In every particular world, -such as Man is especially, his own Soul_ (which is a Spirit) _be the -peculiar and most perfective architect of the Fabrick of his Body, as -the Soul of the world is of it_: Then I cannot conceive in my reason, -how the separation is made in death; for I see, that all animals, and -so man-kind, have a natural desire to live, and that life and soul are -unwilling to part; And if the power lies in the Soul, why doth she -not continue with the Body, and animate, move and actuate it, as she -did before, or order the matter so, as not to dissolve? But if the -dissolution lies in the body, then the body has self-motion: Yet it is -most probable, if the soul be the architect of the body, it must also -be the dissolver of it; and if there come not another soul into the -parts of matter, the body must either be annihilated, or lie immoved as -long as the world lasts, which is improbable; for surely all the bodies -of men, or other animals, are imployed by Nature to some use or other: -However, it is requisite, that the soul must stay so long in the body, -until it be turned into dust and ashes; otherwise, the body having no -self-motion, would remain as it was when the soul left it, that is, -entire and undissolved: As for example; when a man dies, if there be -no motion in his body, and the soul, which was the mover, be gone, it -cannot possibly corrupt; for certainly, that we call corruption, is -made by motion, and the body requires as much motion to be dissolved -or divided, as it doth to be framed or composed; Wherefore a dead -body would remain in the same state continually, it had no self-motion -in it: And if another soul should enter into the body, and work it -to another figure, then certainly there must be many more souls then -bodies, because bodies are subject to change into several forms; but -if the animal spirits, which are left in the body after the soul is -gone, are able to dissolve it without the help of the soul, then it is -probable they could have fram'd it without the help of the soul; and so -they being material, it must be granted, that matter is self-moving: -But if corporeal matter have corporeal self-motion, a self-moving -Immaterial Spirit, by reason of their different natures, would make -great obstruction, and so a general confusion; for the corporeal and -incorporeal motions would hinder and oppose each other, their natures -being quite different; and though they might subsist together without -disturbance of each other, yet it is not probable they should act -together, and that in such a conjunction, as if they were one united -body; for it is, in my opinion, more probable, that one material should -act upon another material, or one immaterial upon another immaterial, -then that an immaterial should act upon a material or corporeal. Thus -the consideration or contemplation of immaterial natural Spirits puts -me always into doubts, and raises so many contradictions in my sense -and reason, as I know not, nor am not able to reconcile them: However, -though I am doubtful of them, yet I can assure your self that I -continue, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 2. _c._ 10. - - - - -XXVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -By reason the _Soul_ is a _Spirit_, and therefore _Contractible_ and -_Dilatable_, your _Authors_ opinion is,[1] That _it begins within less -compass at first in organising the fitly prepared matter, and so bears -it self on in the same tenour of work, till the body hath attained its -full growth; and that the Soul dilates it self in the dilating of the -Body, and so possesses it through all the members thereof._ Truly, -_Madam_, as for the contraction and dilation of an immaterial Spirit, -if I heard never so many arguments, I should hardly be able to conceive -the possibility of it; For in my opinion, dilating and contracting -are motions and actions of Nature, which belong to natural material -Creatures, and to none else; for dilation and contraction cannot be -without extension, but extension belongs to parts which an immaterial -Spirit hath not: But suppose it be so, then the Soul must contract -and dilate, extend and shrink together, and so grow less and bigger, -according to the extension of the body; and when the body dies, the -soul, in my opinion, must contract to a very point; and if one part -of the body die before the other, the soul must by degrees withdraw -out of those parts: also when a part of the body is cut off, the soul -must needs contract, and grow less; the like when a man is let blood. -Which contracting of the soul, by your _Authors_ leave, doth seem, to -my imagination, just like the contracting of Hodmandod into her shell. -Besides, if the soul be individable, and equally spread all over the -body, then, to my opinion, she must necessarily be of a human shape; -and if the body be deformed, the soul must be deformed also; and if -the body be casually extended, as by taking Poyson into the body, the -soul must be so too, as being individable and filling every part; and -if a man be born with six fingers or toes, the soul must be so too; or -if a dwarf, the soul must be a dwarf also; and if he be born deaf and -dumb, the soul must be so too. But if two Twins, as it may fall out, -should be born united in one body, I would fain know then, whether they -would have two souls, or but one? As for example, if they should have -but one body, and one stomack, liver, heart, spleen, lungs, bowels, and -yet have four legs, four hands, and two heads: It seems, to my opinion, -that then two Immaterial Souls must be joyned as into one; neither do -I know yet how this could well be, the monster having but one body, -nor how that Immaterial Soul can be divided, being inseparably double, -when the body dies. But, _Madam_, all this I speak of the Natural -Soul of Man, not of the Divine Soul, which is not subject to natural -imperfections, and corporeal errors, being not made by Nature, but a -supernatural and divine gift of the Omnipotent God, who surely will not -give any thing that is not perfect. Wherefore it is not probable, this -Divine Soul, being not subject to Nature, should be an architect of the -body, as having an higher and more divine imployment, _viz._ to fix -her self on her Creator, and being indued with supernatural faculties, -and residing in the body in a supernatural manner; all which I leave to -the Church: for I should be loth to affirm any thing contrary to their -Doctrine, or the Information of the holy Scripture, as grounding my -belief onely upon the sacred Word of God, and its true Interpretation -made by the Orthodox Church; but not upon the opinions of particular -persons: for particular mens opinions are not authentical, being so -different and various, as a man would be puzled which to adhere to. -Thus, _Madam_, I avoid, as much as ever I can, not to mix Divinity -with Natural Philosophy; for I consider, that such a mixture would -breed more confusion in the Church, then do any good to either; -witness the doctrine of the Soul of Man, whereof are so many different -opinions: The onely cause, in my opinion, is, that men do not conceive -the difference between the Divine, and Natural material Soul of Man, -making them both as one, and mixing or confounding their faculties and -proprieties, which yet are quite different; thus they make a Hodg-podg, -Bisk or Olio of both; proving Divinity by Nature, and Faith by Reason; -and bringing Arguments for Articles of Faith, and sacred Mysteries out -of Natural Arts and Sciences; whereas yet Faith and Reason are two -contrary things, and cannot consist together; according to the Proverb, -Where Reason ends, Faith begins. Neither is it possible that Divinity -can be proved by Mathematical Demonstrations; for if Nature be not -able to do it, much less is Art: Wherefore it is inconvenient to mix -supernatural Spirits with Air, Fire, Light, Heat, Cold, &c. and to -apply corporeal actions and qualities to them; and the Divine Soul, -with the Brain, Blood, Flesh, Animal Spirits, Muscles, Nerves, Bones, -&c. of Man; all which makes a confusion betwixt the Mind or Natural -Soul of Man, and the Supernatural and Divine Soul inspired into him by -God; for both their faculties and proprieties are different, and so are -their effects, as proceeding from so different causes. And therefore, -_Madam_, as for Divinity, I pray devoutly, and believe without -disputing; but as for Natural Philosophy, I reason freely, and argue -without believing, or adhering to any ones particular opinion, which I -think is the best and safest way to choose for, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul, l._ 2. _c._ 10. - - - - -XXVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ in the continuation of his discourse concerning the -Immaterial Soul of Man, demonstrating, that her seat is not bound up -in a certain place of the body, but that she pervades all the body and -every part thereof, takes, amongst the rest, an argument from Passions -and Sympathies: _Moreover_, says he,[1] _Passions and Sympathies, in my -judgment, are more easily to be resolved into this hypothesis of the -Soul's pervading the whole Body, then in restraining its essential -presence to one part thereof.--But it is evident that they arise in us -against both our will and appetite; For who would bear the tortures -of fears and jelousies, if he could avoid it?_ Concerning Passions, -_Madam_, I have given my opinion at large in my Book of Philosophy, and -am of your _Authors_ mind, that Passions are made in the Heart, but not -by an Immaterial spirit, but by the Rational soul which is material; -and there is no doubt, but that many Passions, as Fear, Jealousie &c. -arise against our will and appetite; for so may forreign Nations invade -any Kingdom without the will or desire of the Inhabitants, and yet -they are corporeal men: The same may be said of Passions; and several -parts of matter may invade each other, whereof one may be afraid of -the other, yet all this is but according as corporeal matter moves, -either Generally, or Particularly: Generally, that is, when many parts -of Matter unite or joyn together, having the like appetites, wills, -designs; as we may observe, that there are general agreements amongst -several parts, in Plagues, as well as Wars, which Plagues are not -onely amongst Men, but amongst Beasts; and sometimes but in one sort -of animals, as a general Rot amongst Sheep, a general Mange amongst -Dogs, a general Farcy amongst Horses, a general Plague amongst Men; -all which could not be without a general Infection, one part infecting -another, or rather one part imitating the motions of the other, that -is next adjoyning to it; for such infections come by the neer adhesion -of parts, as is observable, which immaterial and individable natural -Spirits could not effect; that is, to make such a general infection in -so many several parts of so many several Creatures, to the Creatures -dissolution: Also there will be several Invasions at one time, as -Plague, and War, amongst neighbouring and adjoining Creatures or Parts. -But this is to be observed, That the sensitive corporeal motions make -all diseases, and not the Rational, although the Rational are many -times the occasion, that the sensitive do move into such or such a -disease; for all those that are sick by conceit, their sicknesses -are caused by the rational corporeal motions. But being loth to make -tedious repetitions hereof, having discoursed of diseases, and passions -in my mentioned Book of _Philosophy_, I will refer you thither, and -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Immort. of the Soul. Book_ 2. _c._ 10 - - - - -XXVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning _Dimness_ of _Sight_, which your _Author_ will have to -_proceed from the deficiency of the Animal Spirits_,[1] My meaning -in short is, That when sight is dim, though the sensitive organs -are perfect, this dimness is caused by the alteration onely of the -sensitive motions in the organs, not moving to the nature of sight. -And so is made Deafness, Dumbness, Lameness, and the like, as also -Weariness; for the Relaxation of strength in several parts, is onely -an alteration of such sorts of motions which make the nerves strong; -and if a man be more dull at one time, then at another, it is that -there are not so many changes of motions, nor so quick motions at -that time, as at another; for Nature may use more or less force as -she pleases: Also she can and doth often use opposite actions, and -often sympathetical and agreeable actions, as she pleases; for Nature -having a free power to move, may move as she will; but being wise, -she moves as she thinks best, either in her separating or uniting -motions, for continuance, as well as for variety. But if, according -to your _Author_, the Immaterial Soul should determinate matter in -motion, it would, in my opinion, make a confusion; for the motions of -the Matter would often oppose and cross the motions of the Immaterial -Soul, and so they would disagree, as a King and his Subjects, (except -God had given the Soul an absolute power of command, and restrained -matter to an irrisistible and necessitated obedience; which, in my -opinion, is not probable:) By which disagreement, Nature, and all that -is in Nature, would have been quite ruined at this time; for no kinds, -sorts, or particulars, would keep any distinction, if Matter did not -govern it self, and if all the parts did not know their own affairs, -abilities, offices, and functions: Besides, it would, to my thinking, -take up a great deal of time, to receive commands in every several -action, at least so much, that for example, a man could not have so -many several thoughts in so short a time, as he hath. But concerning -the Animal Spirits, which your _Author_ calls the Instruments, Organs -and Engines of the Incorporeal Soul; I would fain know, whether they -have no motion but what comes from the Soul, or whether they have -their own motion of themselves? If the first, then the Soul must, in -my opinion, be like a Deity, and have a divine Power, to give and -impart Motion; if the second, then the spirits being material, it -follows that Matter hath motion of it self, or is self-moving; But -if the Immaterial natural Soul can transfer her gifts upon corporeal -matter, then it must give numerous sorts of motions, with all their -degrees; as also the faculty of figuring, or moving figuratively in -all corporeal Matter: Which power, in my judgment, is too much for a -Creature to give. If you say, the Immaterial Soul hath this power from -God; I answer, Matter may have the same; and I cannot imagine why God -should make an Immaterial Spirit to be the Proxy or Vice-gerent of his -Power, or the _Quarter-master General of his Divine Providence_, as -your _Author_ is pleased to style it,[2] when he is able to effect it -without any Under-Officers, and in a more easie and compendious way, as -to impart immediately such self-moving power to Natural Matter, which -man attributes to an Incorporeal Spirit. But to conclude, if the Animal -Spirits be the Instruments of the Incorporeal Soul, then the Spirits -of Wine are more powerful then the Animal Spirits, nay, then the -Immaterial Soul her self; for they can put them and all their actions -quite out of order: the same may be done by other material things, -Vegetables, Minerals, and the like. And so leaving this discourse to -your better consideration, I take my leave for this time, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful and affectionate Friend,_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Immort. of the Soul. Book_ 2. _ch._ 8. - -[2] _Immort. of the Soul. Book_ 3. _c._ 13. - - - - -XXIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Touching the State or Condition of the Supernatural and Divine Soul, -both in, and after this life, I must crave your excuse that I can give -no account of it; for I dare affirm nothing; not onely that I am no -professed Divine, and think it unfit to take any thing upon me that -belongs not to me, but also that I am unwilling to mingle Divinity and -Natural Philosophy together, to the great disadvantage and prejudice of -either; for if each one did contain himself within the circle of his -own Profession, and no body did pretend to be a Divine Philosopher, -many absurdities, confusions, contentions, and the like, would be -avoided, which now disturb both Church and Schools, and will in time -cause their utter ruine and destruction; For what is Supernatural, -cannot naturally be known by any natural Creature; neither can any -supernatural Creature, but the Infinite and Eternal God, know thorowly -everything that is in Nature, she being the Infinite servant of the -Infinite God, whom no finite Creature, of what degree soever, whether -natural or supernatural, can conceive; for if no Angel nor Devil can -know our thoughts, much less will they know Infinite Nature; nay, one -finite supernatural Creature cannot, in my opinion, know perfectly -another supernatural Creature, but God alone, who is all-knowing; And -therefore all what is said of supernatural Spirits, I believe, so far -as the Scripture makes mention of them; further I dare not presume to -go; the like of the supernatural or divine Soul: for all that I have -writ hitherto to you of the Soul, concerns the natural Soul of Man, -which is material, and not the supernatural or divine Soul; neither -do I contradict any thing concerning this divine soul, but I am -onely against those opinions, which make the natural soul of man an -immaterial natural spirit, and confound supernatural Creatures with -natural, believing those spirits to be as well natural Creatures and -parts of Nature, as material and corporeal beings are; when as there -is great difference betwixt them, and nothing in Nature to be found, -but what is corporeal. Upon this account I take all their relations of -Dæmons, of the Genii, and of the Souls after the departure from humane -Bodies, their Vehicles, Shapes, Habitations, Converses, Conferences, -Entertainments, Exercises, Pleasures, Pastimes, Governments, Orders, -Laws, Magistrates, Officers, Executioners, Punishments, and the like, -rather for Poetical Fictions, then Rational Probabilities; containing -more Fancy, then Truth and Reason, whether they concern the divine -or natural Soul: for as for the divine Soul, the Scripture makes no -other mention of it, but that immediately after her departure out -of this natural life, she goeth either to Heaven or Hell, either to -enjoy Reward, or to suffer Punishment, according to man's actions -in this life. But as for the Natural Soul, she being material, has -no need of any Vehicles, neither is natural death any thing else -but an alteration of the rational and sensitive motions, which from -the dissolution of one figure go to the formation or production of -another. Thus the natural soul is not like a Traveller, going out of -one body into another, neither is air her lodging; for certainly, if -the natural humane soul should travel through the airy regions, she -would at last grow weary, it being so great a journey, except she did -meet with the soul of a Horse, and so ease her self with riding on -Horse-back. Neither can I believe Souls or Dæmons in the Air have any -Common-wealth, Magistrates, Officers and Executioners in their airy -Kingdom; for wheresoever are Governments, Magistrates and Executioners, -there are also Offences, and where there is power to offend, as well as -to obey, there may and will be sometimes Rebellions and Civil Wars; for -there being different sorts of Spirits, it is impossible they should -all so well agree, especially the good and evil Genii, which certainly -will fight more valiantly then _Hector_ and _Achilles_, nay, the -Spirits of one sort would have more Civil Wars then ever the _Romans_ -had; and if the Soul of _Cæsar_ and _Pompey_ should meet, there would -be a cruel fight between those two Heroical souls; the like between -_Augustus's_ and _Antonius's_ Soul. But, _Madam_, all these, as I -said, I take for fancies proceeding from the Religion of the Gentiles, -not fit for Christians to embrace for any truth; for if we should, we -might at last, by avoiding to be Atheists, become Pagans, and so leap -out of the Frying-pan into the Fire, as turning from Divine Faith to -Poetical Fancy; and if _Ovid_ should revive again, he would, perhaps, -be the chief head or pillar of the Church. By this you may plainly -see, _Madam_, that I am no Platonick; for this opinion is dangerous, -especially for married Women, by reason the conversation of the Souls -may be a great temptation, and a means to bring Platonick Lovers to a -neerer acquaintance, not allowable by the Laws of Marriage, although -by the sympathy of the Souls. But I conclude, and desire you, not to -interpret amiss this my discourse, as if I had been too invective -against Poetical Fancies; for that I am a great lover of them, my -Poetical Works will witness; onely I think it not fit to bring Fancies -into Religion: Wherefore what I have writ now to you, is rather to -express my zeal for God and his true Worship, then to prejudice any -body; and if you be of that same Opinion, as above mentioned, I wish my -Letter may convert you, and so I should not account my labour lost, but -judg my self happy, that any good could proceed to the advancement of -your Soul, from, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I sent you word in my last, I would not meddle with writing any -thing of the Divine Soul of Man, by reason it belongs to Faith and -Religion, and not to Natural Philosophy; but since you desire my -opinion concerning the Immortality of the Divine Soul, I cannot but -answer you plainly, that first I did wonder much you made question -of that, whose truth, in my opinion, is so clear, as hardly any -rational man will make a doubt of it; for I think there is almost no -Christian in the world, but believes the Immortality of the Soul, no -not Christians onely, but Mahometans and Jews: But I left to wonder at -you, when I saw Wise and Learned Men, and great Divines, take so much -pains as to write whole volumes, and bring so many arguments to prove -the Immortality of the Soul; for this was a greater Miracle to me, -then if Nature had shewed me some of her secret and hidden effects, -or if I had seen an Immaterial Spirit. Certainly, _Madam_, it seems -as strange to me to prove the Immortality of the Soul, as to convert -Atheists; for it [is] impossible, almost, that any Atheist should be -found in the World: For what Man would be so senceless as to deny a -God? Wherefore to prove either a God, or the Immortality of the Soul, -is to make a man doubt of either: for as Physicians and Surgeons -apply strengthening Medicines onely to those parts of the body which -they suppose the weakest, so it is with proofs and arguments, those -being for the most part used in such subjects, the truth of which is -most questionable. But in things Divine, Disputes do rather weaken -Faith, then prove Truth, and breed several strange opinions; for -Man being naturally ambitious, and endeavouring to excel each other, -will not content himself with what God has been pleased to reveal in -his holy Word; but invents and adds something of his own; and hence -arise so many monstrous expressions and opinions, that a simple man is -puzzled, not knowing which to adhere to; which is the cause of so many -schismes, sects, and divisions in Religion: Hence it comes also, that -some pretend to know the very nature and essence of God, his divine -Counsels, all his Actions, Designs, Rules, Decrees, Power, Attributes, -nay, his Motions, Affections, and Passions, as if the Omnipotent -Infinite God were of a humane shape; so that there are already more -divisions then Religions, which disturb the peace and quiet both of -mind and body; when as the ground of our belief consists but in some -few and short Articles, which clearly explained, and the moral part -of Divinity well pressed upon the People, would do more good, then -unnecessary and tedious disputes, which rather confound Religion, then -advance it: but if man had a mind to shew Learning, and exercise his -Wit, certainly there are other subjects, wherein he can do it with -more profit, and less danger, then by proving Christian Religion by -Natural Philosophy, which is the way to destroy them both. I could -wish, _Madam_, that every one would but observe the Command of Christ, -and give to God what is Gods, and to _Cæsar_ what is _Cæsars_, and -so distinguish what belongs to the actions of Nature, and what to -the actions of Religion; for it appears to my Reason, that God hath -given Nature, his eternal Servant, a peculiar freedom of working and -acting, as a self-moving Power from Eternity; but when the Omnipotent -God acts, he acts supernaturally, as beyond Nature; of which divine -actions none but the holy Church, as one united body, mind and soul, -should discourse, and declare the truth of them, according to the -Revelation made by God in his holy Word, to her Flock the Laity, not -suffering any one single person, of what profession or degree soever, -indifferently to comment, interpret, explain, and declare the meaning -or sense of the Scripture after his own fancy. And as for Nature's -actions, let those whom Nature hath indued with such a proportion of -Reason, as is able to search into the hidden causes of natural effects, -contemplate freely, without any restraint or confinement; for Nature -acts freely, and so may natural Creatures, and amongst the rest Man, in -things which are purely natural; but as for things supernatural, man -cannot act freely, by reason they are beyond his sphere of conception -and understanding, so as he is forced to set aside Reason, and onely -to work by Faith. And thus, _Madam_, you see the cause why I cannot -give you a full description of the Divine Soul of Man, as I mentioned -already in my last, but that I do onely send you my opinion of the -natural soul, which I call the rational soul; not that I dare say, the -supernatural soul is without natural reason, but natural reason is not -the divine soul; neither can natural reason, without Faith, advance -the divine soul to Heaven, or beget a pious zeal, without divine and -supernatural Grace: Wherefore Reason, or the rational Soul is onely -the Soul of Nature, which being material, is dividable, and so becomes -numerous in particular natural Creatures; like as the sensitive life -being also material and dividable, becomes numerous, as being in every -Creature, and in every part of every Creature; for as there is life in -every Creature, so there is also a soul in every Creature; nay, not -onely in every Creature, but in every particle of every Creature, by -reason every Creature is made of rational and sensitive Matter; and as -all Creatures or parts of Nature are but one infinite body of Nature, -so all their particular souls and lives make but one infinite soul -and life of Nature; and this natural soul hath onely natural actions, -not supernatural; nor has the supernatural soul natural actions; -for although they subsist both together in one body, yet each works -without disturbance to the other; and both are Immortal; for of the -supernatural soul there is no question, and of the natural soul, I have -said before, that nothing is perishable or subject to annihilation in -nature, and so no death, but what is called by the name of death, is -onely an alteration of the corporeal natural motions of such a figure -to another figure; and therefore as it is impossible, that one part of -Matter should perish in Nature, so is it impossible, that the natural -or rational soul can perish, being material: The natural humane soul -may alter, so as not to move in an animal way, or not to have animal -motions, but this doth not prove her destruction or annihilation, but -onely a change of the animal figure and its motions, all remaining -still in Nature. Thus my Faith of the Divine, and my opinion of the -Natural Soul, is, that they are both Immortal; as for the immediate -actions of the Divine Soul, I leave you to the Church, which are the -Ministers of God, and the faithful dispensers of the sacred mysteries -of the Gospel, the true Expounders of the Word of God, Reformers of -mens lives, and Tutors of the Ignorant, to whom I submit my self in all -that belongs to the salvation of my Soul, and the regulating of the -actions of my life, to the honour and glory of God. And I hope they -will not take any offence at the maintaining and publishing my opinions -concerning Nature and Natural effects, for they are as harmless, and -as little prejudicial to them, as my designs; for my onely and chief -design is, and ever hath been to understand Nature rightly, obey the -Church exactly, Believe undoubtedly, Pray zealously, Live vertuously, -and Wish earnestly, that both Church and Schools may increase and -flourish in the sacred knowledg of the true Word of God, and that each -one may live peaceable and happily in this world, die quietly, and -rise blessedly and gloriously to everlasting Life and happiness: Which -happiness I pray God also to confer upon your Ladiship; Till then, I -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful and constant_ - -_Friend, to serve you._ - - - - -XXXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I will leave the Controversie of Free-Will and Necessity, which your -_Author_ is discoursing of,[1] to Divines to decide it, onely I say -this, that Nature hath a natural Free-will and power of self-moving, -and is not necessitated; but yet that this Free-will proceeds from God, -who hath given her both will and power to act freely. But as for the -question, whether there be nothing in the Universe, but meer body?[2] -I answer, My opinion is not, that there is nothing in the world but -meer Body; but that Nature is purely material or corporeal, and that -there is no part of Nature, or natural Creature, which is not Matter, -or Body, or made of Matter; also, that there is not any thing else -mixt with body, as a copartner in natural actions, which is distinct -from Body or Matter; nevertheless, there may be supernatural spiritual -beings or substances in Nature, without any hinderance to Matter or -corporeal Nature. The same I may say of the natural material, and -the divine and supernatural Soul; for though the divine Soul is in -a natural body, and both their powers and actions be different, yet -they cause no ruine or disturbance to each other, but do in many cases -agree with each other, without incroachment upon each others powers or -actions; for God, as he is the God of all things, so the God of Order. -Wherefore it is not probable, that created Immaterial or Incorporeal -beings should order Corporeal Nature, no more then Corporeal Nature -orders Immaterial or Incorporeal Creatures. Neither can, in my opinion, -Incorporeal Creatures be clearly conceived by Corporeals, although -they may really exist and subsist in Nature; onely, as I said before, -it is well to be considered, that there is difference betwixt being -in Nature, and being a part of Nature; for bodiless things, and so -spiritual substances, although they may exist in Nature, yet they -are not natural, nor parts of Nature, but supernatural, Nature being -meerly corporeal, and Matter the ground of Nature; and all that is -not built upon this material ground, is nothing in Nature. But you -will say, The divine Soul is a part of Man, and Man a part of Nature, -wherefore the divine Soul must needs be a part of Nature. I answer, -Not: For the divine Soul is not a part of Nature, but supernatural, as -a supernatural Gift from God onely to Man, and to no other Creature: -and although in this respect it may be called a part of Man, yet it is -no natural or material part of Man; neither doth this supernatural Gift -disturb Nature or natural Matter, or natural Matter this supernatural -Gift. And so leaving them both, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Of the Immortality of the Soul. l._ 1. _c._ 3. - -[2] _Lib._ 2. _c._ 2. - - - - -XXXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -If you desire my opinion concerning Witches, whereof your Learned -_Author_ hath many Discourses and Stories:[1] I will tell you really, -that in my sense and reason, I do not believe any, except it be the -witch of _Endor_, which the Scripture makes mention of; for though I -believe that there is a Devil, as the Word of God and the Church inform -me, yet I am not of the opinion, that God should suffer him to have -such a familiar conjunction, and make such contracts with Man, as to -impower him to do mischief and hurt to others, or to foretell things -to come, and the like; for I believe that all things Immaterial, as -Spirits, Angels, Devils, and the divine Soul of Man, are no parts of -Nature, but Supernatural, Nature knowing of no Creature that belongs to -her, but what is material; and since incorporeal Creatures are no parts -of Nature, they neither have natural actions, nor are they concerned -as co-partners or co-agents in the actions of Nature and natural -Creatures; but as their substances, so their actions are supernatural, -and beyond our conceivement. As for Faires, I will not say, but there -may be such Creatures in Nature, and have airy bodies, and be of a -humane shape, and have humane actions, as I have described in my Book -of Poems; for there are many things, in Nature, whereof Man hath no -knowledg at all, and it would be a great folly for any one to deny what -he doth not see, or to ascribe all the unusual effects in Nature to -Immaterial Spirits; for Nature is so full of variety, that she can and -doth present sometimes such figures to our exterior senses, as are -not familiar to us, so as we need not to take our refuge to Immaterial -Spirits: nay, even those that are so much for Incorporeal Spirits, -must confess, that they cannot be seen in their own natures, as being -Invisible, and therefore have need to take vehicles of some grosser -bodies to manifest themselves to men: and if Spirits cannot appear -without bodies, the neerest way is to ascribe such unusual effects or -apparitions, as happen sometimes, rather to matter that is already -corporeal, and not to go so far as to draw Immaterial Spirits to -Natural actions, and to make those Spirits take vehicles fit for their -purposes: for Nature takes sometimes delight in unusual Varieties. -Concerning those stories which your _Author_ relates[2] of the strange -effects of Food received into a mans body, how they did work upon the -Imagination, and change and transform the humors of those that did feed -upon them, those, I say, seem very probable to me. As for example; -of a _Wench who being struck into an Epilepsy, upon the seeing of a -Malefactors Head cut off, was advised to drink Cats-blood; which being -done, she not long after degenerated into the nature and property of -that Animal, cried and jump'd like a Cat, and hunted Mice with the -same silence and watchfulness as they do. Then of a Man, being long -fed with Swines-blood, which took a special pleasure in wallowing and -tumbling himself in the mire. Also of a Girle, which being nourished -up with Goats-milk, would skip like a Goat, and brouze on Trees as -Goats use to do. And of a Man, who by eating the brains of a Bear, -became of a Bear-like disposition._ All these stories I believe to be -true; for naturally the motions of a Man may sometimes Sympathize so -much with the received food, as to make an alteration in his humour -or disposition. But although it be natural, yet it is not regular, at -least not usual, but proceeds from an irregular and unusual change of -motions, like as the conception and generation of a Monster; For if -it were ordinary, then those which drink much of the blood of beasts, -would also degenerate into a beastly nature, the contrary whereof -is sufficiently known: Likewise those that drink much of Cows-milk, -would change into their humors and natures. But certainly, some -kinds of meats do not onely cause sickness, but madness, and strange -Imaginations; all which unnatural or unusual accidents are caused by -Matter's irregular motions; Whereof I have declared my opinion in other -places; and so I rest, - -Madam, - - -_Your faithful and constant_ - -_Friend, to serve you._ - -[1] _Antid. lib._ 3. - -[2] _In his discourse of Enthusiasm._ - - - - -XXXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -You will have my opinion of the Book that treats of _the Pre-existence -of Souls_, and the _Key that unlocks the Divine Providence_; but I -have told you heretofore, that there are so many different opinions -concerning the Soul, as I do not know which to embrace, for the -multiplicity confounds my choice: and the cause of these various -opinions, in my simple judgment, is, that most men make no difference -between the Divine, and Natural Soul. As for the Natural Soul, humane -sense and reason may perceive, that it consists of Matter, as being -Material; but as for the Divine Soul, being not material, no humane -sense and reason is able naturally to conceive it; for there cannot -possibly be so much as an Idea of a natural nothing, or an immaterial -being, neither can sense and reason naturally conceive the Creation of -an Immaterial substance; for as the Creation of material Creatures, -as of this World, belongs to Faith, and not to Reason, so doth also -the Creation of Immaterial substances, as Spirits; nay, it is more -difficult to understand a Natural Nothing to be made out of nothing, -then a Natural Something out of nothing. And as for the _Progress -of Immaterial Souls_, which the same _Author_ mentions, I cannot -conceive how No-thing can make a Progress, and therefore I suppose, -it is an Improper, or Metaphorical expression. The truth is, what is -Immaterial, belongs not to a Natural knowledg or understanding, but is -Supernatural, and goes beyond a natural reach or capacity. Concerning -_the Key of Divine Providence_, I believe God did never give or lend -it to any man; for surely, God, who is infinitely Wise, would never -intrust so frail and foolish a Creature as Man, with it, as to let -him know his secret Counsels, Acts, and Decrees. But setting aside -Pride and Presumption, Sense and Reason may easily perceive, that Man, -though counted the best of Creatures, is not made with such infinite -Excellence, as to pierce into the least secrets of God; Wherefore I am -in a maze when I hear of such men, which pretend to know so much, as -if they had plundered the Celestial Cabinet of the Omnipotent God; for -certainly, had they done it, they could not pretend to more knowledg -then they do. But I, _Madam_, confess my Ignorance, as having neither -divine Inspirations, nor extraordinary Visions, nor any divine or -humane learning, but what Nature has been pleased to bestow upon me; -Yet in all this Ignorance, I know that I am, and ought to be, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - - - - -XXXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since in my former Letters I have discoursed of Immaterial Spirits, -and declared my meaning, that I do not believe them to be natural -Creatures, or parts of Nature; you are of opinion, as if I did -contradict my self, by reason that in the first Edition of my Book -called _Philosophical Opinions_, I name the rational and sensitive -Matter, rational and sensitive Spirits. To which I answer, first, -That when I did write my first Conceptions in Natural Philosophy, I -was not so experienced, nor had I those observations which I have had -since; Neither did I give those first Conceptions time to digest, and -come to a maturity or perfect growth, but forced them forth as soon -as conceived, and this made the first publishing of them so full of -Imperfections, which I am much sorry for; But since that time, I have -not onely reviewed, but corrected and altered them in several places, -so that the last Impression of my _Philosophical Opinions_, you will -find more perfect and exact then the former. Next, I pray you to take -notice, _Madam_, that in the mentioned first Edition, by the word -Spirits, I meant Material, not Immaterial Spirits; for observing, that -Learned Men do discourse much of Animal Spirits, which are Material, -and that also high extracts in Chymistry are called Spirits; I used -that word purposely, thinking it most proper and convenient to express -my sense and meaning of that degree of matter which I call rational and -sensitive. But considering again, that my opinions, being new, would -be subject to misapprehensions and mis-interpretations; to prevent -those, I thought it fitter to leave out the word _Spirits_ in the -second, as also in the last Edition of my named Book of _Philosophy_, -lest my Readers should think I meant Immaterial Spirits; for I confess -really, that I never understood, nor cannot as yet apprehend Immaterial -Spirits; for though I believe the Scripture, and the Church, that -there are Spirits, and do not doubt the existency of them, yet I -cannot conceive the nature of Immaterial Spirits, and what they are; -Wherefore I do onely treat of natural material substances, and not -of incorporeal; also my discourse is of the Infinite servant of the -Infinite God, which servant is corporeal or material Nature: God is -onely to be admired, adored, and worshipped; but not ungloriously -to be discoursed of; Which Omnipotent God, I pray of his Infinite -Mercy to give me Faith to believe in him, and not to let presumption -prevail with me so, as to liken vain and idle conceptions to that -Incomprehensible Deity. These, _Madam_, are my humble Prayers to God; -and my request to you is, that I may continue the same in your love and -affection, which I have been hitherto; so shall I live content, and -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -SECT. III. - -I. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I have discharged my duty thus far, that in obedience to your commands, -I have given you my answers to the opinions of three of those famous -and learned _Authors_ you sent me, _viz. Hobbes, Des Cartes_, and -_More_, and explained my own opinions by examining theirs; My onely -task shall be now to proceed in the same manner with that famous -Philosopher and Chymist, _Van Helmont_; But him I find more difficult -to be understood then any of the forementioned, not onely by reason -of the Art of Chymistry, which I confess myself not versed in, but -especially, that he has such strange terms and unusual expressions -as may puzle any body to apprehend the sense and meaning of them: -Wherefore, if you receive not that full satisfaction you expect -from me, in examining his opinions and arguments, I beg your pardon -before-hand, and desire you to remember, that I sent you word in the -beginning, I did undertake this work more out of desire to clear my -own opinions, then a quarrelsome humor to contradict others; which -if I do but obtain, I have my aim. And so to the business: When as -your _Author_ discourses of the causes and beginnings of Natural -things, he is pleased to say,[1] That _Souls and Lives, as they know -no Degrees, so they know no Parts_; which opinion is very different -from mine: For although I confess, that there is but one kind of Life, -and one kind of Soul in Nature, which is the sensitive Life, and the -rational Soul, both consisting not onely of Matter, but of one kind of -Matter, to wit, Animate; nevertheless they are of different degrees, -the matter of the rational Soul being more agil, subtil and active, -then the matter of the sensitive Life; which is the reason that the -rational can act in its own substance or degree of matter, and make -figures in it self, and its own parts; when as the sensitive, being -of somewhat a grosser degree then the rational, and not so subtil -and active, is confined to work with and upon the Inanimate matter. -But mistake me not, _Madam_, for I make onely a difference of the -degrees of Subtilty, Activity, Agility, Purity, betwixt rational and -sensitive Matter; but as for the rational Matter it self, it has no -degrees of Purity, Subtilty and Activity in its own Nature or Parts, -but is always one and the same in its substance in all Creatures, and -so is the sensitive. You will ask me, How comes then the difference -of so many Parts and Creatures in Nature, if there be no degrees of -Purity, Activity, and Subtilty in the substance of the rational, and in -the substance of the sensitive Matter? As for example: if there were -no such degrees of the Parts of rational Matter amongst themselves, -as also of the Parts of the sensitive, there would be no difference -betwixt Animals, Vegetables, Minerals, and Elements, but all Creatures -would be alike without distinction, and have the same manner of sense -and reason, life and knowledg. I answer, That although each sort or -degree of animate Matter, rational as well as sensitive, has in it self -or its own substance no degrees of purity, rarity, and subtilty, but -is one and the same in its nature or essence; nevertheless, each has -degrees of quantity, or parts, which degrees of quantity do make the -onely difference betwixt the several creatures or parts of Nature, as -well in their general, as particular kinds; for both the rational and -sensitive matter being corporeal, and so dividable into parts, some -creatures do partake more, some less of them, which makes them to have -more or less, and so different sense and reason, each according to the -nature of its kind: Nay this difference of the degrees of quantity or -parts in the substance of the rational and sensitive Matter, makes -also the difference betwixt particulars in every sort of Creatures, as -for example, between several particular Men: But as I said, the nature -or essence of the sensitive and rational Matter is the same in all; -for the difference consists not in the Nature of Matter, but onely in -the degrees of quantity, and parts of Matter, and in the various and -different actions or motions of this same Matter. And thus Matter being -dividable, there are numerous lives and souls in Nature, according to -the variousness of her several Parts and Creatures. Next your _Author_, -mentioning the _Causes and Principles of natural Bodies_, assigns two -first or chief beginnings and corporeal causes of every Creature, -to wit, the _Element of Water_, and the _Ferment or Leaven_; which -Ferment he calls a formal created being; neither a substance, nor an -accident, but a neutral thing. Truly, _Madam_, my reason is not able -to conceive this neutral Being; for it must either be something or -nothing in Nature: and if he makes it any thing betwixt both, it is a -strange Monster; and will produce monstrous effects: and for Water, -if he doth make it a Principle of Natural things, I see no reason -why he excludes the rest of the Elements: But, in my opinion, Water, -and the rest of the Elements, are but effects of Nature, as other -Creatures are, and so cannot be prime causes. The like the Ferment, -which, to my sense and reason, is nothing else, but a natural effect of -natural matter. Concerning his opinion, That _Causes and Beginnings_ -are all one, or that there is but little difference betwixt them, I -do readily subscribe unto it; but when he speaks of those _things, -which are produced without life_, my reason cannot find out, what, or -where they should be; for certainly, in Nature they are not, Nature -being Life and Soul her self, and all her parts being enlivened and -soulified, so that there can be no generation or natural production -without Life. Neither is my sense and reason capable to understand his -meaning, when he says, That the _Seeds of things, and the Spirits, -as the Dispensers thereof, are divided from the Material Cause_: For -I do see no difference betwixt the Seed, and the material Cause, but -they are all one thing, it being undeniable, that the seed is the -matter of that which is produced. But your _Author_ was pleased to say -heretofore, that there are but two beginnings or causes of natural -things, and now he makes so many more; for, says he, Of _Efficient -and Seminal Causes, some are efficiently effecting, and others -effectively effecting_: which nice distinctions, in my opinion, do -but make a confusion in natural knowledg, setting a mans brain on the -rack; for who is able to conceive all those _Chymæras_ and Fancies of -the _Archeus, Ferment,_ various _Ideas, Blas, Gas,_ and many more, -which are neither something nor no-thing in Nature, but betwixt both, -except a man have the same Fancies, Visions and Dreams, your _Author_ -had? Nature is easie to be understood, and without any difficulty, -so as we stand in no need to frame so many strange names, able to -fright any body. Neither do natural bodies know many prime causes and -beginnings, but there is but one onely chief and prime cause from which -all effects and varieties proceed, which cause is corporeal Nature, -or natural self-moving Matter, which forms and produces all natural -things; and all the variety and difference of natural Creatures arises -from her various actions, which are the various motions in Nature; -some whereof are Regular, some Irregular: I mean Irregular, as to -particular Creatures, not as to Nature her self, for Nature cannot -be disturbed or discomposed, or else all would run into confusion; -Wherefore Irregularities do onely concern particular Creatures, not -Infinite Nature; and the Irregularities of some parts may cause the -Irregularities of other Parts, as the Regularities of some parts do -cause the Regularities of others: And thus according as Regularities -and Irregularities have power, they cause either Peace or War, Sickness -or Health, Delight and Pleasure, or Grief and Pain, Life or Death, to -particular Creatures or parts of Nature; but all these various actions -are but various Effects, and not prime Causes; which is well to be -observed, lest we confound Causes with Effects. And so leaving this -discourse for the present, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] Van Helm, _in his Book intituled_, Physick Refined, _ch._ 4. _of -the Causes and beginning of natural things._ - - - - -II. - - -_MADAM,_ - -It is no wonder, your _Author_ has so many odd and strange opinions -in Philosophy, since they do not onely proceed from strange Visions, -Apparitions, and Dreams, but are built upon so strange grounds and -principles as _Ideas, Archeus, Gas, Blas, Ferment,_ and the like, -the names of which sound so harsh and terrifying, as they might put -any body easily into a fright, like so many Hobgoblins or Immaterial -spirits; but the best is, they can do no great harm, except it be to -trouble the brains of them, that love to maintain those opinions; for -though they are thought to be powerful beings, yet being not corporeal -substances, I cannot imagine wherein their power should consist; for -Nothing can do nothing. But to mention each apart; first his _Archeus_ -he calls[1] _the Spirit of Life; a vital gas or Light; the Balsam -preferring from Corruption; the_ Vulcan _or Smith of Generation; the -stirrer up, and inward director of generation; an Air; a skiey or -airy Spirit; cloathing himself presently with a bodily cloathing, in -things soulified, walking through all the dens and retiring places of -the seed, and transforming the matter according to the perfect act of -its own Image, remaining the president and overseer or inward ruler of -his bounds even till death; the Principle of Life: the Inn of Life, -the onely immediate Witness, Executor, and Instrument of Life; the -Prince and Center of Life; the Ruler of the Stern; the Keeper of Life, -and promoter of Transmutations; the Porter of the Soul; a Fountainous -being; a Flint._[2] These, and many more names your _Author_ attributes -to his _Archeus_, but what properly it is, and what its Nature and its -peculiar office, I am not able to conceive. In the next place, _Gas_ -and _Blas_ are to your _Author_ also true Principles of Natural things; -for[3] _Gas is the Vapour into which Water is dissolved by Cold, but -yet it is a far more fine and subtil thing then Vapour_; which he -demonstrates by the Art of Chymistry. This _Gas_ in another place he -calls[4] a _Wild Spirit, or Breath, unknown hitherto; which can neither -be constrained by Vessels, nor reduced into a visible body; in some -things it is nothing but Water, as for example in Salt, in Fruits, and -the like._ But[5] _Blas proceeds from the local and alterative motion -of the Stars, and is the general beginning of motion, producing heat -and cold, and that especially with the changing of the Winds._ There is -also[6] _Blas in all sublunary things_; witness Amulets or preserving -Pomanders, whereby they do constrain objects to obey them; _Which -Incorporeal Blas of Government acts without a Corporeal Efflux, even -as the Moon makes the Sea to swell; but the fleshly generation_[7] -_hath a Blas of its own, and it is twofold, one which existeth by a -natural Motion, the other voluntary, which existeth as a mover to it -self by an Internal Willing._ There is also a _Blas of the Heart_, -which is _the fuel of the Vital Spirit, and consequently of its heat._ -The _Ferment_[8] he describes to be _A true Principle or Original -beginning of things, to wit, a Formal Created beginning, which is -neither a substance, nor an accident, but a Neutral being, framed from -the beginning of the World in the places of its own Monarchy, in the -manner of Light, Fire, the magnal or sheath of the Air, Forms, &c. that -it may prepare, stir up, and go before the Seeds._ Lastly, his _Ideas_ -are _Certain formal seminal Lights,_[9] _mutually piercing each other -without the adultery of Union; For_, says he, _although at first, that, -which is imagined, is nothing, but a meer being of reason, yet it doth -not remain such; for truely the Fancy is a sealifying vertue, and in -this respect is called Imaginative, because it forms the Images of -Likenesses, or Ideas of things conceived, and doth characterize them -in its own Vital Spirit, and therefore that Idea is made a spiritual -or seminal powerful being, to perform things of great moment._ And -those Ideas he makes various and numerous; as _Archeal Ideas, Ideas of -Diseases, Sealifying Ideas, Piercing Ideas, Forreign and strange Ideas, -Mad Ideas, Irrational and Incorrigible Ideas, Staggering Ideas,_ and a -hundred others: the like of _Gas, Blas,_ and the rest. Thus, _Madam_, I -have made a rehearsal of your _Authors_ strange, and hitherto unknown, -Principles (as his Confession is) of Natural things, which, to my -sense and reason, are so obscure, intricate and perplex, as is almost -impossible exactly to conceive them; when as Principles ought to be -easie, plain, and without any difficulty to be understood; Wherefore -what with his Spirits, meer-beings, _non_-beings, and neutral-beings, -he troubles Nature, and puzles the brains of his Readers so, that, I -think, if all men were of his opinion, or did follow the way of his -Philosophy, Nature would desire God she might be annihilated: Onely, of -all other, she doth not fear his Non-beings, for they are the weakest -of all, and can do her the least hurt, as not being able to obstruct -real and corporeal actions of Nature; for Nature is a corporeal -substance, and without a substance Motion cannot be, and without -Motion opposition cannot be made, nor any action in Nature, whether -Prints, Seals, Stamps, Productions, Generations, Thoughts, Conceptions, -Imaginations, Passions, Appetites, or the like: and if motions cannot -be without substance; then all Creatures, their properties, faculties, -natures, &c., being made by corporeal motions, cannot be _Non_-beings, -no nor anything else that is in Nature; for _non_-beings are not in -the number of Natural things, Nature containing nothing within her, -but what is substantially, really, and corporeally existent. But your -Authors _Ideal Entity_, (whereof he is speaking in another place of -his Works,)[10] which performs all the Works of Nature, seems to me, -as if it were the Jack of all Offices, or like the Jack in a Clock, -that makes every Wheel move; for it hath an admirable power to put off -and on Corporeality and Incorporeality, and to make it self Something -and Nothing as often as it has occasion; but if this _Proteus_ have -such power, it may well be named the Magick of Nature. Your _Author_ -saith, it is not the Devil, nor any effect thereof: but certainly, in -my opinion, according to its description, and the effects laid to its -performance, it must be more then the Devil; wherefore, in my Reason, I -cannot conceive it, neither am I able to understand his _Phantastick -Activity, Fancy of Forms, the Souls acting by an insensible way,_ -and many more such like expressions. But I conceive that all these -can be nothing else but the several motions of the sensitive and -rational matter, which is the Active, Ingenious, Distinguishing, -Knowing, Wise and Understanding part of Infinite corporeal Nature; and -though Infinite Matter hath Infinite parts in general, yet there is a -finiteness in every part considered by it self: not that I think a Part -can really subsist single and by it self, but it is onely considered -so in the manner of our Conception, by reason of the difference and -variousness of natural Creatures: for these being different from each -other in their figures, and not all alike, so that we can make a -distinction betwixt them; this difference and distinction causes us -to conceive every part of a different figure by it self: but properly -and according to the Truth of Nature, there is no part by it self -subsisting; for all parts are to be considered, not onely as parts -of the whole, but as parts of other parts, all parts being joyned in -Infinite Nature, and tied by an inseparable tie one way or other, -although we do not altogether perceive it. But to return to _Ideas_: -I had almost forgot to tell you, _Madam_, of another kind of _Ideas_, -by your _Author_ named, _Bewitching_ or _Inchanting Ideas_,[11] which -are for the most part found in Women, against which I cannot but -take exception in the behalf of our Sex: For, says he, _Women stamp -Ideas on themselves, whereby they, no otherwise then Witches driven -about with a malignant spirit of despair, are oftentimes governed or -snatched away unto those things, which otherwise they would not, and -do bewail unto us their own and unvoluntary Madness: These Ideas are -hurtful to themselves, and do, as it were, Inchant, Infatuate, and -weaken themselves; for so (as_ Plutarch _witnesses) a desire of death -by hanging took hold of all the young Maids in the Island_ Chios. By -this it appears, that your _Author_ has never been in Love, or else he -would have found, that Men have as well bewitching _Ideas_ as Women, -and that they are as hurtful to Men, as to Women. Neither can I be -perswaded to believe, that men should not have as well Mad _Ideas_ as -Women; for to mention no other example, some, (I will not speak of -your _Author_) their Writings and strange Opinions in Philosophy do -sufficiently witness it; but whence those Ideas do proceed, whether -from the Bride-bed of the Soul, or the Splene, your _Author_ doth not -declare. As for the young Maids in _Chios_, I must confess, it is a -very strange example; but I think there have been as many Men that -have killed themselves, as Women, if not more: However, I hope, by the -Grace of God, the young Maids in this Kingdom are better advised; for -if they should do the like, it would be a sad fate for all young Men. -To conclude, _Madam_, all these rehearsed opinions of your _Author_, -concerning the Grounds or Principles of Natural Philosophy, if you -desire my Unfeigned Judgment, I can say no more, but that they shew -more Fancy, then Reason and Truth, and so do many others; and, perhaps, -my opinions may be as far from Truth as his, although their Ground is -Sense and Reason; for there is no single Creature in Nature, that is -able to know the perfectest Truth: but some opinions, to humane sense -and reason, may have more probability then others, and every one thinks -his to be most probable, according to his own fancy and imagination, -and so I think of mine; nevertheless, I leave them to the censure of -those, that are endued with solid judgment and reason, and know how -to discern betwixt things of fancy and reason, and amongst the rest, -I submit them to the censure of your _Ladiship_, whose solid and wise -Judgment is the rule of all the actions of, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _In his_ ch. _called_ The Fiction of Elementary Complexions and -Mixtures. - -[2] _In the_ ch. of the Birth and Original of Forms. _In the_ ch. Of -the Ideas of Diseases. _See his_ ch. _called_ The Seat of Diseases -in the Soul is confirmed. Ch. of Archeal Diseases. Ch. _called_ The -Subject of inhering of Diseases is in the point of Life, &c. - -[3] _In the_ ch. Of the Gas of the Water. - -[4] _In the_ ch. of the Fiction of Elementary Complexions and Mixtures. - -[5] _In the_ ch. Of the Blas of Meteors. - -[6] _In the_ ch. Of the unknown action of Government. - -[7] _In the_ ch. Of the Blas of Man. - -[8] Of the Causes and beginnings of Natural things. - -[9] Of the Ideas of Diseases. - -[10] Of the Magnetick cure of Wounds. - -[11] Of things Conceived, or Conceptions. - - - - -III. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ relating how he dissents from the _false Doctrine_, as -he terms it, _of the Schools_, concerning the Elements, and their -Mixtures, Qualities, Temperaments, Discords, &c. in order to Diseases, -is pleased to say as follows:[1] _I have sufficiently demonstrated, -that there are not four Elements in Nature, and by consequence, if -there are onely three, that four cannot go together, or encounter; and -that the fruits which Antiquity hath believed to be mixt bodies, and -those composed from a concurrence of four elements, are materially of -one onely Element; also that those three Elements are naturally cold; -nor that native heat is any where in things, except from Light, Life, -Motion, and an altering Blas: In like manner, that all actual moisture -is of Water, but all virtual moisture from the property of the seeds: -Likewise, that dryness is by it self in the Air and Earth, but in -Fruits by reason of the Seeds and Coagulations; and that there are not -Contraries in Nature._ To give you my opinion hereof, first I think it -too great a presumption in any man, to feign himself so much above the -rest, as to accuse all others of ignorance, and that none but he alone -hath the true knowledg of all things as infallible and undeniable, -and that so many Learned, Wise and Ingenious Men in so many ages have -been blinded with errors; for certainly, no particular Creature in -Nature can have any exact or perfect knowledg of Natural things, and -therefore opinions cannot be infallible truths, although they may seem -probable; for how is it possible that a single finite Creature should -know the numberless varieties and hidden actions of Nature? Wherefore -your _Author_ cannot say, that he hath demonstrated any thing, which -could not be as much contradicted, and perhaps with more reason, then -he hath brought proofs and demonstrations: And thus when he speaks of -Elements, that there are not four in Nature, and that they cannot go -together, or encounter, it may be his opinion; but others have brought -as many reasons to the contrary, and I think with more probability; so -as it is unnecessary to make a tedious discourse thereof, and therefore -I'le refer you to those that have treated of it more learnedly and -solidly then I can do. But I perceive your _Author_ is much for Art, -and since he can make solid bodies liquid, and liquid bodies solid, he -believes that all bodies are composed out of the Element of Water, and -that Water therefore is the first Principle of all things; when as -Water, in my opinion, is but an Effect, as all other natural Creatures, -and therefore cannot be a cause or principle of them. Concerning the -_Natural coldness of Water, Air, and Earth,_ it may be, or not be so, -for any thing your _Author_ can truly know; but to my sense and reason, -it seems probable that there are things naturally hot and moist, and -hot and dry, as well as cold and moist, and cold and dry: But all these -are but several effects produced by the several actions of Natural -Matter, which Natural Matter is the onely Principle of all Natural -Effects and Creatures whatever; and this Principle, I am confident -your _Author_ can no more prove to be Water, then he can prove that -Heat, Light, Life, Motion, and _Blas_, are not material. Concerning -what he saith, That _Native Heat is no where in things, except from -Light, Life, Motion, and an altering Blas_: I believe that motion of -life makes not onely heat, but all effects whatsoever; but this native -heat is not produced onely from the motions of Particular lives in -particular Creatures, but it is made by the motions of Natures life; -which life, in all probability, is the self-moving Matter, which no -doubt, can and doth make Light and Blas without Heat, and Heat without -Light or Blas; Wherefore Light and Blas are not principles of native -Heat, no more then native Heat is the principle of Light and Blas. -Neither is Water the Principle of Actual moisture, nor the propriety -of seeds the Principle of all Virtual moisture; but self-moving Matter -is the Principle of all, and makes both actual and virtual moisture, -and there is no question but there are many sorts of moistures. As for -_Dryness_, which he says, _is by it self in the Air and Earth, and -in Fruits by reason of the Seeds and Coagulations_: I cannot conceive -how any thing can be by it self in Nature, by reason there is nothing -alone and single in Nature, but all are inseparable parts of one body: -perchance, he means, it is naturally and essentially inherent in Air -and Earth; but neither can that be in my reason, because all Creatures -and Effects of Nature are Intermixt, and there is as much dryness in -other Creatures, as in Air and Earth. Lastly, as for his opinion, That -_there are no Contraries in Nature_; I believe not in the essence -or nature of Matter; but sense and reason inform us, that there are -Contraries in Natures actions, which are Corporeal motions, which cause -mixtures, qualities, degrees, discords, as also harmonious conjunctions -and concords, compositions, divisions, and the like effects whatsoever. -But though your _Author_ seems to be an enemy to the mixtures of -Elements, yet he makes such a mixture of Divinity, and natural -Philosophy, that all his Philosophy is nothing but a meer Hotch-potch, -spoiling one with the other. And so I will leave it to those that -delight in it, resting, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _In his Treatise called_, A passive deceiving of the Schools of the -Humourists. - - - - -IV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -_Water_, according to your _Authors_ opinion,[1] _is frozen into Snow, -Ice, or Hail, not by Cold, but by its own Gas._ But since I am not able -to conceive what his Gas is, being a term invented by him self, I will -briefly declare my own opinion, which is, That Snow, Ice, and Hail, in -my judgment, are made in the like manner, as Passions or Colours are -made and raised in Man; for a sad discourse, or a cruel object will -make a Man pale and cold, and a fearful object, will make him tremble; -whereas a wanton and obscene discourse will make some red and hot. -But yet these discourses and objects are onely external, occasional, -and not immediate efficient causes of such alterations. Also when a -Man eats or drinks any thing that is actually hot or cold, or enters -into a cold or hot room, bath, or air, he becomes hot or cold by the -actions of those external agents that work upon him, or rather whose -motions the sensitive motions of his body do pattern out. The like -for diseases; for they may be caused either by hearing ill reports, -or by taking either hurtful or superfluous food into the Body, or by -Infections inwardly or outwardly, and many other ways. Likewise may -Colours be made different ways; And so may Snow, Ice, and Hail; for -all loose, rare, and porous Bodies are more apt to alter and change -then close, solid, and dense bodies; and not onely to change from -what they are, but to rechange to what they were. But, _Madam_, many -studious persons study Nature more in her own substance, then in her -various actions, which is the cause they arrive to no knowledg of -Natures Works; for the same parts of Matter may act or work several -ways: Like as a Man, or other animal creature, may put one part of his -body into various and several postures, and move it many different -ways. Your _Author_ may say, that although several Creatures may be -changed to our sight or perception, yet they are not really changed in -Nature. I answer, Their Principle, which is a natural matter, of which -all Creatures are made, cannot be changed, because it is one, simple, -and unalterable in its Nature; but the figures of several Creatures -are changed continually by the various motions of this matter; not -from being matter, but onely from such or such a figure into another; -and those figures which do change, in their room are others produced -to keep up the certain kinds of Creatures by a continual successive -alteration. And as there are changes of parts, so there are also -mixtures of several parts, figures and motions in one and the same -Matter; for there are not different kinds in the nature of Matter: -But, although Matter is of several degrees, as partly animate and -partly inanimate, and the animate Matter is partly rational, and partly -sensitive; Nevertheless, in all those degrees it remains the same onely -or meer Matter; that is, it is nothing else but Matter, and the onely -ground in which all changes are made. And therefore I cannot perceive -it to be impossible in Nature, as to your _Author_ it seems, That -_Water should not be transchangeable into Air_; for, that he says, -_The Air would have increased into a huge bulk, and all Water would -have long since failed_: It is no consequence, because there is a -Mutual transmutation of all figures and parts of Nature, as I declared -above; and when one part is transchanged into another, that part is -supplied again by the change of another, so that there can be no total -mutation of kinds or sorts of figures, but onely a mutual change of -the particulars. Neither is it of any consequence, when your _Author_ -says, That _if Water should once be turned into Air, it would always -remain Air, because a returning agent is wanting, which may turn Air -again into Water._ For he might as well say, a Man cannot go or turn -backward, being once gone forward. And although he brings a General -Rule, That _every thing, as much as in it lies, doth desire to remain -in it self_; Yet it is impossible to be done, by reason there is no -rest in Nature, she being in a perpetual motion, either working to -the consistance of a figure, or to the uniting of several parts, or -to the dissolving or dividing of several parts, or any other ways. By -dissolving, I do not mean annihilating, but such a dissolving of parts -as is proper for the altering of such a figure into one or many other -figures. But rather then your Author will consent to the transchanging -of Water into Air, he will feign several grounds, soils or pavements -in the Air, which he calls _Peroledes_, and so many Flood-gates and -Folding-dores, and make the Planets their Key-keepers; which are pretty -Fancies, but not able to prove any thing in Natural Philosophy. And so -leaving them to their Author, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Gas of Water. - - - - -V. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I cannot in reason give my consent to your _Authors_ opinion,[1] That -_Fishes do by the force or vertue of an inbred Seed transchange simple -water into fat, bones, and their own flesh, and that materially they -are nothing but water transchanged, and that they return into water by -art._ For though my opinion is, that bodies change and alter from one -figure into another, yet they do not all change into water, neither -is water changed into all other figures; and certainly Fishes do not -live nor subsist meerly by Water, but by several other meats, as other -animals do; either by feeding upon other Fishes, the stronger devouring -the weaker, or upon Mud, and Grass, and Weeds, in the bottom of Seas, -Rivers and Ponds, and the like: As for example, put Fish into a Pool or -Sluce, wherein there is not any thing but clear, pure water, and in a -short time they will be starved to death for want of Food; and as they -cannot live onely by water, so neither can they breed by the power of -water, but by the power of their food, as a more solid substance: And -if all Creatures be nourished by those things whereof they consist, -then Fishes do not consist of water, being not nourished by water; -for it is not the transchanging of water, by which Fishes live, and by -which they produce; but it is the transchange of food, proceeding from -other Creatures, as I mentioned above. 'Tis true, Water is a proper -element for them to live in, but not to live on; and though I have -neither learning, nor experience in _Chymistry_, yet I believe, that -your _Author_, with all the subtilest Art he had, could not turn or -convert all Creatures into pure and simple water, but there would have -been dregs and several mixtures left: I will not say, that the Furnace -may not rarifie bodies extreamly, but not convert them into such a -substance or form as Nature can. And although he thinks Gold is made of -Water, yet I do not believe he could convert it into Water by the help -of Fire; he might make it soluble, fluid and rare, but all things that -are supple, soluble, flowing and liquid, are not Water; I am confident -no _Gas_ or _Blas_ will, or can transform it, nor no Art whatsoever; -what Nature may do, I know not. But since your _Authors_ opinion is, -that Air is also a Primigenial Element, and in its nature a substance, -Why doth he not make it a Principle of natural bodies, as well as -Water? I think it had not been so improper to liken Juices to Water; -but to make the onely Principle of the composition and dissolution of -all Creatures to be Water, seems to me very improbable. Neither can -I admit in reason that the Elements should be called, first, pure, -and simple beings; we might as well call all other creatures, first, -pure, and simple beings: for although the word Element sounds as much -as Principle, yet they are in my reason no more Principles of Nature, -then other Creatures are, there being but one Principle in Nature, out -of which all things are composed, _viz._ the onely matter, which is a -pure and simple corporeal substance; and what Man names impure dregs -and filths, these are onely irregular and cross motions of that matter, -in respect to the nature of such or such a figure; or such motions as -are not agreeable and sympathetical to our Passions, Humors, Appetites, -and the like. Concerning the Contrarieties, Differences and Wars in -Nature, which your _Author_ denies, I have spoken thereof already, and -though he endeavours in a long discourse to prove, that there is no War -in nature; yet, in my opinion, it is to little purpose, and it makes -but a war in the thoughts of the Reader; I know not what it did in -his own. But I observe he appeals often to Divinity to bear him up in -Natural Philosophy; but how the Church doth approve his Interpretations -of the Scripture, I know not: Wherefore I will not meddle with them, -lest I offend the Truth of the Divine Scripture, wherein I desire to -submit to the Judgment of the Church, which is much wiser then I, or -any single Person can be. However, for all what your _Author_ says, -I do nevertheless verily believe, there is a war between Natural -motions: For example; between the Regular motions of Health, and the -Irregular motions of Sickness; and that things applied do oftentimes -give assistance to one side or other, but many times in the conflict, -the applied remedies are destroyed, and sometimes they are forced to -be Neutrals: Wherefore though the nature of Infinite Matter is simple, -and knows of no discord, yet her actions may be cross and opposite: the -truth is, Nature could never make such variety, did her actions never -oppose each other, but live in a constant Peace and Unity. And thus -leaving them to agree, I am confident your _Ladiship_ and I shall never -disagree; for as long as my life doth last, I shall always prove, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ The Fiction of Elementary Complexions and Mixtures. - - - - -VI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ condemns the _Schools_ for saying,[1] That _Air is -moist_, or that it may be _converted into Water by pressing it -together_; bringing an example of an _Iron Pipe, wherein Air has been -pressed together, which afterwards in its driving out has, like a -Hand-gun discharged with Gun-powder, sent a bullet thorow a board or -plank._ Truly, _Madam_, concerning the moisture of Air, I am against -it, but the transchanging of Air into Water I do verily believe, _viz._ -that some sorts of Air may be contracted or condensed into Water, and -that Water again may be dilated into Air, but not readily, commonly and -easily by Art, but onely by Nature. Wherefore your _Authors_ Experiment -can serve for no proof; for an artificial trial cannot be an infallible -natural demonstration, the actions of Art, and the actions of Nature -being for the most part very different, especially in productions and -transmutations of natural things: Neither can an alteration of parts, -cause an utter destruction of the whole, because when some parts change -from their figures, other parts of matter change again into the like -figures, by which successive change the continuation of the whole is -kept up. Next your _Author_ reproves the Schools for maintaining the -opinion, that _Air is hot_; for says he, _Water, Air, and Earth, are -cold by Creation, because without Light, Heat, and the partaking of -Life._ He might, in my opinion, conclude, as well, that Man is cold by -Creation, because a Chameleon, or a Fish is cold, being all of animal -kind: But why may not some sorts of Air, Water and Earth be hot, and -some be cold, as well as some sorts of Light are hot, and some cold; -and so several other Creatures? His Reasons prove nothing: for Light -doth not make Heat, nor is it the principle of Heat; and it is no -consequence to say, all that is without Light is without Heat, there -being many things without Light, which nevertheless are Hot; But to -say, Water, Air, and Earth are cold, because they are without heat, is -no proof, but a meer begging of the principle; for it is but the same -thing, as if I should say, this is no Stone, because it is no Glass. -And that Water, Air and Earth, do not partake of Life, must be proved -first, for that is not granted as yet, there being, according to my -opinion, not one Creature that wants Life in all Nature. Again: your -_Author_ is of opinion, That _Water is the first and chief Principle of -all Natural things._ But this I can no more believe, then that _Water -should never change or degenerate from its essence_: nay, if your -_Author_ means, there shall always be Water in Nature, it is another -thing; but if he thinks that not any part of water doth or can change -or degenerate in its nature, and is the principle and chief producer -of all other Creatures; then he makes Water rather a Creator then a -Creature; and it seems, that those Gentiles which did worship Water, -were of the same opinion, whereas yet he condemns all Pagan opinions -and all those that follow them. Moreover, I cannot subscribe to his -opinion, That _Gas and Blas from the Stars do make heat_: For heat is -made several ways, according to its several sorts; for there is a dry -heat, and a moist heat, a burning, melting, and evaporating heat, and -many more. But as for _Meteors_, that _they are made by Gas and Blas_, -I can say nothing, by reason I am not skilled in Astrology, and the -science of the Heavens, Stars, and Planets; wherefore if I did offer -to meddle with them, I should rather express my Ignorance, then give -your _Ladiship_ any solid reasons; and so I am willing to leave this -speculation to others, resting content with that knowledg Nature hath -given me without the help of Learning: Which I wholly dedicate and -offer to your _Ladiship_, as becomes, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] In the _ch._ of _Air._ - - - - -VII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Having made mention in my last of your _Authors_ opinion, _That Air -is in its nature Cold_, I thought it fit to take a stricter view of -the temper of Air, and to send you withal my own opinion thereof. -First of all, I would fain know, what sort of Air your _Author_ means; -for if he thinks there is but one sort of Air, he might as well say, -that there is but one sort of Animals, or Vegetables; whereas yet -there are not onely different sorts of animal and vegetable kind, but -also different particulars in one and the same sort: As for example; -what difference is not amongst Horses, as between a Barb, a Turk, -a Ginnet, a Courser of _Naples_, a Flanders-horse, a Galloway, an -English-horse, and so forth? not onely in their shapes, but also in -their natures, tempers and dispositions? The like for Cows, Oxen, -Sheep, Goats, Dogs, as also for Fowl and Fish, nay, for Men. And as for -Vegetables, What difference is there not between Barly and Wheat, and -between _French_-barly, _Pine_-barly, and ordinary Barly; as also our -_English_-wheat, _Spanish_-wheat, _Turkish_-wheat, _Indian_-wheat, and -the like? What difference is there not amongst Grapes, as the _Malago, -Muscadel_, and other Grapes, and so of all the rest of Vegetables? -The same may be said of the Elements; for there is as much difference -amongst the Elements as amongst other Creatures. And so of Air: for -Air in some places, as in the _Indies_, especially about _Brasilia_, -is very much different from our air, or from the air that is in other -places: Indeed, in every different Climate, you shall find a difference -of air, wherefore 'tis impossible to assign a certain temper of heat -or cold to air in general. But although my sense and reason inform me, -that air in its own nature or essence is neither hot nor cold, yet -it may become hot or cold, by hot or cold motions; for the sensitive -perceptive motions of Air may pattern out heat or cold; and hence it -is, that in Summer, when as heat predominates, the air is hot; and -in Winter, when as cold predominates, the air is cold. But, perhaps, -you will say, air may be cooled by moving it with a Fan, or such like -thing which can make wind; wherefore it follows, that air must needs be -naturally cold. I answer, That doth not prove Air to be in its nature -cold: for this moving or making of wind may contract or condense the -air into cold motions, which may cause a cold wind, like as Ventiducts, -where the air running thorow narrow Pipes makes a cold wind. The same -may be done with a mans breath; for if he contract his lips close, his -breath will be cold, but if he opens his mouth wide, his breath will -be warm. Again: you may say, that rain is congealed by the coldness of -the air into Snow, Hail and Ice. I answer; Frost, Ice, Snow and Hail, -do not proceed from the coldness of the air, but rather the coldness -of the air proceeds from them; for Ice, Snow, and Hail, proceed from -cold contraction and condensation of a vaporous or watery substance; -and, as Frost and Snow cause air to be cold, so Thunder and Lightning -cause it to be hot, so long as they last. Thus, _Madam_, though Air may -be altered either to heat or cold, yet it is neither hot nor Cold in -it self. And this is all for the present that I can say concerning the -Temper of Air; I conclude, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - - - - -VIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Having hitherto considered your _Authors_ Elements or Principles of -Natural things, you will give me leave to present you now with a short -view of his Opinions concerning Wind, Vacuum, Rainbows, Thunder, -Lightning, Earth-quakes, and the like; which I will do as briefly as I -can, lest I betray my Ignorance; for I confess my self not to be well -versed in the knowledg of Meteors, nor in those things which properly -belong to the Mathematicks, as in Astrology, Geography, Opticks, and -the like. But your _Author_ says, in the first place,[1] That _Natural -Wind is nothing but a flowing Air, moved by the Blas of the Stars._ -Certainly, _Madam_, if this were so, then, in my judgment, when the -Stars blaze, we should have constant Winds, and the more they blaze, -the more violent winds there would be: But I have rather observed -the contrary, that when the Stars blaze most apparently, we have the -calmest weather either in Summer or Winter. Perchance your _Author_ -will say, he doth not mean this apparant and visible Blas, but another -invisible Blas. I answer; I know not, nor cannot conceive any other -Blas in the Stars, except I had seen it in a Vision; neither do I -think that Nature her self knows of any other, But your _Author_ -doth refer himself upon the Authority of _Hypocrates_, who says, -That _not onely the Wind is a blast, but that all Diseases are from -blasts; and that there is in us a Spirit stirring up all things by -its Blas; which Spirit, by a Microcosmical Analogy, or the proportion -of a little World, he compares to the blasts of the world._ As for -my particular, _Madam_, I dare say, I could never perceive, by my -sense and reason, any such blazing Spirit in me; but I have found by -experience, that when my mind and thoughts have been benighted with -Melancholy, my Imagination hath been more active and subtil, then -when my mind has been clear from dark Melancholy: Also I find that -my thoughts and conceptions are as active, if not more, in the night -then in the day; and though we may sometimes dream of several Lights, -yet I cannot perceive a constant light in us; however Light, Blazes, -and all those effects are no more then other effects of Nature are; -nor can they have more power on other Creatures, then other Creatures -have on them: Neither are they made otherwise then by the corporeal -motions of Natural Matter, and are dissolved and transchanged as other -Creatures, out of one form or figure into another. Next your _Author_ -discoursing[2] whether there be any Vacuum in Nature, doth incline to -the affirming party, that there is a Vacuum in the Air; to wit, _There -is in the air something, that is less then a body, which fills up the -emptinesses or little holes and pores in the air, and which is wholly -annihilated by fire; It is actually void of all matter, and is a middle -thing between a body and an Incorporeal Spirit, and almost nothing -in respect of bodies; for it came from Nothing, and so may easily be -reduced to nothing._ All this, _Madam_, surpasses my capacity; for -I can in no ways conceive any thing between something and nothing, -as to be less then something, and more then nothing; for all that is -corporeal in Nature, is to my reason something; that is, some really -existent thing; but what is incorporeal in Nature, is nothing; and if -there be any absolute vacuum in Nature, as your _Author_ endeavours -to prove, then certainly this Vacuum cannot be any thing whatsoever; -for a Vacuum is a pure Nothing. But many ingenious and learned men -have brought as many arguments and reasons against Vacuum, as others -bring for it, and so it is a thing which I leave to them to exercise -their brains withal. The like is the opinion which many maintain -concerning Place, _viz._ that there is a constant succession of Place -and Parts, so that when one part removes, another doth succeed in its -place; the truth and manner whereof I was never able to comprehend: -for, in my opinion, there can be no place without body, nor no body -without place, body and place being all but one thing. But as for -the perpetual Creation and annihilation of your _Authors_ Vacuities, -give me leave to tell you, _Madam_, that it would be a more laborious -work, then to make a new World, or then it was to make this present -World; for God made this World in six days, and rested the seventh -day; but this is a perpetual making of something out of nothing. -Again: concerning Rainbows, your _Author_ says,[3] That _a Rainbow -is not a natural effect of a natural Cause, but a divine Mystery in -its original; and that it has no matter, but yet is in a place, and -has its colours immediately in a place, but in the air mediately, and -that it is of the nature of Light._ This is indeed a great mystery to -my reason; for I cannot conceive, as I said before, a place without a -body, nor how Light and Colours can be bodiless: But as for Rainbows, -I have observed, when as water hath been blown up into the air into -bubles, that by the reflexion of light on the watery bubles, they have -had the like colours of the Rainbow; and I have heard, that there -hath been often seen at the rising and setting of the Sun, Clouds of -divers colours; Wherefore I cannot be perswaded to believe that a -Rainbow should not have a natural cause, and consequently be a natural -effect; For that God has made it a sign of the Covenant between him -and mortal men, is no proof, that it is not a natural effect; Neither -can I believe that it has not been before the Flood, and before it was -made a sign by God, as your _Author_ imagines; for though it was no -sign before the Flood, yet it may nevertheless have had its being and -existence before the Flood. Moreover, as for Thunder and Lightning, -your _Authors_ opinion is; _That although they may have concurring -natural Causes, yet the mover of them is an Incorporeal Spirit, which -is the Devil; who having obtained the Principality of this world, that -he may be a certain executer of the judgments of the chief Monarch, and -so the Umpire and Commissioner of Lightning and Thunder, stirs up a -monstrous and sudden Blas in the Air, yet under Covenanted Conditions; -for unless his power were bridled by divine Goodness, he would shake -the Earth with one stroke so, as to destroy all mortal men: and thus -the cracking noise or voice of Thunder is nothing but a spiritual -Blas of the Evil Spirit._ I will not deny, _Madam_, that Thunder and -Lightning do argue the Power of the most Glorious God, for so do all -the rest of the Creatures; but that this is the onely and immediate -cause, which your _Author_ assigns of Thunder and Lightning, I cannot -believe; for surely, in my opinion, Thunder and Lightning are as much -natural effects as other Creatures in Nature; and are not the Devils -Blas, for I think they may be made without the help of the Devil; nay, -I believe, he may be as much affraid of Thunder, as those Creatures -that live on Earth. But what the causes are, and how Thunder and -Lightning are made, I have elsewhere declared more at large, especially -in my _Philosophical Opinions._ Again your _Author_ speaking[4] of the -_Trembling of the Earth, thinks it is nothing else but the Judgment -of God for the sins of Impenitent men._ For my part, _Madam_, I can -say little to it, either concerning the divine, or the natural cause -of Earthquakes: As for the divine and supernatural Cause, which your -_Author_ gives, if it was so, then I wonder much, why God should -command Earth-quakes in some parts of the World more frequent then -in others. As for example; we here in these parts have very seldom -Earthquakes, and those we have, which is hardly one in many ages, are -not so furious, as to do much harm; and so in many other places of -the World, are as few and as gentle Earth-quakes as here; when as in -others, Earth-quakes are very frequent and dreadful: From whence it -must needs follow, if Earth-quakes be onely a Judgment from God for -the sins of Impenitent Men, and not a natural effect, that then those -places, where the Earth is not so apt to tremble, are the habitations -of the blessed, and that they, which inhabit those parts that are -apt to tremble, are the accursed; when as yet, in those places where -Earthquakes are not usual and frequent, or none at all, People are as -wicked and impious, if not more, then in those where Earthquakes are -common. But the question is, Whether those parts which suffer frequent -and terrible Earthquakes, would not be so shaken or have such trembling -fits, were they uninhabited by Man, or any other animal Creature? -Certainly, in my opinion, they would. But as for the Natural Cause -of Earthquakes, you must pardon me, _Madam_, that I cannot knowingly -discourse thereof, by reason I am not so well skilled in Geography, -as to know the several Soils, Climats, Parts, Regions, or Countries, -nor what disposed matter may be within those parts that are subject -to frequent Earthquakes: Onely this I may say, that I have observed, -that the light of a small Fire or Candle, will dilate it self round -about; or rather that the air round about the Fire or Candle, will -pattern out both its light and its heat. Also I have observed, That a -Man in a raging fit of Madness will have such an unusual strength, as -ten strong men shall hardly be able to encounter or bind him, when as, -this violent fit being past, a single man, nay a youth, may over-master -him: Whence I conclude, that the actions, as the motions of Nature, are -very powerful when they use their force, and that the ordinary actions -of Nature are not so forcible as necessary; but the extraordinary are -more forcible then necessary. Lastly, your _Author_ takes great pains -to prove,[5] That _the Sun with his light rules the Day, and the Moon -with hers the Night; and that the Moon has her own Native light; and -that Bats, Mice, Dormice, Owles, and many others, as also Men, which -rise at night, and walk in their sleep, see by the light and power -of the Moon; also that Plants are more plentifully nourished by the -night._ But lest it might be concluded, that all this is said without -any probability of Truth, by reason the Moon doth not every night -shine upon the Earth, he makes a difference between the Manner of the -Sun's and Moon's enlightning the Earth; to wit, that the Sun strikes -his beams in a right line towards the Earth, but the Moon doth not -respect the Centre of the World, which is the Earth, in a right line; -but her Centre is always excentrical, and she respects the Earth onely -by accident, when she is concentrical with the World; And therefore he -thinks there is another light under the Earth even at Midnight, whereby -many Eyes do see, which owes also its rise to the Moon. This opinion -of your _Author_ I leave to be examined by those that have skill in -Astronomy, and know both the Light and the Course of the Moon: I will -onely say thus much, that when the Moon is concentrical, as he calls -it, with the World, as when it is Full and New Moon, she doth not shine -onely at night, but also in the day, and therefore she may rule the -day as well as the night, and then there will be two lights for the -ruling of the day, or at least there will be a strife betwixt the Sun -and the Moon, which shall rule. But as for Men walking asleep by the -light of the Moon, my opinion is, That blind men may walk as well by -the light of the Sun, as sleeping men by the light of the Moon. Neither -is it probable, that _the Moon or her Blas doth nourish Plants_; for -in a cold Moon-shiny night they will often die; but it is rather the -Regular motions in well tempered matter that cause fruitful productions -and maturity. And so I repose my Pen, lest it trespass too much upon -your Patience, resting, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Blas of Meteors. - -[2] _Ch._ Of Vacuum. - -[3] _Ch._ Of an Irregular Meteor. - -[4] _Ch._ Of the Earthquake. - -[5] _Ch._ Of the Birth or Original of Forms. - - - - -IX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In my former, when I related your _Authors_ opinion, concerning -Earthquakes, I forgot to tell you, that he counts the Doctrine of the -Schools absurd, when they say that Air, or any Exhalation, is the cause -of them: For, says he, _There is no place in the Pavements or soils of -the Earth, wherein any airy body may be entertained, whether that body -be a wind, or an airy exhalation._ But since I promised I would not -offer to appoint or assign any natural causes of Earthquakes, I have -only taken occasion hence to enquire, whether it may not be probably -affirmed, that there is air in the bowels of the Earth: And to my -reason it seems very probable; I mean not this Exterior air, flowing -about the circumference of the Earth we inhabite; but such an airy -matter as is pure, refined, and subtil, there being great difference -in the Elements, as well as in all other sorts of Creatures; for what -difference is there not between the natural heat of an animal, and the -natural heat of the Sun? and what difference is there not between the -natural moisture of an Animal, and the natural moisture of Water? And -so for the Purity of Air, Dryness of Earth, and the like: Nay, there -is great difference also in the production of those Effects: As for -example; the heat of the Earth is not produced from the Sun, nor the -natural heat in Animals, nor the natural heat in Vegetables; for if it -were so, then all Creatures in one Region or place of the Earth would -be of one temper. As for example: Poppy, Night-shade, Lettuce, Thyme, -Sage, Parsly, &c. would be all of one temper and degree, growing all -in one Garden, and upon one patch of Ground, whereon the Sun equally -casts his beams, when as yet they are all different in their natural -tempers and degrees. And so certainly there is Air, Fire, and Water, -in the bowels of the Earth, which were never made by the Sun, the Sea, -and this Exterior elemental Air. Wherefore those, in my opinion, are -in gross Errors, who imagine that these Interior Effects in the Earth -are produced from the mentioned Exterior Elements, or from some other -forreign and external Causes; for an external cause can onely produce -an external effect, or be an occasion to the production of such or -such an effect, but not be the immediate efficient or essential cause -of an interior natural effect in another Creature, unless the Interior -natures of different Creatures have such an active power and influence -upon each other, as to work interiously at a distance, such effects -as are proper and essential to their Natures, which is improbable; -for though their natures and dispositions may mutually agree and -sympathize, yet their powers cannot work upon their Interior Natures -so, as to produce internal natural effects and proprieties in them. The -truth is, it cannot be; for as the Cause is, so is the Effect; and if -the Cause be an exterior Cause, the Effect must prove so too: As for -example; the heat of the Sun, and the heat of the Earth, although they -may both agree, yet one is not the cause of the other; for the Suns -heat cannot pierce into the bowels of the Earth, neither can the heat -of the Earth ascend so far as to the Center of the Sun: As for the heat -of the Earth, it is certain enough, and needs no proof; but as for the -heat of the Sun, our senses will sufficiently inform us, that although -his beams are shot forth in direct lines upon the face of the Earth, -yet they have not so much force, as to pierce into a low Celler or -Vault; Wherefore it is not probable, that the Earth hath its natural -heat from the Sun, and so neither its dryness from the Air, nor its -moisture from the Sea, but these interior effects in the Earth proceed -from some other interior causes. And thus there may be great difference -between the heat, cold, moisture, and drought which is in the Elements, -and between those which are in Vegetables, Minerals, and Animals, not -onely in their General kinds, but also in their Particulars: And not -onely a difference in the aforesaid qualities of heat, cold, moisture, -and drought, but also in all other motions, as Dilations, Contractions, -Rarefactions, Densations, &c. nay, in their Mixtures and Temperaments: -As for example; the temper of a Mineral is not the temper of an Animal, -or of a Vegetable, neither is the temper of these the temper of the -exterior Elements, no more then the temper of the Elements is the -temper of them; for every Creature has a temper natural and peculiar -to it self, nay, every particular Creature, has not onely different -tempers, compositions, or mixtures, but also different productions; or -else, if there were no difference in their productions, every Creature -would be alike, when as yet there are seldom two that do exactly -resemble each other. But I desire you to understand me well, _Madam_, -when I speak of Particular heats, colds, droughts, and moistures; for -I do not believe that all Creatures are made out of the four Elements, -no more, then that the Elements are produced from other Creatures, -for the Matter of all Creatures is but one and the same; but although -the Matter is the same, nevertheless, the Tempers, compositions, -Productions, Motions, &c. of particular Creatures, may be different, -which is the cause of their different exterior figures, or shapes, as -also of their different Interiour Natures, Qualities, Properties, and -the like. And so, to conclude, there is no impossibility or absurdity -in affirming, that there may be Air, Fire, and Water, in the bowels -of the Earth proper for those Creatures, which are in her, although -not such an Elemental Air, Fire and Water, as is subject here to our -senses; but another kind of Air, Fire and Water, different from those. -But this being a subject for Learned and Ingenious men to work and -contemplate upon, better, perhaps, then I can do, I will leave it to -them, and so remain, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - - - - -X. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ mentioning in his Works, several Seeds of several -Creatures, makes me express my opinion thus in short concerning this -Subject: Several Seeds seem to me no otherwise then several Humours, or -several Elements, or several other Creatures made of one and the same -Matter, that produce one thing out of another, and the barrenness of -seeds proceeds either from the irregularity of their natural motions, -or from their unaptness or unactivity of producing. But it is to be -observed, _Madam_, that not every thing doth produce always its like, -but one and the same thing, or one and the same Creature, hath many -various and different productions; for sometimes Vegetables do produce -Animals, Animals produce Minerals, Minerals produce Elements, and -Elements again Minerals, and so forth: for proof I will bring but a -mean and common example. Do not Animals produce Stones, some in one, -and some in another part of their bodies, as some in the Heart, some in -the Stomack, some in the Head, some in the Gall, some in the Kidnies, -and some in the Bladder? I do not say, that this Generation of Stone -is made the same way as the natural generation of Animals, as, for -example, Man is born of his Parents; but I speak of the generation or -production of Creatures in general, for otherwise all Creatures would -be alike, if all generations were after one and the same manner and -way. Likewise do not Fruits, Roots, Flowers and Herbs, produce Worms? -And do not Stones produce Fire? witness the Flint. And doth not Earth -produce Metal? 'Tis true, some talk of the seed of Metals, but who with -all his diligent observations could find it out as yet? Wherefore it -is, in my opinion, not probable, that Minerals are produced by way of -seeds. Neither can I perceive that any of the Elements is produced by -seed, unless Fire, which seems, to my sense and reason, to encrease -numerously by its seed, but not any other of the Elements. And thus -productions are almost as various as Creatures, or rather parts of -Creatures, are; for we see how many productions there are in one animal -body, as the production of flesh, bones, marrow, brains, gristles, -veines, sinews, blood, and the like, and all this comes from Food, -and Food from some other Creatures, but all have their original from -the onely matter, and the various motions of Nature. And thus, in my -opinion, all things are made easily, and not by such constrained ways -as your _Author_ describes, by Gas, Blas, Ideas, and the like; for I -am confident, Nature has more various ways of producing natural things -then any Creature is able to conceive. I'le give another example of -Vegetables, I pray you but to consider, _Madam_, how many several ways -Vegetables are produced, as some by seeds, some by slips, some by -grafts, &c. The graft infuses and commixes with the whole stock and -the branches, and these do the like with the graft: As for example; -an Apple grafted in Colewort produces Apples; but those Apples will -have a taste and sent of the Colewort, which shews that several parts -of several Creatures mix, joyn, and act together; and as for seeds, -they are transchanged wholly, and every part thereof into the produced -fruit, and every part of the seed makes a several production by the -help of the co-working parts of the Earth, which is the reason that so -many seeds are produced from one single seed; But Producers, that waste -not themselves in productions, do not produce so numerously as those -that do dissolve; yet all Creatures increase more or less, according -to their supplies or assistances; for seeds will encrease and multiply -more in manured and fertile then in barren grounds; nay, if the ground -be very barren, no production at all will be; which shews, that -productions come not barely from the seed, but require of necessity -some assistance, and therefore neither Archeus, nor seminal Ideas, nor -Gas, nor Blas, would do any good in Vegetables, if the ground did not -assist them in their generations or productions, no more then a house -would be built without the assistance of labourers or workmen; for let -the materials lie never so long, surely they will never joyn together -of themselves to the artificial structure of an house. Wherefore since -there is so much variety in the production of one kind of Creatures, -nay of every particular in every kind, what needs Man to trouble -his brain for the manner and way to describe circumstantially every -particular production of every Creature by seminal or printing Ideas, -or any other far-fetched termes, since it is impossible to be done? -And as for those Creatures whose producers are of two different sorts, -as a Mule bred of an Asse and a Horse, and another Creature bred of a -Cony and a Dormouse; all which your _Author_ thinks[1] do take more -after their mother then their father, more after the breeder then the -begetter; I will not eagerly affirm the contrary, although it seems -to me more probable: But this I can say, that I have observed by -experience, that Faunes and Foales have taken more after the Male then -after the Female; for amongst many several colour'd Deer, I have seen -but one milk white Doe; and she never brought forth a white Faun, when -as I have seen a white Buck beget white and speckled Faunes of black -and several coloured Does. Also in Foals I have observed, that they -have taken more after the Male then after the Female, both in shape and -colour. And thus I express no more, but what I have observed my self, -others may find out more examples; these are sufficient for me; so I -leave them, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] In the _Ch._ the Position is demonstrated; and in the _ch._ called -the Authority of the _Duumvirate_. - - - - -XI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -You will cease to wonder, that I am not altogether capable to -understand your _Authors_ opinions in Natural Philosophy, when you do -but consider, that his expressions are for the most part so obscure, -mystical and intricate, as may puzzle any brain that has not the like -Genius, or the same Conceptions with your _Author_; wherefore I am -forced oftentimes to express my ignorance rather, then to declare to -you the true sense of his opinions. In the number of these is his -discourse of a _Middle Life_,[1] _viz._ That _the qualities of a -middle life do remain in things that are transchanged:_ For I cannot -understand what he means by a middle life; whether it be a life that -is between the strongest and weakest, or whether he means a life -between the time of production and dissolution, or between the time of -conception and production; or whether he means a life that is between -two sorts of substances, as more then an Animal, and not so high and -excellent as an Angel; or whether he means a middle life for places, -as neither in Heaven nor in Hell, but in Purgatory, or neither in, nor -out of the world, or any other kind of life: Wherefore I'le leave this -Hermaphroditical or neutral life to better understandings then mine. -Likewise I must confess my disability of conceiving the overshadowing -of his _Archeus_, and _how it brings this middle life into its first -life._ For concerning Generation, I know of none that is performed by -overshadowing, except it be the miraculous conception of the blessed -Virgin, as Holy Writ informs us; and I hope your _Author_ will not -compare his _Archeus_ to the Holy Spirit; But how a middle life may -be brought again into the first life, is altogether unconceivable to -me: And so is that, when he says, that the _first life of the Fruit -is the last of the seed_; for I cannot imagine, that the seed dies -in the fruit; but, in my opinion, it lives rather in the fruit, and -is numerously increased, as appears by the production of seed from -the fruit. But the most difficult of all to be understood, are his -_Ideas_,[2] which he makes _certain seminal Images, Formal Lights, -and operative means, whereby the soul moves and governs the body_; -whose number and variety is so great, as it transcends my capacity, -there being _Ideas_ of Inclination, of Affection, of Consideration or -Judgment, of Passion, and these either mild, or violent, besides a -great number of Archeal and forreign Ideas. Truly, _Madam_, I cannot -admire enough the powerful effects of these Ideas, they themselves -being no substances or material Creatures; For how that can pierce, -seal, and print a figure, which hath neither substance nor matter, my -reason is not able to comprehend, since there can be no figure without -matter or substance, they being inseparably united together, so, that -where figure is, there is also substance, and where substance is, there -is also figure; neither can any figure be made without a substance. -You may say, Ideas, though they are not material or corporeal beings -themselves, yet they may put on figures, and take bodies when they -please: I answer, That then they can do more then Immaterial Spirits; -for the Learned say, That Immaterial Spirits are Immaterial substances; -but your _Author_ says, that Ideas are no substances; and I think it -would be easier for a substance to take a body, then for that which is -no substance: But your _Author_ might have placed his Ideas as well -amongst the number of Immaterial Spirits, to wit, amongst Angels and -Devils, and then we should not have need to seek far for the causes of -the different natures and dispositions of Mankind, but we might say, -that Ill-natured men proceeded from Evil, and Good-natured men from -Good Spirits or Ideas. However, _Madam_, I do not deny Ideas, Images, -or Conceptions of things, but I deny them onely to be such powerful -beings and Principal efficient Causes of Natural effects; especially -they being to your _Author_ neither bodies nor substances themselves. -And as for the _Figure of a Cherry_, which your _Author_ makes so -frequent a repetition of, made by a longing Woman on her Child; I dare -say that there have been millions of Women, which have longed for some -or other thing, and have not been satisfied with their desires, and -yet their Children have never had on their bodies the prints or marks -of those things they longed for: but because some such figures are -sometimes made by the irregular motions of animate Matter, would this -be a sufficient proof, that all Conceptions, Ideas and Images have -the like effects, after the same manner, by piercing or penetrating -each other, and sealing or printing such or such a figure upon the -body of the Child? Lastly, I cannot but smile when I read that your -_Author_ makes a _Disease proceed from a non-being to a substantial -being_: Which if so, then a disease, according to his opinion, is -made as the World was, that is, out of Nothing; but surely luxurious -persons find it otherwise, who eat and drink more then their natural -digestive motions can dispose; for those that have infirm bodies, -caused by the irregular motions of animate matter, find that a disease -proceeds from more then a _non_-being. But, _Madam_, I have neither -such an _Archeus_, which can produce, in my mind, an Idea of Consent -or approbation of these your _Authors_ opinions, nor such a light that -is able to produce a beam of Patience to tarry any longer upon the -examination of them; Wherefore I beg your leave to cut off my discourse -here, and onely to subscribe my self, as really I am, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ called _Magnum oporter_. - -[2] Of the Ideas of Diseases. - - - - -XII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I cannot well apprehend your _Authors_ meaning, when he says,[1] That -_Nature doth rise from its fall_; for if he understands Nature in -general, I cannot imagine how she should fall and rise; for though Man -did fall, yet Nature never did, nor cannot fall, being Infinite: And -therefore in another place,[2] when he saith, that _Nature first being -a beautiful Virgin, was defiled by sin; not by her own, but by Mans -sin, for whose use she was created_; I think it too great a presumption -and arrogancy to say that Infinite Nature was not onely defiled by the -sin of Man, but also to make Man the chief over all Nature, and to -believe Nature was onely made for his sake; when as he is but a small -finite part of Infinite Nature, and almost Nothing in comparison to -it. But I suppose your _Author_ doth not understand Nature in general, -but onely the nature of some Particulars, when he speaks of the fall -and rise of Nature; however, this fall and rise of the nature of -Particulars, is nothing but a change of their natural motions. And so -likewise, I suppose, he understands the nature of Particulars, when -he says in another place,[3] That Nature in diseases is standing, -sitting, and lying; for surely Nature in general has more several -postures then sitting, standing, or lying: As also when he speaks[4] of -the _Vertues and Properties that stick fast in the bosom of Nature_, -which I conceive to be a Metaphorical expression; although I think it -best to avoid Metaphorical, similizing, and improper expressions in -Natural Philosophy, as much as one can; for they do rather obscure -then explain the truth of Nature; nay, your _Author_ himself is of -this opinion,[5] and yet he doth nothing more frequent then bring in -Metaphors and similitudes. But to speak properly, there is not any -thing that sticks fast in the bosom of Nature, for Nature is in a -perpetual motion: Neither can she be _heightened or diminished by Art_; -for Nature will be Nature in despite of her Hand-maid. And as for your -_Authors_ opinion, That _there are no Contraries in Nature_, I am quite -of a contrary mind, that there is a Perpetual war and discord amongst -the parts of Nature, although not in the nature and substance of -Infinite Matter, which is of a simple kind, and knows no contraries in -it self, but lives in Peace, when as the several actions are opposing -and crossing each other; and truly, I do not believe, that there is any -part or Creature of Nature, that hath not met with opposers, let it be -never so small or great. But as War is made by the division of Natures -parts, and variety of natural actions, so Peace is caused by the unity -and simplicity of the nature and essence of onely Matter, which Nature -is peaceable, being always one and the same, and having nothing in it -self to be crossed or opposed by; when as the actions of Nature, or -natural Matter, are continually driving against each other, as being -various and different. Again your _Author_ says, That _a Specifical -being cannot be altered but by Fire, and that Fire is the Death of -other Creatures: also that Alchymy, as it brings many things to a -degree of greater efficacy, and stirs up a new being, so on the other -hand again, it by a privy filching doth enfeeble many things._ I, for -my part, wonder, that Fire, being as your _Author_ says, no substantial -body, but substanceless in its nature, should work such effects; but -however, I believe there are many alterations without Fire, and many -things which cannot be altered by Fire. What your _Authors_ meaning -is of a _new being_, I know not; for, to my reason, there neither is; -nor can be made any new being in Nature, except we do call the change -of motions and figures a new Creation; but then an old suit turned or -dressed up may be called new too. Neither can I conceive his _Filching -or Stealing_: For Nature has or keeps nothing within her self, but -what is her own; and surely she cannot steal from her self; nor can -Art steal from Nature; she may trouble Nature, or rather make variety -in Nature, but not take any thing from her, for Art is the insnarled -motions of Nature: But your _Author_, being a Chymist, is much for -the Art of Fire, although it is impossible for Art to work as Nature -doth; for Art makes of natural Creatures artificial Monsters, and doth -oftner obscure and disturb Natures ordinary actions, then prove any -Truth in Nature. But Nature loving variety doth rather smile at Arts -follies, then that she should be angry with her curiosity: like as -for example, a Poet will smile in expressing the part or action of a -Fool. Wherefore Pure natural Philosophers, shall by natural sense and -reason, trace Natures ways, and observe her actions, more readily then -Chymists can do by Fire and Furnaces; for Fire and Furnaces do often -delude the Reason, blind the Understanding, and make the Judgment -stagger. Nevertheless, your _Author_ is so taken with Fire, that from -thence he imagines a Formal Light, which he believes to be the Tip-top -of Life; but certainly, he had, in my opinion, not so much light as to -observe, that all sorts of light are but Creatures, and not Creators; -for he judges of several Parts of Matter, as if they were several kinds -of Matter, which causes him often to err, although he conceits himself -without any Error. In which conceit I leave him, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Nature is ignorant of Contraries. - -[2] In the Hist. of _Tartar_. - -[3] _Ch._ Disease is an unknown guest. - -[4] Nature is ignorant of Contraries. - -[5] _Ch._ The Image of the Ferment begets the Mass with Child. - - - - -XIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -The Art of Fire, as I perceive, is in greater esteem and respect -with your _Author_, then Nature her self: For he says,[1] That _some -things can be done by Art, which Nature cannot do_; nay he calls[2] -_Art_ The _Mistress of Nature, and subjects whole Nature unto Chymical -speculation_; For, _nothing_, says he,[3] _doth more fully bring a Man, -that is greedy of knowing, to the knowledg of all things knowable, -then the Fire; for the root or radical knowledg of natural things -consists in the Fire:_[4] _It pierces the secrets of Nature, and -causes a further searching out in Nature, then all other Sciences, -being put together; and pierces even into the utmost depths of real -truth:_[5] _It creates things which never were before._ These, and -many more the like expressions, he has in the praise of Chymistry. And -truly, _Madam_, I cannot blame your _Author_, for commending this Art, -because it was his own profession, and no man will be so unwise as to -dispraise his own Art which he professes; but whether those praises -and commendations do not exceed truth, and express more then the Art -of Fire can perform, I will let those judg, that have more knowledg -therein then I: But this I may say, That what Art or Science soever -is in Nature, let it be the chief of all, yet it can never be call'd -the Mistress of Nature, nor be said to perform more then Nature doth, -except it be by a divine and supernatural Power; much less to create -things which never were before, for this is an action which onely -belongs to God: The truth is, Art is but a Particular effect of Nature, -and as it were, Nature's Mimick or Fool, in whose playing actions she -sometimes takes delight; nay, your _Author_ confesses it himself, when -he calls[6] the _Art_ of _Chymistry, Nature's emulating Ape_, and _her -Chamber-maid_, and yet he says, _she is now and then the Mistress of -Nature_; which in my opinion doth not agree: for I cannot conceive how -it is possible to be a Chambermaid, and yet to be the Mistress too; -I suppose your _Author_ believes, they justle sometimes each other -out, or take by turns one anothers place. But whatever his opinion -be, I am sure, that the Art of Fire cannot create and produce so, as -Nature doth, nor dissolve substances so, as she doth, nor transform and -transchange, as she doth, nor do any effect like Nature: And therefore -I cannot so much admire this Art as others do, for it appears to me, -rather to be a troubler, then an assistant to Nature, producing more -Monsters then perfect Creatures; nay, it rather doth shut the Gates -of Truth, then unlock the Gates of Nature: For how can Art inform us -of Nature, when as it is but an effect of Nature? You may say, The -cause cannot be better known then by its effect; for the knowledg of -the effect, leads us to the knowledg of the cause. I answer, 'Tis -true: but you will consider, that Nature is an Infinite cause, and has -Infinite effects; and if you knew all the Infinite effects in nature, -then perhaps you might come to some knowledg of the cause; but to know -nature by one single effect, as art is, is impossible; nay, no man -knows this particular effect as yet perfectly; For who is he, that has -studied the art of fire so, as to produce all that this art may be able -to afford? witness the Philosophers-stone. Besides, how is it possible -to find out the onely cause by so numerous variations of the effects? -Wherefore it is more easie, in my opinion, to know the various effects -in Nature by studying the Prime cause, then by the uncertain study of -the inconstant effects to arrive to the true knowledg of the prime -cause; truly it is much easier to walk in a Labyrinth without a Guide, -then to gain a certain knowledg in any one art or natural effect, -without Nature her self be the guide, for Nature is the onely Mistress -and cause of all, which, as she has made all other effects, so she -has also made arts for varieties sake; but most men study Chymistry -more for imployment, then for profit; not but that I believe, there -may be some excellent Medicines found out and made by that art, but -the expence and labour is more then the benefit; neither are all those -Medicines sure and certain, nor in all diseases safe; neither can -this art produce so many medicines as there are several diseases in -Nature, and for the Universal Medicine, and the Philosophers-stone or -Elixir, which Chymists brag of so much; it consists rather in hope -and expectation, then in assurance; for could Chymists find it out, -they would not be so poor, as most commonly they are, but richer then -_Solomon_ was, or any Prince in the World, and might have done many -famous acts with the supply of their vast Golden Treasures, to the -eternal and immortal fame of their Art; nay, Gold being the Idol of -this world, they would be worshipped as well for the sake of Gold, as -for their splendorous Art; but how many have endeavored and laboured -in vain and without any effect? _Gold is easier to be made, then to be -destroyed_, says your _Author,_[7] but I believe one is as difficult or -impossible, nay more, then the other; for there is more probability of -dissolving or destroying a natural effect by Art, then of generating -or producing one; for Art cannot go beyond her sphere of activity, she -can but produce an artificial effect, and Gold is a natural Creature; -neither were it Justice, that a particular creature of Nature should -have as much power to act or work as Nature her self; but because -neither Reason, nor Art has found out as yet such a powerful opposite -to Gold, as can alter its nature; men therefore conclude that it -cannot be done. Your _Author_ relates[8] to have seen the Gold-making -stone, which he says, was of colour such, as Saffron is in its powder, -but weighty and shining like unto powder'd Glass; one fourth part of -one grain thereof, (a grain he reckons the six hundredth part of one -ounce) being projected upon eight ounces of Quicksilver made hot in a -Crucible, and straight way there were found eight ounces, and a little -less then eleven grains of the purest Gold; therefore one onely grain -of that powder had transchanged 19186 parts of Quicksilver, equal to -it self, into the best Gold. Truly, _Madam_, I wish with all my heart, -the poor Royalists had had some quantity of that powder; and I assure -you, that if it were so, I my self would turn a Chymist to gain so much -as to repair my Noble Husbands losses, that his noble family might -flourish the better. But leaving Gold, since it is but a vain wish, -I do verily believe, that some of the Chymical medicines do, in some -desperate cases, many times produce more powerful and sudden effects -then the medicines of Galenists, and therefore I do not absolutely -condemn the art of Fire, as if I were an enemy to it; but I am of an -opinion, that my Opinions in _Philosophy_, if well understood, will -rather give a light to that art, then obscure its worth; for if -Chymists did but study well the corporeal motions or actions of Natures -substantial body; they would, by their observations, understand Nature -better, then they do by the observation of the actions of their Art; -and out of this consideration and respect, I should almost have an -ambition, to become an Artist in Chymistry, were I not too lazie and -tender for that imployment; but should I quit the one, and venture -the other, I am so vain as to perswade my self, I might perform -things worthy my labour upon the ground of my own Philosophy, which -is substantial Life, Sense, and Reason; for I would not study Salt, -Sulphur, and Mercury, but the Natural motions of every Creature, and -observe the variety of Natures actions. But, perchance, you will smile -at my vain conceit, and, it may be, I my self, should repent of my -pains unsuccessfully bestowed, my time vainly spent, my health rashly -endangered, and my Noble Lords Estate unprofitably wasted, in fruitless -tryals and experiments; Wherefore you may be sure, that I will consider -well before I act; for I would not lose Health, Wealth, and Fame, -and do no more then others have done, which truly is not much, their -effects being of less weight then their words. But in the mean time, -my study shall be bent to your service, and how to express my self -worthily, - -MADAM, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble and faithful Servant._ - -[1] Ch. _called_, The Essay of a Meteor. - -[2] _Ch._ Heat doth not digest efficiently, but excitingly. - -[3] _Ch._ The ignorant natural Philosophy of _Aristotle_ and _Galen_. - -[4] _Ch._ A modern Pharmacopoly and dispensatory. - -[5] _Ch._ Of the Power of Medicines. - -[6] _Ch._ Heat doth not digest efficiently, but excitingly. - -[7] _Ch._ The first Principles of the Chymists, not the Essences of the -same are of the Army of Diseases. - -[8] In the _Ch._ Of Life Eternal, and in the _Ch._ Of the Tree of Life. - - - - -XIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I have read your _Authors_ discourse concerning _Sensation_,[1] but it -was as difficult to me to understand it, ash was tedious to read it; -Truly, all the business, might have been easily declared in a short -Chapter, and with more clearness and perspicuity: For Sensation, is -nothing else but the action of sense proceeding from the corporeal -sensitive motions, which are in all Creatures or parts of Nature, and -so all have sense and sensation, although not alike after one and the -same manner, but some more, some less, each according to the nature and -propriety of its figure. But your _Author_ speaks of _Motion without -Sense, and Sense without Motion_, which is a meer impossibility; for -there is not, nor cannot be any Motion in Nature without Sense, nor -any Sense without Motion; there being no Creature without self-motion, -although not always perceptible by us, or our external senses; for all -motion is not exteriously local, and visible. Wherefore, not any part -of Nature, according to my opinion, wants Sense and Reason, Life and -Knowledg; but not such a substanceless Life as your _Author_ describes, -but a substantial, that is a corporeal Life. Neither is Light the -principle of Motion, but Motion, is the principle of Light: Neither is -Heat the principle of Motion, but its effect as well as Cold is; for -I cannot perceive that Heat should be more active then Cold. Neither -is there any such thing as Unsensibleness in Nature, except it be in -respect of some particular Sensation in some particular Figure: As -for example, when an Animal dies, or its Figure is dissolved from the -Figure of an Animal; we may say it hath not animal sense or motion, -but we cannot say, it hath no sense or motion at all; for as long as -Matter is in Nature, Sense and Motion will be; so that it is absurd and -impossible to believe, or at least to think, that Matter, as a body, -can be totally deprived of Life, Sense, and Motion, or that Life can -perish and be corrupted, be it the smallest part of Matter conceivable, -and the same turned or changed into millions of Figures; for the -Life and Soul of Nature is self-moving Matter, which by Gods Power, -and leave, is the onely Framer and Maker, as also the Dissolver and -Transformer of all Creatures in Nature, making as well Light, Heat, and -Cold, Gas, Blas, and Ferments, as all other natural Creatures beside, -as also Passions, Appetites, Digestions, Nourishments, Inclination, -Aversion, Sickness and Health; nay, all Particular Ideas, Thoughts, -Fancies, Conceptions, Arts, Sciences, &c. In brief, it makes all that -is to be made in Nature. But many great Philosophers conceive Nature to -be fuller of Intricacy, Difficulty, and Obscurity, then she is, puzling -themselves about her ordinary actions, which yet are easie and free, -and making their arguments hard, constrained, and mystical, many of -them containing neither sense nor reason; when as, in my opinion, there -is nothing else to be studied in Nature, but her substance and her -actions. But I will leave them to their own Fancies and Humors, and say -no more, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - -[1] Of the Disease of the Stone. _Ch._ 9. - - - - -XV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning Sympathy and Antipathy, and attractive or magnetick -Inclinations, which some do ascribe to the influence of the Stars, -others to an unknown Spirit as the Mover, others to the Instinct of -Nature, hidden Proprieties, and certain formal Vertues; but your -_Author_,[1] doth attribute to _directing Ideas, begotten by their -Mother Charity, or a desire of Good Will_, and calls it[2] a _Gift -naturally inherent in the Archeusses of either part_: If you please -to have my opinion thereof, I think they are nothing else but plain -ordinary Passions and Appetites. As for example: I take Sympathy, as -also Magnetisme or attractive Power, to be such agreeable Motions -in one part or Creature, as do cause a Fancy, love and desire to -some other part or Creature; and Antipathy, when these Motions are -disagreeable, and produce contrary effects, as dislike, hate and -aversion to some part or Creature. And as there are many sorts of such -motions, so there are many sorts of Sympathyes and Antipathyes, or -Attractions and Aversions, made several manners or ways; For in some -subjects, Sympathy requires a certain distance; as for example, in -Iron and the Loadstone; for if the Iron be too far off, the Loadstone -cannot exercise its power, when as in other subjects, there is no need -of any such certain distance, as betwixt the Needle and the North-pole, -as also the Weapon-salve; for the Needle will turn it self towards -the North, whether it be near or far off from the North-pole; and -so, be the Weapon which inflicted the wound, never so far from the -wounded Person, as they say, yet it will nevertheless do its effect: -But yet there must withal be some conjunction with the blood; for as -your _Author_ mentions,[3] the Weapon shall be in vain anointed with -the Unguent, unless it be made bloody, and the same blood be first -dried on the same Weapon. Likewise the sounding of two eights when one -is touched, must be done within a certain distance: the same may be -said of all Infectious and catching Diseases amongst Animals, where -the Infection, be it the Infected Air, or a Poysonous Vapour, or any -thing else, must needs touch the body, and enter either through the -Mouth, or Nostrils, or Ears, or Pores of the body; for though the -like Antipathies of Infectious Diseases, as of the Plague, may be in -several places far distant and remote from each other at one and the -same time, yet they cannot infect particular Creatures, or Animals, -without coming near, or without the sense of Touch: For example; the -Plague may be in the _East Indies_, and in this Kingdom, at one and -the same time, and yet be strangers to each other; for although all -Men are of Mankind, yet all have not Sympathy or Antipathy to each -other; the like of several Plagues, although they be of the same kind -of disease, yet, being in several places at one time, they may not -be a kin to each other, nor one be produced by the other, except -the Plague be brought over out of an infected Country, into a sound -Country, by some means or other. And thus some Sympathy and Antipathy -is made by a close conjunction, or corporeal uniting of parts, but not -all; neither is it required, that all Sympathy and Antipathy must be -mutual, or equally in both Parties, so that that part or party, which -has a Sympathetical affection or inclination to the other, must needs -receive the like sympathetical affection from that part again; for one -man may have a sympathetical affection to another man, when as this -man hath an antipathetical aversion to him; and the same may be, for -ought we know, betwixt Iron and the Loadstone, as also betwixt the -Needle and the North; for the Needle may have a sympathy towards the -North, but not again the North towards the Needle; and so may the Iron -have towards the Loadstone, but not again the Loadstone towards the -Iron: Neither is Sympathy or Antipathy made by the issuing out of any -invisible rayes, for then the rays betwixt the North and the Needle -would have a great way to reach: But a sympathetical inclination in -a Man towards another, is made either by sight, or hearing; either -present, or absent: the like of infectious Diseases. I grant, that -if both Parties do mutually affect each other, and their motions be -equally agreeable; then the sympathy is the stronger, and will last -the longer, and then there is a Union, Likeness, or Conformableness, -of their Actions, Appetites, and Passions; For this kind of Sympathy -works no other effects, but a conforming of the actions of one party, -to the actions of the other, as by way of Imitation, proceeding from -an internal sympathetical love and desire to please; for Sympathy -doth not produce an effect really different from it self, or else the -sympathy betwixt Iron and the Loadstone would produce a third Creature -different from themselves, and so it would do in all other Creatures. -But as I mentioned above, there are many sorts of attractions in -Nature, and many several and various attractions onely in one sort of -Creatures, nay, so many in one particular as not to be numbred; for -there are many Desires, Passions, and Appetites, which draw or intice a -man to something or other, as for example, to Beauty, Novelty, Luxury, -Covetousness, and all kinds of Vertues and Vices; and there are many -particular objects in every one of these, as for example, in Novelty. -For there are so many several desires to Novelty, as there are Senses, -and so many Novelties that satisfie those desires, as a Novelty to the -Ear, a Novelty to the Sight, to Touch, Taste, and Smell; besides in -every one of these, there are many several objects; To mention onely -one example, for the novelty of Sight; I have seen an Ape, drest like a -Cavalier, and riding on Horse-back with his sword by his side, draw a -far greater multitude of People after him, then a Loadstone of the same -bigness of the Ape would have drawn Iron; and as the Ape turn'd, so did -the People, just like as the Needle turns to the North; and this is -but one object in one kind of attraction, _viz._ Novelty: but there be -Millions of objects besides. In like manner good cheer draws abundance -of People, as is evident, and needs no Demonstration. Wherefore, as I -said in the beginning, Sympathy is nothing else but natural Passions -and Appetites, as Love, Desire, Fancy, Hunger, Thirst, &c. and its -effects are Concord, Unity, Nourishment, and the like: But Antipathy is -Dislike, Hate, Fear, Anger, Revenge, Aversion, Jealousie, &c. and its -effects are Discord, Division, and the like. And such an Antipathy is -between a Wolf and a Sheep, a Hound and a Hare, a Hawk and a Partridg, -&c. For this Antipathy is nothing else but fear in the Sheep to run -away from the Wolf, in the Hare to run from the Hound, and in the -Partridg to flie from the Hawk; for Life has an Antipathy to that -which is named Death; and the Wolf's stomack hath a sympathy to food, -which causes him to draw neer, or run after those Creatures he has a -mind to feed on. But you will say, some Creatures will fight, and kill -each other, not for Food, but onely out of an Antipathetical nature. I -answer: When as Creatures fight, and endeavour to destroy each other, -if it be not out of necessity, as to preserve and defend themselves -from hurt or danger, then it is out of revenge, or anger, or ambition, -or jealousie, or custom of quarrelling, or breeding. As for example: -Cocks of the Game, that are bred to fight with each other, and many -other Creatures, as Bucks, Staggs, and the like, as also Birds, will -fight as well as Men, and seek to destroy each other through jealousie; -when as, had they no Females amongst them, they would perhaps live -quiet enough, rather as sympathetical Friends, then antipathetical -Foes; and all such Quarrels proceed from a sympathy to their own -interest. But you may ask me, what the reason is, that some Creatures, -as for example, Mankind, some of them, will not onely like one sort -of meat better then another of equal goodness and nourishment, but -will like and prefer sometimes a worse sort of meat before the best, -to wit, such as hath neither a good taste nor nourishment? I answer: -This is nothing else, but a particular, and most commonly an inconstant -Appetite; for after much eating of that they like best, especially if -they get a surfeit, their appetite is chang'd to aversion; for then all -their feeding motions and parts have as much, if not more antipathy -to those meats, as before they had a sympathy to them. Again, you may -ask me the reason, why a Man seeing two persons together, which are -strangers to him, doth affect one better then the other; nay, if one of -these Persons be deformed or ill-favoured, and the other well-shaped -and handsom; yet it may chance, that the deformed Person shall be more -acceptable in the affections and eyes of the beholder, then he that -is handsom? I answer: There is no Creature so deformed, but hath some -agreeable and attractive parts, unless it be a Monster, which is never -loved, but for its rarity and novelty, and Nature is many times pleased -with changes, taking delight in variety: and the proof that such a -sympathetical affection proceeds from some agreeableness of Parts, -is, that if those persons were vail'd, there would not proceed such a -partial choice or judgment from any to them. You may ask me further, -whether Passion and Appetite are also the cause of the sympathy which -is in the Loadstone towards Iron, and in the Needle towards the North? -I answer, Yes: for it is either for nourishment, or refreshment, or -love and desire of association, or the like, that the Loadstone draws -Iron, and the Needle turns towards the North. The difference onely -betwixt the sympathy in the Needle towards the North, and betwixt the -sympathy in the Loadstone towards the Iron is, that the Needle doth -always turn towards the North, but the Loadstone doth not always draw -Iron: The reason is, because the sympathy of the Needle towards the -North requires no certain distance, as I said in the beginning; and the -North-pole continuing constantly in the same place, the Needle knows -whither to turn; when as the sympathy between the Loadstone and Iron -requires a certain distance, and when the Loadstone is not within this -compass or distance, it cannot perform its effect, to wit, to draw the -Iron, but the effect ceases, although the cause remains in vigour. The -same may be said of the Flower that turns towards the Sun; for though -the Sun be out of sight, yet the Flower watches for the return of the -Sun, from which it receives benefit: Like as faithful Servants watch -and wait for their Master, or hungry Beggers at a Rich man's door for -relief; and so doth the aforesaid Flower; nay, not the Flower onely, -but any thing that has freedom and liberty of motion, will turn towards -those Places or Creatures whence it expects relief. Concerning ravenous -Beasts that feed on dead Carcasses, they, having more eager appetites -then food, make long flights into far distant Countries to seek food to -live on; but surely, I think, if they had food enough at home, although -not dead Carcasses, they would not make such great Journies; or if a -battel were fought, and many slain, and they upon their journey should -meet with sufficient food, they would hardly travel further before they -had devoured that food first: But many Birds travel for the temper of -the Air, as well as for food, witness Woodcocks, Cranes, Swallows, -Fieldfares, and the like; some for cold, some for hot, and some for -temperate Air. And as for such Diseases as are produced by conceit -and at distance, the cause is, the fearfulness of the Patient, which -produces Irregularities in the Mind, and these occasion Irregularities -in the Body, which produce such a disease, as the Mind did fearfully -apprehend; when as without that Passion and Irregularity, the Patient -would, perhaps, not fall sick of that disease, But to draw towards an -end, I'le answer briefly to your _Authors_ alledged example[4] which -he gives of Wine, that it is troubled while the Vine flowreth: The -reason, in my opinion, may perhaps be, that the Wine being the effect -of the Vine, and proceeding from its stock as the producer, has not so -quite alter'd Nature, as not to be sensible at all of the alteration -of the Vine; For many effects do retain the proprieties of their -causes; for example, many Children are generated, which have the same -proprieties of their Parents, who do often propagate some or other -vertuous or vicious qualities with their off-spring; And this is rather -a proof that there are sensitive and rational motions, and sensitive -and rational knowledge in all Creatures, and so in Wine, according to -the nature or propriety of its Figure; for without motion, sense and -reason, no effect could be; nor no sympathy or antipathy. But it is -to be observed, that many do mistake the true Causes, and ascribe an -effect to some cause, which is no more the cause of that same effect, -then a particular Creature is the cause of Nature; and so they are apt -to take the Fiddle for the hot Bricks, as if the Fiddle did make the -Ass dance, when as it was the hot Bricks that did it; for several -effects may proceed from one cause, and one effect from several causes; -and so in the aforesaid example, the Wine may perhaps be disturbed by -the alteration of the weather at the same time of the flowring of the -Vines; and so may Animals, as well as Vegetables, and other Creatures, -alter alike at one and the same point of time, and yet none be the -cause of each others alteration. And thus, to shut up my discourse, I -repeat again, that sympathy and antipathy are nothing else but ordinary -Passions and Appetites amongst several Creatures, which Passions -are made by the rational animate Matter, and the Appetites by the -sensitive, both giving such or such motions, to such or such Creatures; -for cross motions in Appetites and passions make Antipathy, and -agreeable motions in Appetites and Passions make Sympathy, although the -Creatures be different, wherein these motions, Passions and Appetites -are made; and as without an object a Pattern cannot be, so without -inherent or natural Passions and Appetites there can be no Sympathy or -Antipathy: And there being also such Sympathy betwixt your Ladiship and -me, I think my self the happiest Creature for it; and shall make it my -whole study to imitate your Ladiship, and conform all my actions to the -rule and pattern of yours, as becomes, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_faithful Friend, and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of Sympathetical Mediums. - -[2] In the Plague-Grave. - -[3] In the Magnetick care of Wounds. - -[4] _Ch._ Of the Magnetick Power. - - - - -XVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -My opinion of Witches and Witchcraft, (of whose Power and strange -effects your _Author_ is pleased to relate many stories) in brief, -is this; My Sense and Reason doth inform me, that there is Natural -Witchcraft, as I may call it, which is Sympathy, Antipathy, Magnetisme, -and the like, which are made by the sensitive and rational motions -between several Creatures, as by Imagination, Fancy, Love, Aversion, -and many the like; but these Motions, being sometimes unusual and -strange to us, we not knowing their causes, (For what Creature knows -all motions in Nature, and their ways?) do stand amazed at their -working power; and by reason we cannot assign any Natural cause for -them, are apt to ascribe their effects to the Devil; but that there -should be any such devillish Witchcraft, which is made by a Covenant -and Agreement with the Devil, by whose power Men do enchaunt or bewitch -other Creatures, I cannot readily believe. Certainly, I dare say, -that many a good, old honest woman hath been condemned innocently, -and suffered death wrongfully, by the sentence of some foolish and -cruel Judges, meerly upon this suspition of Witchcraft, when as really -there hath been no such thing; for many things are done by slights -or juggling Arts, wherein neither the Devil nor Witches are Actors. -And thus an Englishman whose name was _Banks_, was like to be burnt -beyond the Seas for a Witch, as I have been inform'd, onely for making -a Horse shew tricks by Art; There have been also several others; as -one that could vomit up several kinds of Liquors and other things: -and another who did make a Drum beat of it self. But all these were -nothing but slights and jugling tricks; as also the talking and walking -Bell; and the Brazen-Head which spake these words, _Time was, Time -is_, and _Time is past_, and so fell down; Which may easily have been -performed by speaking through a Pipe conveighed into the said head: -But such and the like trifles will amaze many grave and wise men, when -they do not know the manner or way how they are done, so as they are -apt to judg them to be effected by Witchcraft or Combination with the -Devil. But, as I said before, I believe there is Natural Magick; which -is, that the sensitive and rational Matter oft moves such a way, as -is unknown to us; and in the number of these is also the bleeding of -a murdered body at the presence of the Murderer, which your _Author,_ -mentions;[1] for the corporeal motions in the murthered body may move -so, as to work such effects, which are more then ordinary; for the -animal Figure, being not so quickly dissolved, the animal motions are -not so soon altered, (for the dissolving of the Figure is nothing else -but an alteration of its Motions;) and this dissolution is not done in -an instant of time, but by degrees: But yet I must confess, it is not a -common action in Nature, for Nature hath both common, and singular or -particular actions: As for example, Madness, natural Folly, and many -the like, are but in some particular persons; for if those actions were -general, and common, then all, or most men would be either mad, or -fools, but, though there are too many already, yet all men are not so; -and so some murthered bodies may bleed or express some alterations at -the presence of the Murtherer, but I do not believe, that all do so; -for surely in many, not any alteration will be perceived, and others -will have the same alterations without the presence of the Murtherer. -And thus you see, _Madam_, that this is done naturally, without the -help of the Devil; nay, your _Author_ doth himself confess it to be -so; for, says he, _The act of the Witch is plainly Natural; onely the -stirring up of the vertue or power in the Witch comes from Satan._ -But I cannot understand what your _Author_ means, by the departing of -spiritual rays from the Witch into Man, or any other animal, which she -intends to kill or hurt; nor how Spirits wander about in the Air, and -have their mansions there; for men may talk as well of impossibilities, -as of such things which are not composed of Natural Matter: If man were -an Incorporeal Spirit himself, he might, perhaps, sooner conceive the -essence of a Spirit, as being of the same Nature; but as long as he is -material, and composed of Natural Matter, he might as well pretend to -know the Essence of God, as of an Incorporeal Spirit. Truly, I must -confess, I have had some fancies oftentimes of such pure and subtil -substances, purer and subtiler then the Sky or Æthereal substance is, -whereof I have spoken in my Poetical Works; but these substances, which -I conceived within my fancy, were material, and had bodies, though -never so small and subtil; for I was never able to conceive a substance -abstracted from all Matter, for even Fancy it self is material, and -all Thoughts and Conceptions are made by the rational Matter, and -so are those which Philosophers call Animal Spirits, but a material -Fancy cannot produce immaterial effects, that is, Ideas of Incorporeal -Spirits: And this was the cause that in the first impression of my -_Philosophical Opinions_, I named the sensitive and rational Matter, -sensitive and rational Spirits, because of its subtilty, activity -and agility; not that I thought them to be immaterial, but material -Spirits: but since Spirits are commonly taken to be immaterial, and -Spirit and Body are counted opposite to one another, to prevent -a misapprehension in the thoughts of my Readers, as if I meant -Incorporeal Spirits, I altered this expression in the last Edition, and -call'd it onely sensitive and rational Matter, or, which is all one, -sensitive and rational corporeal motions. You will say, perhaps, That -the divine Soul in Man is a Spirit: but I desire you to call to mind -what I oftentimes have told you, to wit, that when I speak of the Soul -of Man, I mean onely the Natural, not the Divine Soul; which as she is -supernatural, so she acts also supernaturally; but all the effects of -the natural Soul, of which I discourse, are natural, and not divine or -supernatural. But to return to Magnetisme; I am absolutely of opinion, -that it is naturally effected by natural means, without the concurrence -of Immaterial Spirits either good or bad, meerly by natural corporeal -sensitive and rational motions; and, for the most part, there must be a -due approach between the Agent and the Patient, or otherwise the effect -will hardly follow, as you may see by the Loadstone and Iron; Neither -is the influence of the Stars performed beyond a certain distance, -that is, such a distance as is beyond sight or their natural power to -work; for if their light comes to our Eyes, I know no reason against -it, but their effects may come to our bodies. And as for infectious -Diseases, they come by a corporeal imitation, as by touch, either of -the infected air, drawn in by breath, or entring through the pores -of the Body, or of some things brought from infected places, or else -by hearing; but diseases, caused by Conceit, have their beginning, -as all alterations have, from the sensitive and rational Motions, -which do not onely make the fear and conceit, but also the disease; -for as a fright will sometimes cure diseases, so it will sometimes -cause diseases; but as I said, both fright, cure, and the disease, are -made by the rational and sensitive corporeal motions within the body, -and not by Supernatural Magick, as Satanical Witchcraft, entering -from without into the body by spiritual rays. But having discoursed -hereof in my former Letter, I will not trouble you with an unnecessary -repetition thereof; I conclude therefore with what I begun, _viz._ that -I believe natural Magick to be natural corporeal motions in natural -bodies: Not that I say, Nature in her self is a Magicianess, but it -may be called natural Magick or Witchcraft, meerly in respect to our -Ignorance; for though Nature is old, yet she is not a Witch, but a -grave, wise, methodical Matron, ordering her Infinite family, which are -her several parts, with ease and facility, without needless troubles -and difficulties; for these are onely made through the ignorance of -her several parts or particular Creatures, not understanding their -Mistress, Nature, and her actions and government, for which they cannot -be blamed; for how should a part understand the Infinite body, when it -doth not understand it self; but Nature understands her parts better -then they do her. And so leaving Wise Nature, and the Ignorance of her -Particulars, I understand my self so far that I am, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Magnetick cure of wounds. - - - - -XVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am not of your _Authors_[1] opinion, That _Time hath no relation to -Motion, but that Time and Motion are as unlike and different from each -other as Finite from Infinite, and that it hath its own essence or -being Immoveable, Unchangeable, Individable, and unmixed with things, -nay, that Time is plainly the same with Eternity._ For, in my opinion, -there can be no such thing as Time in Nature, but what Man calls Time, -is onely the variation of natural motions; wherefore Time, and the -alteration of motion, is one and the same thing under two different -names; and as Matter, Figure, and Motion, are inseparable, so is Time -inseparably united, or rather the same thing with them, and not a -thing subsisting by it self; and as long as Matter, Motion and Figure -have been existent, so long hath Time; and as long as they last, so -long doth Time. But when I say, Time is the variation of motion, I -do not mean the motion of the Sun or Moon, which makes Days, Months, -Years, but the general motions or actions of Nature, which are the -ground of Time; for were there no Motion, there would be no Time; and -since Matter is dividable, and in parts, Time is so too; neither hath -Time any other Relation to Duration, then what Nature her self hath. -Wherefore your _Author_ is mistaken, when he says, Motion is made in -Time, for Motion makes Time, or rather is one and the same with Time; -and Succession is no more a stranger to Motion, then Motion is to -Nature, as being the action of Nature, which is the Eternal servant of -God. _But_, says he, _Certain Fluxes of Formerlinesses and Laternesses, -have respect unto frail moveable things in their motions, wherewith -they hasten unto the appointed ends of their period, and so unto their -own death or destruction; but what relation hath all that to Time: for -therefore also ought Time to run with all and every motion? Verily so -there should be as many times and durations as there are motions._ I -answer: To my Reason, there are as many times and durations as there -are motions; for neither time nor duration can be separated from -motion, no more then motion can be separated from them, being all one. -But Time is not Eternity, for Eternity hath no change, although your -_Author_ makes Time and Eternity all one, and a being or substance by -it self: Yet I will rather believe _Solomon_, then him, who says, that -there is a time to be merry, and a time to be sad; a time to mourn, and -a time to rejoyce, and so forth: making so many divisions of Time as -there are natural actions; whenas your _Author_ makes natural actions -strangers to Nature, dividing them from their substances: Which seemeth -very improbable in the opinion of, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_faithful Friend, and humble Servant._ - -[1] In his Treatise of Time. - - - - -XVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Authors_[1] opinion is, That _a bright burning Iron doth not -burn a dead Carcass after an equal manner as it doth a live one; For -in live bodies_, saith he, _it primarily hurts the sensitive Soul, -the which therefore being impatient, rages after a wonderful manner, -doth by degrees resolve and exasperate its own and vital liquors into -a sharp poyson, and then contracts the fibres of the flesh, and turns -them into an escharre, yea, into the way of a coal; but a dead Carcass -is burnt by bright burning Iron, no otherwise, then if Wood, or if any -other unsensitive thing should be; that is, it burns by a proper action -of the fire, but not of the life._ To which opinion, I answer: That my -Reason cannot conceive any thing to be without life, and so neither -without sense; for whatsoever hath self-motion, has sense and life; and -that self-motion is in every Creature, is sufficiently discoursed of in -my former Letters, and in my _Philosophical Opinions_; for self-motion, -sense, life, and reason, are the grounds and principles of Nature, -without which no Creature could subsist. I do not say, That there is -no difference between the life of a dead Carcass, and a live one, -for there is a difference between the lives of every Creature; but to -differ in the manner of life, and to have neither life nor sense at -all, are quite different things: But your _Author_ affirms himself, -that all things have a certain sense of feeling, when he speaks of -Sympathy and Magnetisme, and yet he denies that they have life: And -others again, do grant life to some Creatures, as to Vegetables, and -not sense. Thus they vary in their Opinions, and divide sense, life, -and motion, when all is but one and the same thing; for no life is -without sense and motion, nor no motion without sense and life; nay, -not without Reason; for the chief Architect of all Creatures, is -sensitive and rational Matter. But the mistake is, that most men, do -not, or will not conceive, that there is a difference and variety -of the corporeal sensitive and rational motions in every Creature; -but they imagine, that if all Creatures should have life, sense, and -reason, they must of necessity have all alike the same motions, without -any difference; and because they do not perceive the animal motions -in a Stone or Tree, they are apt to deny to them all life, sense, and -motion. Truly, _Madam_, I think no man will be so mad, or irrational, -as to say a Stone is an Animal, or an Animal is a Tree, because a Stone -and Tree have sense, life, and motion; for every body knows, that their -Natural figures are different, and if their Natures be different, -then they cannot have the same Motions, for the corporeal motions do -make the nature of every particular Creature, and their differences; -and as the corporeal motions act, work, or move, so is the nature of -every figure, Wherefore, nobody, I hope, will count me so senseless, -that I believe sense and life to be after the like manner in every -particular Creature or part of Nature; as for example, that a Stone or -Tree has animal motions, and doth see, touch, taste, smell and hear by -such sensitive organs as an Animal doth; but, my opinion is, that all -Sense is not bound up to the sensitive organs of an Animal, nor Reason -to the kernel of a man's brain, or the orifice of the stomack, or the -fourth ventricle of the brain, or onely to a mans body; for though we -do not see all Creatures move in that manner as Man or Animals do, as -to walk, run, leap, ride, &c. and perform exterior acts by various -local motions; nevertheless, we cannot in reason say, they are void and -destitute of all motion; For what man knows the variety of motions in -Nature: Do not we see, that Nature is active in every thing, yea, the -least of her Creatures. For example; how some things do unanimously -conspire and agree, others antipathetically flee from each other; and -how some do increase, others decrease; some dissolve, some consist, -and how all things are subject to perpetual changes and alterations; -and do you think all this is done without motion, life, sense, and -reason? I pray you consider, _Madam_, that there are internal motions -as well as external, alterative as well as constitutive; and several -other sorts of motions not perceptible by our senses, and therefore -it is impossible that all Creatures should move after one sort of -motions. But you will say, Motion may be granted, but not Life, Sense, -and Reason. I answer, I would fain know the reason why not; for I am -confident that no man can in truth affirm the contrary: What is Life, -but sensitive Motion? what is Reason, but rational motion? and do you -think, _Madam_, that any thing can move it self without life, sense -and reason? I, for my part, cannot imagine it should; for it would -neither know why, whither, nor what way, or how to move. But you may -reply, Motion may be granted, but not self-motion; and life, sense, -and reason, do consist in self-motion. I answer: this is impossible; -for not any thing in Nature can move naturally without natural motion, -and all natural motion is self-motion. If you say it may be moved by -another; My answer is, first, that if a thing has no motion in it self, -but is moved by another which has self-motion, then it must give that -immovable body motion of its own, or else it could not move, having -no motion at all; for it must move by the power of motion, which is -certain; and then it must move either by its own motion, or by a -communicated or imparted motion; if by a communicated motion, then -the self-moveable thing or body must transfer its own motion into the -immoveable, and lose so much of its own motion as it gives away, which -is impossible, as I have declared heretofore at large, unless it do -also transfer its moving parts together with it, for motion cannot be -transfered without substance. But experience and observation witnesseth -the contrary. Next, I say, if it were possible that one body did -move another, then most part of natural Creatures, which are counted -immoveable of themselves, or inanimate, and destitute of self-motion, -must be moved by a forced or violent, and not by a natural motion; for -all motion that proceeds from an external agent or moving power, is -not natural, but forced, onely self-motion is natural; and then one -thing moving another in this manner, we must at last proceed to such -a thing which is not moved by another, but hath motion in it self, -and moves all others; and, perhaps, since man, and the rest of animals -have self-motion, it might be said, that the motions of all other -inanimate Creatures, as they call them, doth proceed from them; but man -being so proud, ambitious, and self-conceited, would soon exclude all -other animals, and adscribe this power onely to himself, especially -since he thinks himself onely endued with Reason, and to have this -prerogative above all the rest, as to be the sole rational Creature -in the World. Thus you see, _Madam_, what confusion, absurdity, and -constrained work will follow from the opinion of denying self-motion, -and so consequently, life and sense to natural Creatures. But I, having -made too long a digression, will return to your _Authors_ discourse: -And as for that he says, _A dead Carcass burns by the proper action of -the fire_, I answer, That if the dissolving motions of the fire be too -strong for the consistent motions of that body which fire works upon, -then fire is the cause of its alteration; but if the consistent motions -of the body be too strong for the dissolving motions of the fire, then -the fire can make no alteration in it. Again: he says, _Calx vive, at -long as it remains dry, it gnaws not a dead Carcass; but it presently -gnaws live flesh, and makes an escharre; and a dead carcass is by lime -wholly resolved into a liquor, and is combibed, except the bone and -gristle thereof; but it doth not consume live flesh into a liquor, -but translates it into an escharre_. I will say no more to this, but -that I have fully enough declared my opinion before, that the actions -or motions of life alter in that which is named a dead Carcass, from -what they were in that which is called a Living body; but although -the actions of Life alter, yet life is not gone or annihilated; for -life is life, and remains full the same, but the actions or motions of -life change and differ in every figure; and this is the cause that the -actions of Fire, Time, and _Calx-vive_, have not the same effects in a -dead Carcass, as in a living Body; for the difference of their figures, -and their different motions, produce different effects in them; and -this is the cause, that one and the same fire doth not burn or act -upon all bodies alike: for some it dissolves, and some not; and some -it hardens, and some it consumes; and some later, some sooner: For put -things of several natures into the same Fire, and you will see how they -will burn, or how fire will act upon them after several manners; so -that fire cannot alter the actions of several bodies to its own blas; -and therefore, since a living and a dead Body (as they call them) are -not the same, (for the actions or motions of life, by their change or -alteration, have altered the nature or figure of the body) the effects -cannot be the same; for a Carcass has neither the interior nor exterior -motions of that figure which it was before it was a Carcass, and so the -figure is quite alter'd from what it was, by the change and alteration -of the motions. But to conclude, the motions of the exterior Agent, -and the motions of the Patient, do sometimes joyn and unite, as in one -action, or to one effect, and sometimes the motions of the Agent are -onely an occasion, but not a co-workman in the production of such or -such an effect, as the motions of the Patient do work; neither can the -motions of the Agent work totally and meerly of themselves, such or -such effects, without the assistance or concurrence of the motions -of the Patient, but the motions of the Patient can; and there is -nothing that can prove more evidently that Matter moves it self, and -that exterior agents or bodies are onely an occasion to such or such -a motion in another body, then to see how several things put into one -and the same fire, do alter after several modes; which shews, it is not -the onely action of fire, but the interior motions of the body thrown -into the fire, which do alter its exterior form or figure. And thus, I -think I have said enough to make my opinions clear, that they may be -the better understood: which is the onely aim and desire of, - -Madam, - -_Your humble and_ - -_faithful Servant._ - -[1] Of the disease of the Stone, _Ch._ 9. - - - - -XIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ is not a Natural, but a Divine Philosopher, for in -many places he undertakes to interpret the Scripture; wherein, to my -judgment, he expresseth very strange opinions; you will give me leave -at this present to note some few. First, in one place,[1] interpreting -that passage of Scripture, where it is said,[2] That the _sons of God -took to wives the daughters of men_: He understands by the Sons of -God, those which came from the Posterity of _Adam_, begotten of a Man -and a Woman, having the true Image of God: But by the Daughters of -Men, he understands Monsters; that is, those which through the Devils -mediation, were conceived in the womb of a Junior Witch or Sorceress: -For when Satan could find no other ways to deprive all the race of -Men of the Image of God, and extinguish the Immortal mind out of the -flock of _Adams_ Posterity, he stirr'd up detestable copulations, -from whence proceeded savage Monsters, as Faunes, Satyrs, Sylphs, -Gnomes, Nymphs, Driades, Najades, Nereides, &c. which generated their -off-springs amongst themselves, and their posterities again contracted -their copulations amongst themselves, and at length began Wedlocks with -Men; and from this copulation of Monsters and Nymphs, they generated -strong Gyants. Which Interpretation, how it agrees with the Truth of -Scripture, I will leave to Divines to judg: But, for my part, I cannot -conceive, how, or by what means or ways, those Monsters and Nymphs were -produced or generated. Next, his opinion is, That _Adam_ did ravish -_Eve_, and defloured her by force, calling him the first infringer of -modesty, and deflourer of a Virgin; and that therefore God let hair -grow upon his chin, cheeks, and lips, that he might be a Compere, -Companion, and like unto many four-footed Beasts, and might bear before -him the signature of the same; and that, as he was lecherous after -their manner, he might also shew a rough countenance by his hairs; -which whether it be so, or not, I cannot tell, neither do I think your -_Author_ can certainly know it himself; for the Scripture makes no -mention of it: But this I dare say, that _Eves_ Daughters prove rather -the contrary, _viz._ that their Grandmother did freely consent to their -Grandfather. Also he says, That God had purposed to generate Man by -the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, but Man perverted the Intent of -God; for had _Adam_ not sinned, there had been no generation by the -copulation of a Man and Woman, but all the off-springs had appear'd -out of _Eve_, a Virgin, from the Holy Spirit, as conceived from God, -and born of a woman, a virgin, To which, I answer, first, That it is -impossible to know the Designs and secret purposes of God: Next, to -make the Holy Spirit the common Generator of all Man-kind, is more -then the Scripture expresses, and any man ought to say: Lastly, it is -absurd, in my opinion, to say, that frail and mortal Men, can pervert -the intent and designs of the Great God; or that the Devil is able to -prevent God's Intent, (as his expression is in the same place.) But -your _Author_ shews a great affection to the Female Sex, when he says, -that God doth love Women before Men, and that he has given them a -free gift of devotion before men; when as others do lay all the fault -upon the Woman, that she did seduce the Man; however in expressing -his affection for Women, your _Author_ expresses a partiality in God. -And, as for his opinion, that God creates more Daughters then Males, -and that more Males are extinguished by Diseases, Travels, Wars, -Duels, Shipwracks, and the like: Truly, I am of the same mind, that -more Men are kill'd by Travels, Wars, Duels, Shipwracks, &c. then -Women; for Women never undergo these dangers, neither do so many kill -themselves with intemperate Drinking, as Men do; but yet I believe, -that Death is as general, and not more favourable to Women, then he -is to Men; for though Women be not slain in Wars like Men, (although -many are, by the cruelty of Men, who not regarding the weakness of -their sex, do inhumanely kill them,) yet many do die in Child-bed, -which is a Punishment onely concerning the Female sex. But to go on -in your _Authors_ Interpretations: His knowledg of the Conception of -the Blessed Virgin, reaches so far, as he doth not stick to describe -exactly, not onely how the blessed Virgin conceiv'd in the womb, but -first in the heart, or the sheath of the heart; and then how the -conception removed from the heart, into the womb, and in what manner -it was performed. Certainly, _Madam_, I am amazed, when I see men so -conceited with their own perfections and abilities, (I may rather -say, with their imperfections and weaknesses) as to make themselves -God's privy Councilors, and his Companions, and partakers of all the -sacred Mysteries, Designs, and hidden secrets of the Incomprehensible -and Infinite God. O the vain Presumption, Pride, and Ambition of -wretched Men! There are many more such expressions in your _Authors_ -works, which, in my opinion, do rather detract from the Greatness of -the Omnipotent God, then manifest his Glory: As for example; That Man -is the clothing of the Deity, and the sheath of the Kingdom of God, -and many the like: which do not belong to God; for God is beyond all -expression, because he is Infinite; and when we name God, we name an -Unexpressible, and Incomprehensible Being; and yet we think we honour -God, when we express him after the manner of corporeal Creatures. -Surely, the noblest Creature that ever is in the World, is not able -to be compared to the most Glorious God, but whatsoever comparison is -made, detracts from his Glory: And this, in my opinion, is the reason, -that God forbad any likeness to be made of him, either in Heaven, or -upon Earth, because he exceeds all that we might compare or liken to -him. And as men ought to have a care of such similizing expressions, so -they ought to be careful in making Interpretations of the Scripture, -and expressing more then the Scripture informs; for what is beyond the -Scripture, is Man's own fancy; and to regulate the Word of God after -Man's fancy, at least to make his fancy equal with the Word of God, -is Irreligious. Wherefore, men ought to submit, and not to pretend to -the knowledg of God's Counsels and Designs, above what he himself hath -been pleased to reveal: as for example, to describe of what Figure -God is, and to comment and descant upon the Articles of Faith; as -how Man was Created; and what he did in the state of Innocence; how -he did fall; and what he did after his fall: and so upon the rest of -the Articles of our Creed, more then the Scripture expresses, or is -conformable to it. For if we do this, we shall make a Romance of the -holy Scripture, with our Paraphrastical descriptions: which alas! is -too common already. The truth is, Natural Philosophers, should onely -contain themselves within the sphere of Nature, and not trespass upon -the Revelation of the Scripture, but leave this Profession to those to -whom it properly belongs. I am confident, a Physician, or any other man -of a certain Profession, would not take it well, if others, who are not -professed in that Art, should take upon them to practise the same: -And I do wonder, why every body is so forward to encroach upon the -holy Profession of Divines, which yet is a greater presumption, then -if they did it upon any other; for it contains not onely a most hidden -and mystical knowledg, as treating of the Highest Subject, which is -the most Glorious, and Incomprehensible God, and the salvation of our -Souls; but it is also most dangerous, if not interpreted according to -the Holy Spirit, but to the byass of man's fancy. Wherefore, _Madam_, I -am afraid to meddle with Divinity in the least thing, lest I incur the -hazard of offending the divine Truth, and spoil the excellent Art of -Philosophying; for a Philosophical Liberty, and a Supernatural Faith, -are two different things, and suffer no co-mixture; as I have declared -sufficiently heretofore. And this you will find as much truth, as that -I am, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ The Position is demonstrated. - -[2] _Gen._ 6. 2. - - - - -XX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Although your _Author_[1] is of the opinion of _Plato_, in making -_Three sorts of Atheists: One that believes no Gods; Another, which -indeed admits of Gods, yet such as are uncarefull of us, and despisers -of small matters, and therefore also ignorant of us: And lastly, a -third sort, which although they believe the Gods to be expert in the -least matters, yet do suppose that they are flexible and indulgent -toward the smallest cold Prayers or Petitions_: Yet I cannot approve -of this distinction, for I do understand but one sort of Atheists; -that is, those which believe no God at all; but those which believe -that there is a God, although they do not worship him truly, nor live -piously and religiously as they ought, cannot, in truth, be called -Atheists, or else there would be innumerous sorts of Atheists; to -wit, all those, that are either no Christians, or not of this or that -opinion in Christian Religion, besides all them that live wickedly, -impiously and irreligiously; for to know, and be convinced in his -reason, that there is a God, and to worship him truly, according to -his holy Precepts and Commands, are two several things: And as for the -first, that is, for the Rational knowledg of the Existence of God, I -cannot be perswaded to believe, there is any man which has sense and -reason, that doth not acknowledg a God; nay, I am sure, there is no -part of Nature which is void and destitute of this knowledg of the -existence of an Infinite, Eternal, Immortal, and Incomprehensible -Deity; for every Creature, being indued with sense and reason, and -with sensitive and rational knowledg, there can no knowledg be -more Universal then the knowledg of a God, as being the root of -all knowledg: And as all Creatures have a natural knowledg of the -Infinite God, so, it is probable, they Worship, Adore, and Praise his -Infinite Power and Bounty, each after its own manner, and according -to its nature; for I cannot believe, God should make so many kinds of -Creatures, and not be worshipped and adored but onely by Man: Nature is -God's Servant, and she knows God better then any Particular Creature; -but Nature is an Infinite Body, consisting of Infinite Parts, and if -she adores and worships God, her Infinite Parts, which are Natural -Creatures, must of necessity do the like, each according to the -knowledg it hath: but Man in this particular goes beyond others, as -having not onely a natural, but also a revealed knowledg of the most -Holy God; for he knows Gods Will, not onely by the light of Nature, -but also by revelation, and so more then other Creatures do, whose -knowledg of God is meerly Natural. But this Revealed Knowledg makes -most men so presumptuous, that they will not be content with it, but -search more and more into the hidden mysteries of the Incomprehensible -Deity, and pretend to know God as perfectly, almost, as themselves; -describing his Nature and Essence, his Attributes, his Counsels, his -Actions, according to the revelation of God, (as they pretend) when as -it is according to their own Fancies. So proud and presumptuous are -many: But they shew thereby rather their weaknesses and follies, then -any truth; and all their strict and narrow pryings into the secrets of -God, are rather unprofitable, vain and impious, then that they should -benefit either themselves, or their neighbour; for do all we can, God -will not be perfectly known by any Creature: The truth is, it is a -meer impossibility for a finite Creature, to have a perfect Idea of -an Infinite Being, as God is; be his Reason never so acute or sharp, -yet he cannot penetrate what is Impenetrable, nor comprehend what is -Incomprehensible: Wherefore, in my opinion, the best way is humbly to -adore what we cannot conceive, and believe as much as God has been -pleased to reveal, without any further search; lest we diving too deep, -be swallowed up in the bottomless depth of his Infiniteness: Which I -wish every one may observe, for the benefit of his own self, and of -others, to spend his time in more profitable Studies, then vainly to -seek for what cannot be found. And with this hearty wish I conclude, -resting, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Image of the Mind. - - - - -XXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ is so much for Spirits, that he doth not stick to -affirm,[1] _That Bodies scarce make up a moity or half part of the -world; but Spirits, even by themselves, have or possess their moity, -and indeed the whole world._ If he mean bodiless and incorporeal -Spirits, I cannot conceive how Spirits can take up any place, for -place belongs onely to body, or a corporeal substance, and millions of -immaterial Spirits, nay, were their number infinite, cannot possess so -much place as a small Pins point, for Incorporeal Spirits possess no -place at all: which is the reason, that an Immaterial and a Material -Infinite cannot hinder, oppose, or obstruct each other; and such an -Infinite, Immaterial Spirit is God alone. But as for Created Immaterial -Spirits, as they call them, it may be questioned whether they be -Immaterial, or not; for there may be material Spirits as well as -immaterial, that is, such pure, subtil and agil substances as cannot -be subject to any humane sense, which may be purer and subtiller then -the most refined air, or purest light; I call them material spirits, -onely for distinctions sake, although it is more proper, to call them -material substances: But be it, that there are Immaterial Spirits, -yet they are not natural, but supernatural; that is, not substantial -parts of Nature; for Nature is material, or corporeal, and so are all -her Creatures, and whatsoever is not material is no part of Nature, -neither doth it belong any ways to Nature: Wherefore, all that is -called Immaterial, is a Natural Nothing, and an Immaterial Natural -substance, in my opinion, is _non_-sense: And if you contend with me, -that Created Spirits, as good and bad Angels, as also the Immortal Mind -of Man, are Immaterial, then I say they are Supernatural; but if you -say, they are Natural, then I answer they are Material: and thus I do -not deny the existence of Immaterial Spirits, but onely that they are -not parts of Nature, but supernatural; for there may be many things -above Nature, and so above a natural Understanding, and Knowledg, -which may nevertheless have their being and existence, although they -be not Natural, that is, parts of Nature: Neither do I deny that those -supernatural Creatures may be amongst natural Creatures, that is, -have their subsistence amongst them, and in Nature; but they are not -so commixed with them, as the several parts of Matter are, that is, -they do not joyn to the constitution of a material Creature; for no -Immaterial can make a Material, or contribute any thing to the making -or production of it; but such a co-mixture would breed a meer confusion -in Nature: wherefore, it is quite another thing, to be in Nature, or to -have its subsistence amongst natural Creatures in a supernatural manner -or way, and to be a part of Nature. I allow the first to Immaterial -Spirits, but not the second, _viz._ to be parts of Nature. But what -Immaterial Spirits are, both in their Essence or Nature, and their -Essential Properties, it being supernatural, and above natural Reason, -I cannot determine any thing thereof. Neither dare I say, they are -Spirits like as God is, that is, of the same Essence or Nature, no -more then I dare say or think that God is of a humane shape or figure, -or that the Nature of God is as easie to be known as any notion else -whatsoever, and that we may know as much of him as of any thing else -in the world. For if this were so, man would know God as well as he -knows himself, but God and his Attributes are not so easily known as -man may know himself and his own natural Proprieties; for God and -his Attributes are not conceiveable or comprehensible by any humane -understanding, which is not onely material, but also finite; for -though the parts of Nature be infinite in number, yet each is finite -in it self, that is, in its figure, and therefore no natural Creature -is capable to conceive what God is; for he being infinite, there is -also required an infinite capacity to conceive him; Nay, Nature her -self, although she is Infinite, yet cannot possibly have an exact -notion of God, by reason she is Material, and God is Immaterial; and -if the Infinite servant of God is not able to conceive God, much less -will a finite part of Nature do it. Besides, the holy Church doth -openly confess and declare the Incomprehensibility of God, when in the -_Athanasian_ Creed, she expresses, that the Father is Incomprehensible, -the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible, and -that there are not three, but one Incomprehensible God: Therefore, if -any one will prove the contrary, to wit, that God is Comprehensible, -or (which is all one) that God is as easie to be known as any Creature -whatsoever, he surely is more then the Church: But I shall never say or -believe so, but rather confess my ignorance, then betray my folly; and -leave things Divine to the Church; to which I submit, as I ought, in -all Duty: and as I do not meddle with any Divine Mysteries, but subject -my self, concerning my Faith or Belief, and the regulating of my -actions for the obtaining of Eternal Life, wholly under the government -and doctrine of the Church, so, I hope, they will also grant me leave -to have my liberty concerning the contemplation of Nature and natural -things, that I may discourse of them, with such freedom, as meer -natural Philosophers use, or at least ought, to do; and thus I shall be -both a good Christian, and a good Natural Philosopher: Unto which, to -make the number perfect, I will add a third, which is, I shall be, - -Madam, - -_Your real and faithful_ - -_Friend and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Magnetick cure of wounds. - - - - -XXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Though I am loth (as I have often told you) to imbarque my self in the -discourse of such a subject, as no body is able naturally to know, -which is the supernatural and divine Soul in Man; yet your _Author_ -having, in my judgment, strange opinions, both of the Essence, Figure, -Seat and Production of the Soul, and discoursing thereof, with such -liberty and freedom, as of any other natural Creature, I cannot chuse -but take some notice of his discourse, and make some reflections upon -it; which yet, shall rather express my ignorance of the same subject, -then in a positive answer, declare my opinion thereof; for, in things -divine, I refer my self wholly to the Church, and submit onely to -their instructions, without any further search of natural reason; and -if I should chance to express more then I ought to do, and commit some -error, it being out of ignorance rather then set purpose, I shall be -ready upon better information, to mend it, and willingly subject my -self under the censure and correction of the holy Church, as counting -it no disgrace to be ignorant in the mysteries of Faith, since Faith -is of things unknown, but rather a duty required from every Layman to -believe simply the Word of God, as it is explained and declared by the -Orthodox Church, without making Interpretations out of his own brain, -and according to his own fancy, which breeds but Schismes, Heresies, -Sects, and Confusions. But concerning your _Author_, I perceive by him, -first, that he makes no distinction between the Natural or Rational -Soul or Mind of Man, and between the Divine or Supernatural Soul, but -takes them both as one, and distinguishes onely the Immortal Soul -from the sensitive Life of Man, which he calls the Frail, Mortal, -Sensitive Soul. Next, all his knowledg of this Immortal Soul is -grounded upon Dreams and Visions, and therefore it is no wonder, if -his opinions be somewhat strange and irregular. _I saw, in a Vision,_ -says he,[1] _my Mind in a humane shape; but there was a light, whose -whole homogeneal body was actively seeing, a spiritual substance, -Chrystalline, shining with a proper splendor, or a splendor of its own, -but in another cloudy part it was rouled up as it were in the husk of -it self; which whether it had any splendor of it self, I could not -discern, by reason of the superlative brightness of the Chrystal Spirit -contain'd within._ Whereupon he defines _the Soul_ to be _a Spirit, -beloved of God, homogeneal, simple, immortal, created into the Image -of God, one onely Being, whereto death adds nothing, or takes nothing -from it, which may be natural or proper to it in the Essence of its -simplicity._ As for this definition of the Soul, it may be true, for -any thing I know: but when your _Author_ makes the divine Soul to be a -Light, I cannot conceive how that can agree; for Light is a Natural and -Visible Creature, and, in my opinion, a corporeal substance; whereas -the Soul is immaterial and incorporeal: But be it, that Light is not a -substance, but a neutral Creature, according to your _Author_; then, -nevertheless the Immortal Soul cannot be said to be a light, because -she is a substance. He may say,[2] The Soul is an Incomprehensible -Light. But if the Soul be Incomprehensible, how then doth he know that -she is a light, and not onely a light, but a glorious and splendorous -light? You will say, By a Dream, or Vision. Truly, _Madam_, to judg -any thing by a Dream, is a sign of a weak judgment. Nay, since your -_Author_ calls the soul constantly a light; if it were so, and that -it were such a splendorous, bright and shining light, as he says; -then when the body dies, and the soul leaves its Mansion, it would -certainly be seen, when it issues out of the body. But your _Author_ -calls the Soul a _Spiritual Substance_, and yet he says, she has _an -homogeneal body, actively seeing and shining with a proper splendor -of her own_; which how it can agree, I leave to you to judg; for I -thought, an Immaterial spirit and a body were too opposite things, and -now I see, your _Author_ makes Material and Immaterial, Spiritual and -Corporeal, all one. But this is not enough, but he allows it a Figure -too, and that of a humane shape; for says he, I _could never consider -the Thingliness of the Immortal Mind with an Individual existence, -deprived of all figure, neither but that it at least would answer to -a humane shape_; but the Scripture, as much as is known to me, never -doth express any such thing of the Immortal Soul, and I should be loth -to believe any more thereof then it declares. The Apostles, although -they were conversant with Christ, and might have known it better, yet -were never so inquisitive into the nature of the Soul, as our Modern -divine Philosophers are; for our Saviour, and they, regarded more the -salvation of Man's Soul, and gave holy and wise Instructions rather, -how to live piously and conformably to God's Will, to gain eternal -Life, then that they should discourse either of the Essence or Figure, -or Proprieties of the Soul, and whether it was a light, or any thing -else, and such like needless questions, raised in after-times onely -by the curiosity of divine Philosophers, or Philosophying Divines; -For though Light is a glorious Creature, yet Darkness is as well a -Creature as Light, and ought not therefore to be despised; for if it -be not so bright, and shining as Light, yet it is a grave Matron-like -Creature, and very useful: Neither is the Earth, which is inwardly -dark, to be despised, because the Sun is bright. The like may be said -of the soul, and of the body; for the body is very useful to the soul, -how dark soever your _Author_ believes it to be; and if he had not -seen light with his bodily eyes, he could never have conceived the -Soul to be a Light: Wherefore your _Author_ can have no more knowledg -of the divine soul then other men have, although he has had more -Dreams and Visions; nay, he himself confesses, that the Soul is an -Incomprehensible Light; which if so, she cannot, be perfectly known, -nor confined to any certain figure; for a figure or shape belongs -onely to a corporeal substance, and not to an incorporeal: and so, God -being an Incomprehensible Being, is excluded from all figure, when as -yet your _Author_ doth not stick to affirm, that God is of a humane -figure too, as well as the humane Soul is; _For_, says he, _Since God -hath been pleased to adopt the Mind alone into his own Image, it also -seems to follow, that the vast and unutterable God is of a humane -Figure, and that from an argument from the effect, if there be any -force of arguments in this subject._ Oh! the audacious curiosity of -Man! Is it not blasphemy to make the Infinite God of a frail and humane -shape, and to compare the most Holy to a sinful Creature? Nay, is it -not an absurdity, to confine and inclose that Incomprehensible Being -in a finite figure? I dare not insist longer upon this discourse, -lest I defile my thoughts with the entertaining of such a subject -that derogates from the glory of the Omnipotent Creator; Wherefore, I -will hasten, as much as I can, to the seat of the Soul, which, after -relating several opinions, your _Author_ concludes to be the orifice -of the stomack, where the Immortal Soul is involved and entertained -in the radical Inn or Bride-bed of the sensitive Soul or vital Light; -which part of the body is surely more honoured then all the rest: But -I, for my part, cannot conceive why the Soul should not dwell in the -parts of conception, as well, as in the parts of digestion, except it -be to prove her a good Huswife; however, your _Author_ allows her to -slide down sometimes: For, _The action of the Mind_, says he, _being -imprisoned in the Body, doth always tend downwards_; but whether -the Soul tend more downwards then upwards, Contemplative Persons, -especially Scholars, and grave States-men, do know best; certainly, I -believe, they find the soul more in their heads then in their heels, -at least her operations. But, to conclude, if the Soul be pure and -single of her self, she cannot mix with the Body, because she needs -no assistance; nor joyn with the Body, though she lives in the Body, -for she needs no support; and if she be individable, she cannot divide -her self into several Parts of the Body; but if the Soul spread over -all the Body, then she is bigger, or less, according as the Body is; -and if she be onely placed in some particular part, then onely that -one part is indued with a Soul, and the rest is Soul-less; and if she -move from place to place, then some parts of the Body will be sometimes -indued with a Soul, sometimes not; and if any one part requires not -the subsistence of the Soul within it, then perhaps all the Body might -have been able to spare her; neither might the Soul, being able to -subsist without the body, have had need of it. Thus useless questions -will trouble men's brains, if they give their fancies leave to work. -I should add something of the Production of the Soul; but being tyred -with so tedious a discourse of your _Author_, I am not able to write -any more, but repose my Pen, and in the mean while rest affectionately, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Image of the Mind. - -[2] Of the Spirit of Life. - - - - -XXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Authors_ comparison[1] of the Sun, with the immaterial or divine -Soul in Man, makes me almost of opinion, that the Sun is the Soul of -this World we inhabit, and that the fixed Stars, which are counted -Suns by some, may be souls to some other worlds; for every one man has -but one immaterial or divine soul, which is said to be individable -and simple in its essence, and therefore unchangeable; and if the Sun -be like this immaterial soul, then the Moon may be like the material -soul. But as for the Production of this immaterial and divine Soul in -Man, whether it come by an immediate Creation from God, or be derived -by a successive propagation from Parents upon their Children, I cannot -determine any thing, being supernatural, and not belonging to my -study; nevertheless, the Propagation from Parents seems improbable to -my reason; for I am not capable to imagine, how an immaterial soul, -being individable, should beget another. Some may say, by imprinting or -sealing, _viz._ that the soul doth print the Image of its own figure -upon the spirit of the seed; which if so, then first there will onely -be a production of the figure of the soul, but not of the substance, -and so the Child will have but the Image of the soul, and not a real -and substantial soul. Secondly, Every Child of the same Parents would -be just alike, without any distinguishment; if not in body, yet in the -Faculties and Proprieties of their Minds or Souls. Thirdly, There must -be two prints of the two souls of both Parents upon one Creature, to -wit, the Child; for both Parents do contribute alike to the Production -of the Child, and then the Child would either have two souls, or both -must be joyned as into one; which how it can be, I am not able to -conceive. Fourthly, If the Parents print the Image of their souls upon -the Child, then the Childs soul bears not the Image of God, but the -Image of Man, to wit, his Parents. Lastly, I cannot understand, how an -immaterial substance should make a print upon a corporeal substance, -for Printing is a corporeal action, and belongs onely to bodies. Others -may say, that the soul is from the Parents transmitted into the Child, -like as a beam of Light; but then the souls of the Parents must part -with some of their own substance; for light is a substance dividable, -in my opinion; and if it were not, yet the soul is a substance, and -cannot be communicated without losing some of his own substance, -but that is impossible; for the immaterial soul being individable, -cannot be diminished nor increased in its substance or Nature. Others -again, will have the soul produced by certain Ideas; but Ideas being -corporeal, cannot produce a substance Incorporeal or Spiritual. -Wherefore I cannot conceive how the souls of the Parents, being -individable in themselves, and not immoveable out of their bodies until -the time of death, should commix so, as to produce a third immaterial -soul, like to their own. You will say, As the Sun, which is the -fountain of heat and light, heats and enlightens, and produces other -Creatures. But I answer, The Sun doth not produce other Suns, at least -not to our knowledg. 'Tis true, there are various and several manners -and ways of Productions, but they are all natural, that is, material, -or corporeal; to wit, Productions of some material beings, or corporeal -substances; but the immaterial soul not being in the number of these, -it is not probable, that she is produced by the way of corporeal -productions, but created and infused from God, according to her nature, -which is supernatural and divine: But being the Image of God, how she -can be defiled with the impurity of sin, and suffer eternal damnation -for her wickedness, without any prejudice to her Creator, I leave to -the Church to inform us thereof. Onely one question I will add, Whether -the Soul be subject to Sickness and Pain? To which I answer: As for the -supernatural and divine Soul, although she be a substance, yet being -not corporeal, but spiritual, she can never suffer pain, sickness, nor -death; but as for the natural soul, to speak properly, there is no -such thing in Nature as pain, sickness, or death; unless in respect -to some Particular Creatures composed of natural Matter; for what Man -calls Sickness, Pain, and Death, are nothing else but the Motions of -Nature; for though there is but one onely Matter, that is, nothing but -meer Matter in Nature, without any co-mixture of either a spiritual -substance, or any thing else that is not Matter; yet this meer Matter -is of several degrees and parts, and is the body of Nature; Besides, -as there is but one onely Matter, so there is also but one onely -Motion in Nature, as I may call it, that is, meer corporeal Motion, -without any rest or cessation, which is the soul of that Natural body, -both being infinite; but yet this onely corporeal Motion is infinitely -various in its degrees or manners, and ways of moving; for it is -nothing else but the action of natural Matter, which action must needs -be infinite, being the action of an infinite body, making infinite -figures and parts. These motions and actions of Nature, since they -are so infinitely various, when men chance to observe some of their -variety, they call them by some proper name, to make a distinguishment, -especially those motions which belong to the figure of their own -kind; and therefore when they will express the motions of dissolution -of their own figure, they call them Death; when they will express -the motions of Production of their figure, they call them Conception -and Generation; when they will express the motions proper for the -Consistence, Continuance and Perfection of their Figure, they call them -Health; but when they will express the motions contrary to these, they -call them Sickness, Pain, Death, and the like: and hence comes also the -difference between regular and irregular motions; for all those Motions -that belong to the particular nature and consistence of any figure, -they call regular, and those which are contrary to them, they call -irregular. And thus you see, _Madam_, that there is no such thing in -Nature, as Death, Sickness, Pain, Health, &c. but onely a variety and -change of the corporeal motions, and that those words express nothing -else but the variety of motions in Nature; for men are apt to make more -distinctions then Nature doth: Nature knows of nothing else but of -corporeal figurative Motions, when as men make a thousand distinctions -of one thing, and confound and entangle themselves so, with Beings, -Non-beings, and Neutral-beings, Corporeals and Incorporeals, Substances -and Accidents, or manners and modes of Substances, new Creations, -and Annihilations, and the like, as neither they themselves, nor any -body else, is able to make any sense thereof; for they are like the -tricks and slights of Juglers, 'tis here, 'tis gone; and amongst those -_Authors_ which I have read as yet, the most difficult to be understood -is this _Author_ which I am now perusing, who runs such divisions, and -cuts Nature into so small Parts, as the sight of my Reason is not sharp -enough to discern them. Wherefore I will leave them to those that are -more quick-sighted then I, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - -[1] Of the seat of the Soul. _It._ Of the Image of the Mind. - - - - -XXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ relates,[1] how by some the _Immortal Soul is divided -into two distinct parts; the Inferior or more outward, which by a -peculiar name is called the Soul, and the other the Superior, the -more inward, the which is called the bottom of the Soul or Spirit, in -which Part the Image of God is specially contained; unto which is no -access for the Devil, because there is the Kingdom of God_: and each -part has distinct Acts, Proprieties, and Faculties. Truly, _Madam_, I -wonder, how some men dare discourse so boldly of the Soul, without any -ground either of Scripture or Reason, nay, with such contradiction to -themselves, or their own opinions; For how can that be severed into -parts, which in its nature is Individable? and how can the Image of -God concern but one Part of the Soul, and not the other? Certainly, -if the Soul is the Image of God, it is his Image wholly, and not -partially, or in parts. But your _Author_ has other as strange and -odd opinions as these, some whereof I have mentioned in my former -Letters, the Souls being a Light, her Figure, her Residence, and many -the like: Amongst the rest, there is one thing which your _Author_ -frequently makes mention of;[2] I know not what to call it, whether -a thing, or a being, or no-thing; for it is neither of them; not a -substance, nor an accident; neither a body, nor a spirit; and this -Monster (for I think this is its proper name, since none other will -fit it) is the Lacquey of the Soul, to run upon all errands; for the -Soul sitting in her Princely Throne or Residence, which is the orifice -of the stomack, cannot be every where her self; neither is it fit she -should, as being a disgrace to her, to perform all offices her self -for want of servants, therefore she sends out this most faithful and -trusty officer, (your _Author_ calls him _Ideal Entity_) who being -prepared for his journey, readily performs all her commands, as being -not tied up to no commands of places, times or dimensions, especially -in Women with Child he operates most powerfully; for sometime he -printed a Cherry on a Child, by a strong Idea of the Mother; but this -Ideal Entity or servant of the Soul, hath troubled my brain more, then -his Mistress the Soul her self; for I could not, nor cannot as yet -conceive, how he might be able to be the Jack of all offices, and do -Journies and travel from one part of the body to another, being no body -nor substance himself, nor tyed to any place, time, and dimension, -and therefore I will leave him. Your _Author_ also speaks much of the -Inward and Outward Man; but since that belongs to Divinity, I will -declare nothing of it; onely this I say, that, in my opinion, the -Inward and Outward man do not make a double Creature, neither properly, -nor improperly; properly, as to make two different men; improperly, as -we use to call that man double, whose heart doth not agree with his -words. But by the Outward man I understand the sinful actions of flesh -and blood, and by the Inward man the reformed actions of the Spirit, -according to the Word of God; and therefore the Outward and Inward -man make but one Man. Concerning the Natural Soul, your _Author_[3] -speaks of her more to her disgrace then to her honor; for he scorns to -call her a substance, neither doth he call her the Rational Soul, but -he calls her the Sensitive Soul, and makes the Divine Soul to be the -Rational Natural Soul, and the cause of all natural actions; for he -being a Divine Philosopher, mixes Divine and Natural things together: -But of the Frail, Mortal, Sensitive Soul, as he names her, which is -onely the sensitive Life, his opinions are, that she is neither a -substance, nor an accident, but a Neutral Creature, and a Vital Light, -which hath not its like in the whole World, but the light of a Candle; -for it is extinguished, and goes out like the flame of a Candle; it is -locally present, and entertained in a place, and yet not comprehended -in a place. Nevertheless, although this sensitive soul is no substance, -yet it has the honor to be the Inn or Lodging-place of the Immortal -Soul or Mind; and these two souls being both lights, do pierce each -other; but the Mortal soul blunts the Immortal soul with its cogitation -of the corruption of _Adam_. These opinions, _Madam_, I confess really, -I do not know what to make of them; for I cannot imagine, how this -Mortal soul, being no substance, can contain the Immortal soul, which -is a substance; nor how they can pierce each other, and the Mortal -soul being substanceless, get the better over an Immortal substance, -and vitiate, corrupt, and infect it; neither can I conceive, how that, -which in a manner is nothing already, can be made less and annihilated. -Wherefore, my opinion is, that the Natural Soul, Life, and Body, are -all substantial parts of Infinite Nature, not subsisting by themselves -each apart, but inseparably united and co-mixed both in their actions -and substances; for not any thing can and doth subsist of it self in -Nature, but God alone; and things supernatural may, for ought I know: -'Tis true, there are several Degrees, several particular Natures, -several Actions or Motions, and several Parts in Nature, but none -subsists single, and by it self, without reference to the whole, and to -one another. Your _Author_ says, the Vital Spirit sits in the Throne -of the Outward man as Vice Roy of the Soul, and acts by Commission of -the Soul; but it is impossible, that one single part should be King -of the whole Creature, since Rational and sensitive Matter is divided -into so many parts, which have equal power and force of action in their -turns and severall imployments; for though Nature is a Monarchess over -all her Creatures, yet in every particular Creature is a Republick, -and not a Monarchy; for no part of any Creature has a sole supreme -Power over the rest. Moreover, your _Author_[4] says, That an _Angel -is not a Light himself, nor has an Internal Light, natural and proper -to himself, but is the Glass of an uncreated Light_: Which, to my -apprehension, seems to affirm, That Angels are the Looking-glasses -of God; a pretty Poetical Fancy, but not grounded on the Scripture: -for the Scripture doth not express any such thing of them, but onely -that they are[5] _Ministring Spirits sent forth to minister for them -who shall be heirs of Salvation_: Which, I think, is enough for us to -know here, and leave the rest until we come to enjoy their company in -Heaven. But it is not to be admired, that those, which pretend to know -the Nature and Secrets of God, should not have likewise knowledg of -Supernatural Creatures; In which conceit I leave them, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your real and faithful_ - -_Friend and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the Image of the Soul. - -[2] _Ch._ Of the Magnetick cure of wounds. - -[3] Of the seat of the Soul. - -[4] _Ch._ Of the Image of the Mind. - -[5] _Heb._ 11. 14. - - - - -XXV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Reason and Intellect are two different things to your _Author_;[1] -for _Intellect_, says he, _doth properly belong to the Immortal Soul, -as being a Formal Light, and the very substance of the Soul it self, -wherein the Image of God onely consists; But Reason is an uncertain, -frail faculty of the Mortal Soul, and doth in no ways belong, nor has -any communion with the Intellect of the Mind._ Which seems to me, as -if your _Author_ did make some difference between the Divine, and -the Natural Soul in Man, although he doth not plainly declare it in -the same Terms; for that which I name the Divine Soul, is to him the -Immortal Mind, Intellect, or Understanding, and the Seat of the Image -of God; but the Natural Soul he calls the Frail, Mortal, and Rational -Soul; and as Understanding is the Essence of the Immortal, so Reason -is to him the Essence of the Mortal Soul; which Reason he attributes -not only to Man, but also to Brutes: For _Reason and Discourse_, says -he, _do not obscurely flourish and grow in brute Beasts, for an aged -Fox is more crafty then a younger one by rational discourse_; and -again, _That the Rational Part of the Soul doth belong to brutes, is -without doubt_: Wherein he rightly dissents from those, which onely -do attribute a sensitive Soul to brutes; and Reason to none but Man, -whom therefore they call a Rational Creature, and by this Rational -Faculty do distinguish him from the rest of Animals. And thus I -perceive the difference betwixt your _Authors_ opinion, and theirs, -is, That other Philosophers commonly do make the Rational soul, to be -partly that which I call the supernatural and divine Soul, as onely -belonging to man, and bearing the Image of God, not acknowledging any -other Natural, but a Sensitive soul in the rest of Animals, and a -Vegetative soul in Vegetables; and these three souls, or faculties, -operations, or degrees, (call them what you will, for we shall not -fall out about names,) concurr and joyn together in Man; but the -rest of all Creatures, are void and destitute of Life, as well as of -Soul, and therefore called Unanimate; and thus they make the natural -rational soul, and the divine soul in man to be all one thing, without -any distinguishment; but your _Author_ makes a difference between the -Mortal and Immortal soul in Man; the Immortal he calls the Intellect -or Understanding, and the Mortal soul he calls Reason: but to my -judgment he also attributes to the immortal soul, actions which are -both natural, and supernatural, adscribing that to the divine soul, -which onely belongs to the natural, and taking that from the natural, -which properly belongs to her. Besides, he slights and despises the -Rational soul so, as if she were almost of no value with Man, making -her no substance, but a mental intricate and obscure Being, and so far -from Truth, as if there were no affinity betwixt Truth and Reason, -but that they disagree in their very roots, and that the most refined -Reason may be deceitful. But your _Author_, by his leave, confounds -Reason, and Reasoning, which are two several and distinct things; for -reasoning and arguing differs as much from Reason, as doubtfulness -from certainty of knowledg, or a wavering mind from a constant mind; -for Reasoning is the discoursive, and Reason the understanding part in -Man, and therefore I can find no great difference between Understanding -and Reason: Neither can I be perswaded, that Reason should not remain -with Man after this life, and enter with him into Heaven, although -your _Author_ speaks much against it; for if Man shall be the same -then, which he is now, in body, why not in soul also? 'Tis true, the -Scripture says, he shall have a more glorious body; but it doth not -say, that some parts of the body shall be cast away, or remain behind; -and if not of the body, why of the soul? Why shall Reason, which is -the chief part of the natural Soul, be wanting? Your _Author_ is much -for Intellect or Understanding; but I cannot imagine how Understanding -can be without Reason. Certainly, when he saw the Immortal Soul in -a Vision, to be a formal Light, how could he discern what he saw, -without Reason? How could he distinguish between Light and Darkness, -without Reason? How could he know the Image of the Mind to be the Image -of God, without the distinguishment of Reason? You will say, Truth -informed him, and not Reason. I answer, Reason shews the Truth. You -may reply, Truth requires no distinguishment or judgment. I grant, -that perfect Truth requires not reasoning or arguing, as whether it -be so, or not; but yet it requires reason, as to confirm it to be so, -or not so; for Reason is the confirmation of Truth, and Reasoning is -but the Inquisition into Truth: Wherefore, when our Souls shall be in -the fulness of blessedness, certainly, they shall not be so dull and -stupid, but observe distinctions between God, Angels, and sanctified -Souls; as also, that our glory is above our merit, and that there is -great difference between the Damned, and the Blessed, and that God is -an Eternal and Infinite Being, and onely to be adored, admired, and -loved, and that we enjoy as much as can be enjoyed: All which the Soul -cannot know without the distinguishment of Reason; otherwise we might -say, the Souls in Heaven, love, joy, admire and adore, but know not -what, why, or wherefore; For, shall the blessed Souls present continual -Praises without reason? Have they not reason to praise God for their -happiness, and shall they not remember the Mercies of God, and the -Merits of his Son? For without remembrance of them, they cannot give -a true acknowledgment, although your _Author_ says there is no use of -Memory or remembrance in Heaven: but surely, I believe there is; for if -there were not memory in Heaven, the Penitent Thief upon the Cross his -Prayers had been in vain; for he desired our Saviour to remember him -when he did come into his Kingdom: Wherefore if there be Understanding -in Heaven, there is also Reason; and if there be Reason, there is -Memory also: for all Souls in Heaven, as well as on Earth, have reason -to adore, love, and praise God. But, _Madam_, my study is in natural -Philosophy, not in Theology; and therefore I'le refer you to Divines, -and leave your _Author_ to his own fancy, who by his singular Visions -tells us more news of our Souls, then our Saviour did after his Death -and Resurrection: Resting in the mean time, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ The hunting or searching out of Sciences. _It._ Of the Image -of the Mind. - - - - -XXVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning those parts and chapters of your _Authors_ Works, which -treat of Physick; before I begin to examine them, I beg leave of you -in this present, to make some reflections first upon his Opinions -concerning the Nature of Health and Diseases: As for _Health_, he is -pleased to say,[1] That _it consists not in a just Temperature of the -body, but in a sound and intire Life; for otherwise, a Temperature of -body is as yet in a dead Carcass newly kill'd, where notwithstanding -there is now death, but not life, not health_: Also he says,[2] _That -no disease is in a dead carcass._ To which I answer, That, in my -opinion, Life is in a dead Carcass, as well as in a living Animal, -although not such a Life as that Creature had before it became a -Carcass, and the Temperature of that Creature is altered with the -alteration of its particular life; for the temperature of that -particular life, which was before in the Animal, doth not remain in -the Carcass, in such a manner as it was when it had the life of such -or such an Animal; nevertheless, a dead Carcass hath life, and such a -temperature of life, as is proper, and belonging to its own figure: for -there are as many different lives, as there be different creatures, -and each creature has its particular life and soul, as partaking of -sensitive and rational Matter. And if a dead Carcass hath life, and -such a temperature of motions as belong to its own life, then there -is no question, but these motions may move sometimes irregularly in -a dead Carcass as well, as in any other Creature; and since health -and diseases are nothing else but the regularity or irregularity of -sensitive corporeal Motions, a dead Carcass having Irregular motions, -may be said as well to have diseases, as a living body, as they name -it, although it is no proper or usual term for other Creatures, but -onely for Animals. However, if there were no such thing as a disease -(or term it what you will, I will call it Irregularity of sensitive -motions) in a dead Carcass, How comes it that the infection of a -disease proceeds often from dead Carcasses into living Animals? For, -certainly, it is not meerly the odour or stink of a dead body, for -then all stinking Carcasses would produce an Infection; wherefore this -Infection must necessarily be inherent in the Carcass, and proceed -from the Irregularity of its motions. Next I'le ask you, Whether a -Consumption be a disease, or not? If it be, then a dead Carcass might -be said to have a disease, as well as a living body; and the Ægyptians -knew a soveraign remedy against this disease, which would keep a dead -Carcass intire and undissolved many ages; but as I said above, a dead -Carcass is not that which it was being a living Animal, wherefore -their effects cannot be the same, having not the same causes. Next, -your _Author_ is pleased to call, with _Hippocrates, Nature the onely -Physicianess of Diseases._ I affirm it; and say moreover, that as -she is the onely Physicianess, so she is also the onely Destroyeress -and Murtheress of all particular Creatures, and their particular -lives; for she dissolves and transforms as well as she frames and -creates; and acts according to her pleasure, either for the increase -or decrease, augmentation or destruction, sickness or health, life -or death of Particular Creatures. But concerning Diseases, your -_Authors_ opinion is, That _a Disease is as Natural as Health._ I -answer; 'tis true, Diseases are natural; but if we could find out the -art of healing, as well as the art of killing and destroying; and the -art of uniting and composing, as well as the art of separating and -dividing, it would be very beneficial to man; but this may easier be -wished for, then obtained; for Nature being a corporeal substance, has -infinite parts, as well as an infinite body; and Art, which is onely -the playing action of Nature, and a particular Creature, can easier -divide and separate parts, then unite and make parts; for Art cannot -match, unite, and joyn parts so as Nature doth; for Nature is not -onely dividable and composeable, being a corporeal substance, but she -is also full of curiosity and variety, being partly self-moving: and -there is great difference between forced actions, and natural actions; -for the one sort is regular, the other irregular. But you may say, -Irregularities are as natural as Regularities. I grant it; but Nature -leaves the irregular part most commonly to her daughter or creature -Art, that is, she makes irregularities for varieties sake, but she -her self orders the regular part, that is, she is more careful of her -regular actions; and thus Nature taking delight in variety suffers -irregularities; for otherwise, if there were onely regularities, there -could not be so much variety. Again your _Author_ says,[3] That _a -disease doth not consist but in living bodies._ I answer, there is -not any body that has not life; for if life is general, then all -figures or parts have life; but though all bodies have life, yet all -bodies have not diseases; for diseases are but accidental to bodies, -and are nothing else but irregular motions in particular Creatures, -which may be not onely in Animals, but generally in all Creatures; -for there may be Irregularities in all sorts of Creatures, which may -cause untimely dissolutions; but yet all dissolutions are not made by -irregular motions, for many creatures dissolve regularly, but onely -those which are untimely. In the same place your _Author_ mentions, -That _a Disease consists immediately in Life it self, but not in the -dregs and filthinesses, which are erroneous forreigners and strangers -to the life._ I grant, that a Disease is made by the motions of Life, -but not such a life as your _Author_ describes, which doth go out like -the snuff of a Candle, or as one of _Lucian's_ Poetical Lights; but -by the life of Nature, which cannot go out without the destruction of -Infinite Nature: and as the Motions of Nature's life make diseases or -irregularities, so they make that which man names dregs and filths; -which dregs, filths, sickness, and death, are nothing but changes -of corporeal motions, different from those motions or actions that -are proper to the health, perfection and consistence of such or such -a figure or creature. But, to conclude, there is no such thing as -corruption, sickness, or death, properly in Nature, for they are -made by natural actions, and are onely varieties in Nature, but not -obstructions or destructions of Nature, or annihilations of particular -Creatures; and so is that we name Superfluities, which bear onely a -relation to a particular Creature, which hath more Motion and Matter -then is proper for the nature of its figure. And thus much of this -subject for the present, from, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Call'd the Authors answers. - -[2] _Ch._ Of the subject of inhering of diseases. - -[3] _Ch._ The subject of inhering of diseases is in the point of life. -_It. Ch._ Of the knowledg of diseases. - - - - -XXVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In my last, I remember, I told you of your _Authors_ opinion concerning -the seat of Diseases, _viz._ that Diseases are properly in living -bodies, and consist in the life it self; but when I consider his -definition of Life, and of a Disease, I cannot conceive how they -should consist together; for he describes[1] _a Disease to be a real, -material and substantial being, truly subsisting in a body; but life -to be a meer nothing, and_ _yet the immediate mansion of a disease, -the inward subject, yea, and workman of the same; and that with the -life all diseases depart into nothing._ Surely, _Madam_, it exceedeth -my understanding; for, first, I cannot conceive how life, which is a -meer Nothing, can be a lodging to something? Next, how Nothing can -depart and die? and thirdly how Something can become Nothing? I think -your _Author_ might call a dead Carcass as well No-thing, as Life; and -since he names Diseases the Thieves of Life, they must needs be but -poor Thieves, because they steal No-thing. But your _Author_ compares -Life to Light, and calls it an Extinguishable Light, like the light of -a Candle; which if so, then the old saying is verified, That life goes -out like the snuff of a Candle. But I wonder, _Madam_, that grave and -wise men will seriously make use of a similising old Proverb, or of a -Poetical Fancy, in matter of natural Philosophy; for I have observed, -that _Homer, Lucian, Ovid, Virgil, Horace,_ &c. have been very -serviceable to great Philosophers, who have taken the ground of their -Fictions, and transferred them into Natural Philosophy, as Immaterial -substances, Non-beings, and many the like; but they can neither do any -good nor hurt to Nature, but onely spoil Philosophical Knowledg; and as -Nature is ignorant of Immaterials and Non-beings, so Art is ignorant -of Nature; for Mathematical Rules, Measures, and Demonstrations, -cannot rule, measure nor demonstrate Nature, no more, then Chymical -Divisions, Dissolutions and Extractions (or rather distractions, nay, -I may say destructions) can divide, dissolve, extract, compose, and -unite, as Nature doth; Wherefore their Instruments, Figures, Furnaces, -Limbecks, and Engines, cannot instruct them of the truth of Natures -Principles; but the best and readiest way to find out Nature, or rather -some truth of Nature, is sense and reason, which are Parts of Natures -active substance, and therefore the truest informers of Nature; but -the Ignorance of Nature has caused Ignorance amongst Philosophers, -and the Ignorance of Philosophers hath caused numerous Opinions, and -numerous Opinions have caused various Discourses and Disputes; which -Discourses and Disputes, are not Sense and Reason, but proceed from -Irregular Motions; and Truth is not found in Irregularities. But to -return to Life: it seems your _Author_ hath taken his opinion from -_Lucian's_ Kingdom of Lights, the Lights being the Inhabitants thereof; -and when any was adjudged to die, his Light was put out, which was his -punishment: And thus this Heathenish Fiction is become a Christian -Verity; when as yet your _Author_ rayls much at those, that insist upon -the Opinions and Doctrine of Pagan Philosophers. Wherefore I will leave -this Poetical Fancy of Life, and turn to Death, and see what opinion -your _Author_ hath of that. First, concerning the cause or original of -Death; _Neither God_, says he,[2] _nor the Evil Spirit, is the Creator -of Death, but Man onely, who made Death for himself; Neither did Nature -make death, but Man made death natural._ Which if it be so, then Death -being, to my opinion, a natural Creature, as well as Life, Sickness, -and Health; Man, certainly, had great Power, as to be the Creator of a -natural Creature. But, I would fain know the reason, why your _Author_ -is so unwilling to make God the Author of Death, and Sickness, as well -as of Damnation? Doth it imply any Impiety or Irreligiousness? Doth -not God punish, as well as reward? and is not death a punishment for -our sin? You may say, Death came from sin, but sin did not come from -God. Then some might ask from whence came sin? You will say, From the -Transgression of the Command of God, as the eating of the Forbidden -Fruit. But from whence came this Transgression? It might be answer'd, -From the Perswasion of the Serpent. From whence came this Perswasion? -From his ill and malitious nature to oppose God, and ruine the race of -Mankind. From whence came this ill Nature? From his Fall. Whence came -his Fall? From his Pride and Ambition to be equal with God. From whence -came this Pride? From his Free-will. From whence came his Free-will? -From God. Thus, _Madam_, if we should be too inquisitive into the -actions of God, we should commit Blasphemy, and make God Cruel, as to -be the Cause of Sin, and consequently of Damnation. But although God -is not the Author of Sin, yet we may not stick to say, that he is the -Author of the Punishment of Sin, as an Act of his Divine Justice; which -Punishment, is Sickness, and Death; nay, I see no reason, why not of -Damnation too, as it is a due punishment for the sins of the wicked; -for though Man effectively works his own punishment, yet Gods Justice -inflicts it: Like as a just Judg may be call'd the cause of a Thief -being hang'd. But these questions are too curious; and some men will -be as presumptuous as the Devil, to enquire into Gods secret actions, -although they be sure that they cannot be known by any Creature. -Wherefore let us banish such vain thoughts, and onely admire, adore, -love, and praise God, and implore his Mercy, to give us grace to shun -the punishments for our sins by the righteousness of our actions, and -not endeavour to know his secret designs. Next, I dissent from your -_Author_,[3] That _Death and all dead things do want roots whereby they -may produce_: For death, and dead things, in my opinion, are the most -active producers, at least they produce more numerously and variously -then those we name living things; for example, a dead Horse will -produce more several Animals, besides other Creatures, then a living -Horse can do; but what _Archeus_ and _Ideas_ a dead Carcass hath, I can -tell no more, then what _Blas_ or _Gas_ it hath; onely this I say, that -it has animate Matter, which is the onely _Archeus_ or Master-workman, -that produces all things, creates all things, dissolves all things, -and transforms all things in Nature; but not out of Nothing, or into -Nothing, as to create new Creatures which were not before in Nature, or -to annihilate Creatures, and to reduce them to nothing; but it creates -and transforms out of, and in the same Matter which has been from all -Eternity. Lastly, your _Author_ is pleased to say, That _he doth not -behold a disease as an abstracted Quality; and that Apoplexy, Leprosie, -Dropsie, and Madness, as they are Qualities in the abstract, are not -diseases._ I am of his mind, that a disease is a real and corporeal -being, and do not understand what he and others mean by abstracted -qualities; for Nature knows of no abstraction of qualities from -substances, and I doubt Man can do no more then Nature doth: Besides, -those abstractions are needless, and to no purpose; for no Immaterial -quality will do any hurt, if it be no substance; wherefore Apoplexy, -Leprosie, Dropsie, and Madness, are Corporeal beings, as well as the -rest of Diseases, and not abstracted Qualities; and I am sure, Persons -that are affected with those diseases will tell the same. Wherefore -leaving needless abstractions to fancies abstracted from right sense -and reason, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of the knowledg of diseases. - -[2] _Ch._ Called the Position. - -[3] _Ch._ Of the knowledg of diseases. - - - - -XXVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am very much troubled to see your _Authors_ Works fill'd with so -many spiteful reproaches and bitter taunts against the Schools of -Physicians, condemning both their Theory and Practice; nay, that not -onely the Modern Schools of Physicians, but also the two ancient and -famous Physicians, _Galen_, and _Paracelsus_, must sufficiently suffer -by him; especially _Galen_; for there is hardly a Chapter in all his -Works, which has not some accusations of blind errors, sloth, and -sluggishness, Ignorance, Covetousness, Cruelty, and the like: Which I -am very sorry for; not onely for the sake of your _Author_ himself, who -herein doth betray both his rashness, and weakness, in not bridling -his passions, and his too great presumption, reliance and confidence -in his own abilities, and extraordinary Gifts; but also for the sake -of the Fame and Repute of our Modern Physicians; for without making -now any difference betwixt the _Galenists_ and _Paracelsians_, and -examining which are the best, (for I think them both excellent in -their kinds, especially when joyned together) I will onely say this -in general, that the Art of Physick has never flourish'd better then -now, neither has any age had more skilful, learned, and experienced -Physicians, then this present; because they have not onely the knowledg -and practise of those in ages Past, but also their own experience -joyned with it, which cannot but add perfection to their Art; and I, -for my part, am so much for the old way of Practice, that if I should -be sick, I would desire rather such Physicians which follow the same -way, then those, that by their new Inventions, perchance, cure one, -and kill a hundred. But your _Author_[1] will have a Physician to be -like a Handycrafts man, who being call'd to a work, promises that work, -and stands to his promise; and therefore, _It is a shame_, says he, -_in a Physician, being call'd to a sick man in the beginning of the -disease, and when his strength is yet remaining, to suffer the same -man to die._ This, in my opinion, is a very unreasonable comparison, -to liken a Handicrafts man to a Physician, and the art of Curing to -the art of Building, or any the like, without regard of so many great -differences that are between them, which I am loth to rehearse, for -brevities sake, and are apparant enough to every one that will consider -them: but this I may say, that it is not always for want of skill and -industry in a Physician, that the cure is not effected, but it lies -either in the Incureableness of the disease, or any other external -accidents that do hinder the success: Not but that the best Physicians -may err in a disease, or mistake the Patients inward distemper by -his outward temper, or the interior temper by his outward distemper, -or any other ways; for they may easily err through the variation of -the disease, which may vary so suddenly and oft, as it is impossible -to apply so fast, and so many Medicines, as the alteration requires, -without certain death; for the body is not able, oftentimes, to dispose -and digest several Medicines so fast, as the disease may vary, and -therefore what was good in this temper, may, perhaps, be bad in the -variation; insomuch, that one medicine may in a minute prove a Cordial, -and Poyson. Nay, it may be that some Physicians do err through their -own ignorance and mistake, must we therefore condemn all the skill, -and accuse all the Schools of Negligence, Cruelty, and Ignorance? God -forbid: for it would be a great Injustice. Let us rather praise them -for the good they do, and not rashly condemn them for the evil they -could not help: For we may as well condemn those holy and industrious -Divines, that cannot reform wicked and perverse Sinners, as Physicians, -because they cannot restore every Patient to his former health, the -Profession of a Physician being very difficult; for they can have but -outward signs of inward distempers. Besides, all men are not dissected -after they are dead, to inform Physicians of the true cause of their -death; nay, if they were, perchance they would not give always a true -information to the Physician, as is evident by many examples; but -oftentimes the blame is laid upon the Physician, when as the fault is -either in Nature, or any other cause, which Art could not mend. And -if your _Author_ had had such an extraordinary Gift from God as to -know more then all the rest of Physicians, why did he not accordingly, -and as the Scripture speaks of Faith, shew his skill by his Works and -Cures? certainly, could he have restored those that were born blind, -lame, deaf and dumb, or cured the spotted Plague, or Apoplexy after -the third fit, or the Consumption of Vital parts, or a Fever in the -Arteries, or dissolved a Stone too big to go through the passage, -and many the like; he would not onely have been cried up for a rare -Physician, but for a miracle of the World, and worshipped as a Saint: -But if he could not effect more then the Schools can do, why doth he -inveigh so bitterly against them? Wherefore I cannot commend him in -so doing; but as I respect the Art of Physick, as a singular Gift -from God to Mankind, so I respect and esteem also learned and skilful -Physicians, for their various Knowledg, industrious Studies, careful -Practice, and great Experiences, and think every one is bound to do -the like, they being the onely supporters and restorers of humane life -and health: For though I must confess, with your _Author_, that God -is the onely giver of Good, yet God is not pleased to work Miracles -ordinarily, but has ordained means for the restoring of health, -which the Art of Physick doth apply; and therefore those Persons -that are sick, do wisely to send for a Physician; for Art, although -it is but a particular Creature, and the handmaid of Nature, yet she -doth Nature oftentimes very good service; and so do Physicians often -prolong their Patients lives. The like do Chirurgeons; for if those -Persons that have been wounded, had been left to be cured onely by the -Magnetick Medicine, I believe, numbers that are alive would have been -dead, and numbers would die that are alive; insomuch, as none would -escape, but by miracle, especially if dangerously hurt. Concerning the -Coveteousness of Physicians, although sickness is chargeable, yet I -think it is not Charitable to say or to think, that Physitians regard -more their Profit, then their Patients health; for we might as well -condemn Divines for taking their Tithes and Stipends, as Physicians -for taking their Fees: but the holy Writ tells us, that a Labourer is -Worthy of his hire or reward; and, for my part, I think those commit a -great sin, which repine at giving Rewards in any kind; for those that -deserve well by their endeavours, ought to have their rewards; and such -Meritorious Persons, I wish with all my Soul, may prosper and thrive. -Nevertheless, as for those persons, which for want of means are not -able to reward their Physicians, I think Physicians will not deal so -unconscionably, as to neglect their health and lives for want of their -Fees, but expect the reward from God, and be recompenced the better by -those that have Wealth enough to spare. And this good opinion I have of -them. So leaving them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - -[1] In his Promises, _Column._ 3. - - - - -XXIX. - - -_MADAM_ - -I am of your _Authors_ mind, That _heat is not the cause of digestion_; -but I dissent from him, when he says, That it is _the Ferment of the -stomach that doth cause it_: For, in my opinion, Digestion is onely -made by regular digestive motions, and ill digestion is caused by -irregular motions, and when those motions are weak, then there is no -digestion at all, but what was received, remains unaltered; but when -they are strong and quick, then they make a speedy digestion. You may -ask me, what are digestive motions? I answer, They are transchanging, -or transforming motions: but since there be many sorts of transchanging -motions, digestive motions are those, which transchange food into the -nourishment of the body, and dispose properly, fitly and usefully of -all the Parts of the food, as well of those which are converted into -nourishment, as of those which are cast forth. For give me leave to -tell you, _Madam_, that some parts of natural Matter, do force or cause -other parts of Matter to move and work according to their will, without -any change or alteration of their parts; as for example, Fire and -Metal; for Fire will cause Metal to flow, but it doth not readily alter -it from its nature of being Metal; neither doth Fire alter its nature -from being Fire. And again, some parts of Matter will cause other parts -to work and act to their own will, by forcing these over-powred parts -to alter their own natural motions into the motions of the victorious -Party, and so transforming them wholly into their own Figure; as for -example, Fire will cause Wood to move so as to take its figure, to -wit, the figure of Fire, that is, to change its own figurative motions -into the motions of Fire: and this latter kind of moving or working -is found in digestion; for the regular digestive motions do turn all -food received from its own nature or figure, into the nourishment, -figure, or nature of the body, as into flesh, blood, bones, and the -like. But when several parts of Matter meet or joyn with equal force -and power, then their several natural motions are either quite altered, -or partly mixt: As for example; some received things not agreeing with -the natural constitution of the body, the corporeal motions of the -received, and those of the receiver, do dispute or oppose each other: -for the motions of the received, not willing to change their nature -conformable to the desire of the digestive motions, do resist, and -then a War begins, whereby the body suffers most; for it causes either -a sickness in the stomack, or a pain in the head, or in the heart, or -in the bowels, or the like: Nay, if the received food gets an absolute -victory, it dissolves and alters oftentimes the whole body, it self -remaining entire and unaltered, as is evident in those that die of -surfeits. But most commonly these strifes and quarrels, if violent, do -alter and dissolve each others forms or natures. And many times it is -not the fault of the Received, but of the Receiver; as for example, -when the digestive and transforming motions are either irregular, or -weak; for they being too weak, or too few, the meat or food received -is digested onely by halves; and being irregular, it causes that which -we call corruption. But it may be observed, that the Received food is -either agreeable, or disagreeable, to the Receiver; if agreeable, then -there is a united consent of Parts, to act regularly and perfectly in -digestion; if disagreeable, then the Received acts to the Ruine, that -is, to the alteration or dissolution of the Nature of the Receiver; but -if it be neutral, that is, neither perfectly agreeable, nor perfectly -disagreeable, but between both, then the receiver, or rather the -digestive Motions of the receiver, use a double strength to alter and -transform the received. But you may ask me, _Madam_, what the reason -is, that many things received, after they are dissolved into small -parts, those parts will keep their former colour and savour? I answer; -The cause is, that either the retentive Motions in the Parts of the -received, are too strong for the digestive and alterative Motions of -the receiver, or perchance, this colour and savour is so proper to -them, as not to be transchanged: but you must observe, that those -digestive, alterative and transchanging motions, do not act or move all -after one and the same manner; for some do dissolve the natural figure -of the received, some disperse its dissolved parts into the parts of -the body, some place the dispersed parts fitly and properly for the -use, benefit, and consistence of the body; for there is so much variety -in this one act of digestion, as no man is able to conceive; and if -there be such variety in one Particular natural action, what variety -will there not be in all Nature? Wherefore, it is not, as I mentioned -in the beginning, either Ferment, or Heat, or any other thing, that -causes digestion; for if all the constitution and nature of our body -was grounded or did depend upon Ferment, then Brewers and Bakers, -and those that deal with Ferments, would be the best Physicians. -But I would fain know the cause which makes Ferment? You may say, -saltness, and sowreness. But then I ask, From whence comes saltness and -sowreness? You may say, From the Ferment. But then I shall be as wise -as before. The best way, perhaps, may be to say, with your _Author_, -that Ferment is a Primitive Cause, and a beginning or Principle of -other things, and it self proceeds from nothing. But then it is beyond -my imagination, how that can be a Principle of material things, which -it self is nothing; that is, neither a substance, nor an accident. -Good Lord! what a stir do men make about nothing! I am amazed to see -their strange Fancies and Conceptions vented for the Truest Reasons: -Wherefore I will return to my simple opinion; and as I cannot conceive -any thing that is beyond Matter, or a Body; so I believe, according to -my reason, that there is not any part in Nature, be it never so subtil -or small, but is a self-moving substance, or endued with self-motion; -and according to the regularity and irregularity of these motions, -all natural effects are produced, either perfect, or imperfect; -timely births, or untimely and monstrous births; death, health, and -diseases, good and ill dispositions, natural and extravagant Appetites -and Passions, (I say natural, that is, according to the nature of -their figures;) Sympathy and Antipathy, Peace and War, Rational and -Phantastical opinions. Nevertheless, all these motions, whether -regular or irregular, are natural; for regularity and irregularity -hath but a respect to particulars, and to our conceptions, because -those motions which move not after the ordinary, common or usual way or -manner, we call Irregular. But the curiosity and variety in Nature is -unconceiveable by any particular Creature; and so leaving it, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ says,[1] it is an ancient Truth, _That whatsoever things, -meats being digested and cast out by vomit, are of a sowre taste and -smell, yea, although they were seasoned with much sugar._ But I do -not assent to this opinion; for I think that some Vomits have no more -taste then pure Water hath. Neither am I of his mind, That _Digestion -is hastened by sharpness or tartness:_ For do but try it by one -simple experiment; take any kind of flesh-meat, boyl or stew it with -Vinegar, or sowre wine, or with much salt; and you will find, that it -doth require a longer time, or rather more motions to dissolve, then -if you boyl it in fair water, without such ingredients as are sowre, -sharp, or salt; also if you do but observe, you will find the dregs -more sandy, stony and hard, being drest with much salt, and sharp -wine, or vinegar, then when they are not mixt with such contracting -and fixing Ingredients. Wherefore, if the Ferment of the stomack hath -such a restringent and contracting quality, certainly digestions will -be but slow and unprofitable; but Nature requires expulsion as much -as attraction, and dilation as much as contraction, and digestion is -a kind of dilation. Wherefore, in my judgment; contracting tartness -and sharpness doth rather hinder digestion then further it. Next I -perceive, your _Author_ inclines to the opinion, _That Choler is not -made by meat_:[2] But I would ask him, whether any humor be made of -meat, or whether blood, flesh, &c. are made and nourished by meat? If -they be not, then my answer is, That we eat to no purpose; but if they -be, then Choler is made so too. But if he says, That some are made, and -some not; then I would ask, what that humor is made of, that is not -made by meat or food received into the body? But we find that humors, -blood, flesh, &c. will be sometimes more, sometimes less, according -either to feeding, or to digestion, which digestion is a contribution -of food to every several part of the body for its nourishment; and when -there is a decay of those parts, then it is caused either by fasting, -or by irregular digestion, or by extraordinary evacuation, or by -distempered matter, &c. all which, causes sickness, paleness, leanness, -weakness, and the like. Again: your _Author_ is against the opinion of -the Schools, _That the Gall is a receptacle of superfluous humors and -dregs_: for he says, _it has rather the constitution of a necessary -and vital bowel, and is the balsom of the liver and blood._ Truly, it -may be so, for any thing I know, or it may be not; for your _Author_ -could but guess, not assuredly know, unless he had been in a man as big -as the Whale in whose belly _Jonas_ was three days, and had observed -the interior parts and motions of every part for three years time, and -yet he might perchance have been as ignorant at the coming forth, as -if he never had been there; for Natures actions are not onely curious, -but very various; and not onely various, but very obscure; in so much, -as the most ingenious Artists cannot trace her ways, or imitate her -actions; for Art being but a Creature, can do or know no more then a -Creature; and although she is an ingenious Creature, which can and hath -found out some things profitable and useful for the life of others, -yet she is but a handmaid to Nature, and not her Mistress; which your -_Author_, in my opinion, too rashly affirms, when he says,[3] That _the -Art of Chymistry is not onely the Chambermaid and emulating Ape, but -now and then the Mistress of Nature_: For Art is an effect of Nature, -and to prefer the effect before the cause, is absurd. But concerning -Chymistry, I have spoken in another place; I'le return to my former -Discourse: and I wonder much why your _Author_ is so opposite to the -Schools, concerning the doctrine of the Gall's being a receptacle for -superfluities and dregs; for I think there is not any Creature that -has not places or receptacles for superfluous matter, such as we call -dregs; for even the purest and hardest Mineral, as Gold, has its dross, -although in a less proportion then some other Creatures; nay, I am -perswaded, that even Light, which your _Author_ doth so much worship, -may have some superfluous matter, which may be named dregs; and since -Nature has made parts in all Creatures to receive and discharge -superfluous matter, (which receiving and discharging is nothing else -but a joyning and dividing of parts to and from parts,) why may not the -Gall be as well for that use as any other part? But I pray mistake me -not, when I say _superfluous matter or dregs_; for I understand by it, -that which is not useful to the nourishment or consistence of such or -such a Creature; but to speak properly, there is neither superfluity -of matter nor dregs in Nature. Moreover, your _Author_ mentions a -_six-fold digestion_, and makes every digestion to be performed by -inbreathing or inspiration; For _in the first digestion_, he says, -_The spleen doth inspire a sowre Ferment into the Meat: In the second, -The Gall doth inspire a ferment, or fermental blas into the slender -entrails: In the third, The Liver doth inspire a bloody ferment into -the veins of the Mensentery_, &c. I answer, first, I am confident -Nature has more ways then to work onely by Inspirations, not onely in -General, but in every Particular. Next, I believe there are not onely -six, but many more digestions in an animal Creature; for not onely -every sort of food, but every bit that is eaten, may require a several -digestion, and every several part of the body works either to expel, or -preserve, or for both; so that there are numerous several Motions in -every Creature, and many changes of motions in each particular part; -but Nature is in them all. And so leaving her, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Of a Six-fold digestion. - -[2] See _The passive deceiving of the Schools, the humorists,_ c. 1. - -[3] _Ch._ Heat doth not digest efficiently. - - - - -XXXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_, in opposition to the Schools, endeavouring to prove -that there are no humors in an animal body, except blood, proves -many humors in himself. But I can see no reason, why Nature should -not make several humors, as well as several Elements, Vegetables, -Minerals, Animals, and other Creatures; and that in several parts of -the body, and many several ways; for to mention but one sort of other -Creatures, _viz._ Vegetables, they are, as we see, not onely produced -many several ways, but in many several grounds; either by sowing, -setting, or grafting, either in clayie, limy, sandy, chalky, dry, or -wet grounds: And why may not several humors be produced as well of -other Creatures and parts, as others are produced of them? for all -parts of Nature are produced one from another, as being all of one -and the same Matter, onely the variation of corporeal motions makes -all the difference and variety between them, which variety of motions -is impossible to be known by any particular Creature; for Nature can -do more then any Creature can conceive. Truly, _Madam_, I should not -be of such a mind, as to oppose the Schools herein so eagerly as your -_Author_ doth; but artificial actions make men to have erroneous -opinions of the actions of Nature, judging them all according to the -rule and measure of Art, when as Art oft deludes men under the cover -of truth, and makes them many times believe falshood for truth; for -Nature is pleased with variety, and so doth make numerous absurdities, -doubts, opinions, disputations, objections, and the like. Moreover, -your _Author_ is as much against the radical moisture, as he is against -the four humors; saying, that according to this opinion of the Schools, -a fat belly, through much grease affording more fuel to the radical -moisture, must of necessity live longer. But this, in my opinion, -is onely a wilful mistake; for I am confident, that the Schools do -not understand radical moisture to be gross, fat radical oyl, but a -thin oylie substance. Neither do they believe radical heat to be a -burning, fiery and consuming heat, but such a degree of natural heat, -as is comfortable, nourishing, refreshing, and proper for the life -of the animal Creature: Wherefore radical heat and moisture doth not -onely consist in the Grease of the body; for a lean body may have as -much, and some of them more Radical moisture, then fat bodies. But -your _Author_ instead of this radical moisture, makes a nourishable -moisture, onely, as I suppose, out of a mind to contradict the -Schools; when as I do not perceive, that the Schools mean by Radical -moisture, any other then a nourishable moisture, and therefore this -distinction is needless. Lastly, he condemns the Schools, for making -an affinity betwixt the bowels and the brain. But he might as will -condemn Politicians, for saying there is an affinity betwixt Governors -and Subjects, or betwixt command and obedience; but as the actions of -Particulars, even from the meanest in a Commonwealth, may chance to -make a Publick disturbance, so likewise in the Common-wealth of the -body, one single action in a particular part may cause a disturbance -of the whole Body, nay, a total ruine and dissolution of the composed; -which dissolution is called Death; and yet these causes are neither -Light, nor Blas, nor Gas, no more then men are shining Suns, or flaming -Torches, or blazing Meteors, or azure Skies. Wherefore leaving your -_Author_ to his contradicting humor, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I do verily believe, with the Schools, the _Purging of the Brain_, -against your _Author_;[1] For I know no reason, why all the parts of -a man's body should not stand in need of evacuation and Purging, as -well as some. 'Tis true, if the substance or nourishment received were -all useful, and onely enough for the maintenance, subsistance and -continuance of the Creature, and no more, then there would be no need -of such sort of evacuation; but I believe the corporeal self-motions -in a body, discharge the superfluous matter out of every part of the -body, if the motions of the superfluous matter be not too strong, and -over-power the motions in the parts of the body; but some parts do -produce more superfluities then others, by reason their property is -more to dilate, then to contract, and more to attract, then to retain -or fix; which parts are the brain, stomack, bowels, bladder, gall, and -the like: wherefore, as there is nourishment in all parts of the body, -so there are also excrements in all parts, for there is no nourishment -without excrement. Next your _Author_ says, That _the nourishment of -the solid parts is made with the transmutation of the whole venal blood -into nourishment, without a separation of the pure from the impure._ -But I pray give me leave to ask, _Madam_, whether the solid Parts -are not Instruments for the nourishment of the Venal blood? Truly, I -cannot conceive, how blood should be nourished, wanting those solid -parts, and their particular motions and imployments. Again: his opinion -is, _That the brain is nourished by a few and slender veins; neither -doth a passage or channel appear whereby a moist excrement may derive, -or a vapour enter._ And by reason of the want of such a passage, in -another place[2] he is pleased to affirm, _That nothing can fume up -from the stomack into the brain_, and therefore _Wine doth not make -drunk with fuming from the stomach into the head, but the Winie spirit -is immediately snatched into the arteries out of the stomach without -digestion, and so into the head, and there breeds a confusion._ First, -I am not of the opinion, that all nourishment comes from the veins, or -from one particular part of the body, no more do Excrements; neither do -I believe that every passage in the body is visible to Anatomists, for -Natures works are too curious and intricate for any particular Creature -to find them out, which is the cause that Anatomists and Chymists -are so oft mistaken in natural causes and effects; for certainly, -they sometimes believe great Errors for great Truths. Next, as for -Drunkenness, I believe that many, who drink much Wine, are drunk before -such time as the Wine spirit can get into the Arteries; but if there be -Pores to the Brain, as it is most probable, the spirit of Wine may more -easily ascend and enter those Pores, then the Pores of the Arteries, -or the Mouth-veins, and so make a circular journey to the Head. But -as for Excrements, whereof I spake in the beginning, as they are made -several manners or ways, and in several parts of the body, so they -are also discharged several ways from several parts, and several ways -from each particular part, indeed so many several ways and manners, as -would puzzle the wisest man in the world, nay your _Authors Interior -keeper of the Brain_, to find them out. Wherefore, to conclude, he is -the best Physician, that can tell how to discharge superfluity, and to -retain useful nourishments; or to restore by the application of proper -Medicines, decaying parts, or to put in order Irregular motions; and -not those that have Irregular opinions of Immaterial causes: To which, -I leave them, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ Call'd _The Erring Watchman, or Wandring Keeper_. - -[2] _Ch._ call'd _The Spirit of Life_. - - - - -XXXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I do not approve of your _Authors_ Doctrine, forbidding Phlebotomy or -blood-letting in Fevers, opposite to the received Practice of the -Schools; his reason is, that he believes there can be no corruption -in the blood. _Corrupted blood_, says he,[1] _cannot be in the veins, -neither doth a state of ill juice consist in the veins; for Gangrenes -do teach, that nothing of Putrified matter can long persist without a -further contagion of it self._ Also he says, _That the blood of the -Veins is no otherwise distinguished by its several colours and signs, -then as wine is troubled when the vine flourisheth._ To which I answer, -first, That I can see no reason why there should not be as well corrupt -blood, or an ill state of juice in the veins, as ill humors in the -body. Perchance he will say, There is no corruption in the body. But -Ulcers do teach the contrary. He may reply, Ulcers are not parts of the -body. I answer, 'Tis true; but yet they are evil Inhabitants in the -body, and the like may be in the Veins. But surely some men may have -corrupted parts of their bodies, and yet live a great while; witness -Ulcers in the Lungs, and other parts. But your _Author_ may say, When -a part of the body is corrupted, it is no longer an animal Part. I -grant it: but yet, as I said, that transformed part may remain in the -body some time without destruction of the whole body; and so likewise, -when some of the blood, is transchanged from being blood, so as not -to be capable to be reduced again, it may nevertheless remain in the -veins without definition of the veins, or of the whole body: Neither -do I conceive any reason, why corrupt blood should Gangrene in the -veins, and infect the adjoyning parts more then corrupted lungs do. -Next, as for the comparison of the various colours and signs of the -blood, with Wine being troubled when the Vine is flourishing; I answer, -That it doth not prove any thing; for we speak of such colours, as -are signs of corrupted, and not such as are signs of troubled blood: -Besides, it is an unlike comparison; for though Wine may become thick -by much fermentation, yet it doth not turn into water, as blood in -some sick and diseased persons will do. But corrupted blood may be, -not onely in the veins of sick, but also of healthy persons; and the -story says, that _Seneca_, when his veins were cut, they would not -bleed, although in a hot Bath, by reason that which was in the veins, -was rather like a white jelly, then blood, and yet he was healthy, -though old; which proves, that it is not necessary for the blood to -be so pure and fluid as your _Author_ will have it. The truth is, the -more fluid the blood is, the weaker it is; like balsam, the more gummy -it is, the stronger it is: but veins, which are the mouth, to receive -or suck in juices, as also the stomack which digests the meat that -after is turned into blood, may be defective either through weakness, -superfluity, obstruction, corruption, or evil and hurtful diet, or -through the disorders of other particular parts, which may disturb -all the parts in general, as skilful Physicians have observed, and -therefore apply remedies accordingly; for if the defect proceeds from -weakness, they give strengthening remedies; if from superfluities, they -give evacuating remedies; if from evil diets, they prescribe such a -course of diet as shall be beneficial, and conducing for the restoring -of health to the whole body. But your _Author_, as I perceive, believes -the blood to be the chief vital part of the body; which surely it is -not: for if it were, the least disturbance of the blood would endanger -the life of the whole body, and the least diminution would cause a -total dissolution of that animal Creature which has blood: Not but -that blood is as necessary as breath for respiration, and food for -nourishment of the body; but too much blood is as dangerous to the -life of the animal body, as too great a piece of food, which cannot -be swallowed down, but doth stick in the throat, and stop the breath, -or so much quantity as cannot be digested, for too great a fulness or -abounding makes a stoppage of the blood, or which is worse, causes -the veins to break, and an evil digestion, makes a corruption, or at -least such disorder as to indanger the whole animal Figure. But some -veins breed more blood, and some less, and some better, and some worse -blood, some hotter, and some colder, some grosser, and some purer, some -thicker, and some thinner; and some veins breed rather an evil juice or -corrupt matter then pure blood; the truth is, blood is bred somewhat -after the manner of Excrements, for the veins are somewhat like the -guts, wherein the excrements are digested. But you will say, A man may -live without excrements, but not without blood. I answer: a man can -live no more without excrements and excremental humors, then he can -without blood: but yet I am not of your _Authors_ mind, that bleeding -and purging are destructive; for superfluities are as dangerous as -scarcities, nay more; like as an house filled with rubbish is in more -danger to sink or fall, then that which is empty; and when a house is -on fire, it is wisdom to take out the Moveables, but a folly to let -them increase the flame. But your _Author_ says, Blood-letting takes -not onely away the bad, but also the good blood, by which it diminishes -and impairs much the strength of the body. I will answer by way of -question, Whether in War men would not venture the loss of some few -friends, to gain the victory, or save the whole body of the Army: or -whether the destroying of the enemies Army be not more advantageous, -then the loss of some few friends? For although some good blood may -issue out with the bad, yet the veins have more time, room, and some -more power to get friendly juices from the several parts of the body, -which will be more obedient, trusty, and true to the life and service -of the whole body. But neither Fevers, nor any other distempers, will -be more afraid of your _Authors_ words, Stones, Spirits, as also Rings, -Beads, Bracelets, and the like toys, fitter for Children to play -withal, then for Physicians to use; then an Army of men will be of -their enemies Colours, Ensigns, Feathers, Scarfs, and the like; knowing -it must be Swords, Pistols, Guns, Powder and Bullets, that must do the -business to destroy the enemy, and to gain the victory: Wherefore in -Diseases it must be Bleeding, Purging, Vomiting, using of Clysters, -and the like, if any good shall be done. 'Tis true, they must well be -ordered, otherwise they will do more hurt then good; for Diseases are -like Enemies, which sometimes take away our Armes for their own uses. -But your _Author_ says again, _That the Matter of a Fever floats not -in the veins, nor sits nigh the heart._ I answer: There are several -sorts of Fevers; for all Fevers are not produced after one and the -same manner, or from one and the same cause, as is very well known -to wise and experienced Physicians; but although some Fevers are not -in the blood, yet that doth not prove, that the blood is never in a -Fever; for sometimes the blood is in a Fever, and not the solid parts; -and sometimes the fluid and moveable humors, and not the blood, or -solid parts; and sometimes the solid parts, and not the blood, nor the -liquid and moveable humors; and sometimes they are all in a Fever; and -sometimes onely the radical parts, and neither the blood, humors, nor -solid parts: and this last kind of Fever, which is a hectick Fever, in -my opinion, is incureable; but the others may be cureable, if there -be not too many varieties of distempers, or irregular motions. And as -for a Fever in the solid parts, Letting of blood, and taking away the -humor, may cure it; for the veins being empty, suck the heat out of -the solid parts, which solid parts cannot draw out a distempered heat -in the veins, and the opening of the veins gives vent to some of the -interior heat to issue forth: Wherefore it is very requisite, that in -all sorts of Fevers, except Hectick-Fevers, blood-letting should be -used, not onely once, but often; for 'tis better to live with a little -blood, and a little strength, which will soon be recovered, then to -die with too much, or too hot and distempered blood. Also Purging, but -especially Vomiting is very good; for if the humors be in a Feaver, -they may infect the vital parts, as also the blood; but if they be not -in a Fever, yet the solid parts or blood may do the same, and so make -the contagion greater; for the humors are as the moveables in a house, -which ought to be cast out if either they or the house should be on -fire; and if a disorder proceeds from the error of a particular part, -then care must be taken to rectifie that part for the health of the -whole: Wherefore Physicians use in some cases Blood-letting, in some -Purging, in some Vomiting, in some Bathing, in some Sweating, in some -Cordials, especially after much evacuation, in some they prescribe a -good diet, and in some they mix and prescribe partly one and partly the -other, and in some cases they are forced to use all these remedies; -for though great evacuations may cause weakness, yet they often save -the life; and there is no Patient, but had rather lose some strength, -then life; for life can gather strength again; but all strong men are -not always long lived, nor all long-lived men very strong; for many -that are but weak, will live to a very old age. Lastly, concerning what -your _Author_ says, that there is but one Choler and Phlegme in Nature; -I answer, That is more then he knows: for all that is in Nature, is -not nor cannot be known by any Particular Creature; and he might say, -as well, the same of particular Metals, as that there is but one sort -of Gold or Silver, when as there is great difference in the weight, -purity, colour, and gloss, of several parts of Gold and Silver; Neither -is all Gold found in one place; but some is found in Rocks, some in -Sand, some in Mines, some in Stones; and so Silver, some is found in -the bowels of the Earth, some in the veins of Stones, and some in other -Metals, as Lead, and Iron, and some in Coals. And the like may be said -of Choler and Phlegme; for they may be several in several places or -parts of the body, and be of different colours, tastes, odours, and -degrees of heat or cold, thinness or thickness, or the like; for though -there is but one Matter in Nature, yet this onely Matter by its several -actions or motions changes into several figures, and so makes several -sorts of Creatures, and different particulars in every sort. And thus, -_Madam_, I have delivered unto you my opinion concerning the cure of -Fevers by Blood-letting: Which I submit to the correction of your -better judgment, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] In his Treatise of Fevers, _c._ 4. - - - - -XXXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ is not onely against Phlebotomy or Blood-letting, but -against all Purging Medicines, which he condemns to _carry a hidden -poyson in them, and to be a cruel and stupid invention._ But certainly -he shall not have my assent; for if they be Poyson, they are a very -beneficial Poyson; and Physical Purgations, in my opinion, are very -necessary and profitable for the prolonging of life, and taking away -of diseases, provided they be proper for those diseases in which they -are used; and so is Phlebotomy, Vomits, and the like: but Medicines are -often wrong applyed, and many times the disease is so various, that -it is as hard for a Physician to hit right with several Medicines, -as for a Gunner or Shooter to kill with Powder and small Shot a Bird -flying in the Air; not that it is not possible to be done, but it -is not ordinary, or frequent: neither doth the fault onely lie in -the Gun, Powder, or Shot, but in the swiftness of the flight of the -Bird, or in the various motion of the air, or in a hidden wind, or -mist, or the like; for the same Gunner may perhaps easily kill a -Bird sitting in a bush, or hopping upon the ground. The like may be -said of Diseases, Physicians, and Medicines; for some diseases have -such hidden alterations, by the sudden changes of motions, that a -wise Physician will not, nor cannot venture to apply so many several -medicines so suddenly as the alteration requires; and shall therefore -Physicians be condemned? and not onely condemned for what cannot be -helped by reason of the variety of irregular motions, but what cannot -be helped in Nature? For some diseases are so deadly, as no art can -cure them, when as otherwise Physicians with good and proper medicines, -have, and do as yet rescue more people from death, then the Laws do -from ruine. Nay, I have known many that have been great enemies to -Physick, die in the flower of their age, when as others which used -themselves to Physick, have lived a very long time. But you may say, -Country-people and Labourers, take little or no Physick, and yet grow -most commonly old, whereas on the contrary, Great and rich Persons -take much Physick, and do not live so long as the common sort of men -doth. I answer: It is to be observed, first, that there are more -Commons, then Nobles, or Great and rich persons; and there is not so -much notice taken of the death of a mean, as of a noble, great, or -rich person; so that for want of information or knowledg, one may -easily be deceived in the number of each sort of persons. Next, the -Vulgar sort use laborious exercises, and spare diet; when as noble -and rich persons are most commonly lazie and luxurious, which breeds -superfluities of humors, and these again breed many distempers: For -example, you shall find few poor men troubled with the Gout, Stone, -Pox, and the like diseases, nor their Children with Rickets; for all -this cometh by luxury, and no doubt but all other diseases are sooner -bred with luxury, then temperance; but whatsoever is superfluous, -may, if not be taken away, yet mediated with lenitive and laxative -medicines. But as for Physicians, surely never age knew any better, in -my opinion, then this present, and yet most of them follow the rules -of the Schools, which are such as have been grounded upon Reason, -Practice, and Experience, for many ages: Wherefore those that will -wander from the Schools, and follow new and unknown ways, are, in my -opinion, not Orthodoxes, but Hereticks in the Art of Physick. But to -return to your _Author_, give me leave, _Madam_, to consider what his -opinions are concerning the Purging of Choler; _Come on_, says he to -the Schools,[1] _Why doth that, your Choler following with so swift -an efflux, stink so horribly, which but for one quarter of an hour -before did not stink?_ To which it may be answered, That though humors -may not stink in themselves, yet the excrements mixt with the humors -may stink; also the very passing thorow the excrements will cause a -strong savour. But your _Author_ thinks, That _by passing through so -suddenly, the humors cannot borrow such a smell of stinking dung from -the Intestines._ Truly, 'tis easily said, but hardly proved, and the -contrary is manifest by putting clear, pure water into a stinking -vessel, which straightway is corrupted with an ill smell. He talks -also of _Vitriol dissolved in Wine, which if it be taken, presently -provokes vomit; but if after drinking it, any one shall drink thereupon -a draught of Ale or Beer, or Water, &c. he indeed shall suffer many -stools, yet wholly without stink._ I answer: This expresses Vitriol -to be more poysonous, by taking away the natural savour of the bowels, -then Scammony, Coloquintida, Manna, Cassia, Sena, Rhubarb, &c. to -all which your _Author_ is a great enemy; and it is well known to -experienced Physicians, that Medicines prepared by the art of fire are -more poysonous and dangerous then natural drugs; nay, I dare say, that -many Chymical Medicines, which are thought to be Cordials, and have -been given to Patients for that purpose, have proved more poysonous -then any Purging Physick. Again your _Author_ says, _It is worthy of -Lamentation, that Physicians would have loosening things draw out one -humor, and not another, by selection or choyce._ My answer is, That -natural drugs and simples are as wise in their several operations, as -Chymists in their artificial distillations, extractions, sublimations, -and the like; but it has long been observed by Physicians, that one -simple will work more upon one part of the body, then upon another; the -like may be said of humors. But give me leave to tell you, _Madam_, -that if your _Author_ believes magnetick or attractive cures (as he -doth, and in whose behalf he makes very long discourses) he doth in -this opinion contradict himself. He may say, perhaps, There is no such -thing as what Physicians name humors. But grant there be none, yet he -cannot deny that there are offensive juices, or moveable substances -made by evil, as irregular digestions, which may be troublesom and -hurtful to the nature of the body. Or perchance he will say, There are -such humors, but they are beneficial and not offensive to the nature -of the body. I answer: Then he must make an agreement with every part -of the body, not to make more of these humors then is useful for the -body. Also he mentions some few that took Purging Physick, and died. -Truly so they might have done without taking it: but he doth not tell, -how many have died for want of proper and timely Purges. In truth, -_Madam_, 'tis an easie thing to find fault, but not so easie to mend -it. And as for what he speaks of the weighing of those humors and -excrements, which by purging were brought out of some Princes body, and -how much by the Schools rules remained, and of the place which should -maintain the remainder; I onely say this, that all the several sorts -of juices, humors, or moveable substances in a body, do not lie in one -place, but are dispersed, and spread all about and in several parts -and places in the body; so that the several Laxative medicines do but -draw them together, or open several parts, that they may have freedom -to travel with their chief Commanders, which are the Purging medicines. -But your _Author_ says, the Loadstone doth not draw rust. And I say, no -more do Purging drugs draw out pure Matter: for it may be as natural -for such medicines to draw or work onely upon superfluities, that is, -corrupted, or evil-affected humors, juices or moveable substances, as -for the Loadstone to draw Iron; and so it may be the property of Purges -to draw onely the rust of the body, and not the pure metal, which are -good humors. But few do consider or observe sufficiently the variety of -Natures actions, and the motions of particular natural Creatures, which -is the cause they have no better success in their cures. And so leaving -them to a more diligent inquisition and search into Nature, and her -actions, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] In his Treatise of Fevers, _c._ 5. - - - - -XXXV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I find your _Author_ to be as great an enemy to Issues, Cauteries, -Clysters, and the like, as he is to Blood-letting and Purging; -especially to Issues, which he counts to be blasphemous against -the Creator, and blames much the Schools for prescribing them. But -concerning Blood-letting and Purging, I have declared my opinion in -my former Letters; and if you desire my judgment of Clysters and -Issues, I must needs tell you, that it is well known these many ages, -that in such diseases which lie in the guts, and cause pain in the -head, and stop the ureteres, Clysters have been very beneficial, but -wise Physicians do not prescribe them, unless upon necessity: As for -example; if the disease in the Guts proceed from cold or wind, they -prescribe a Sack-Clyster, with oyl of Walnuts; and if the disease in -the guts proceed from a sharp or bitter humor, then they prescribe -Milk, or Posset, sweetned with Sugar: the same if the guts be too -full of excrements or slime. But in case of diseases in the head or -stomack, they prescribe attractive Clysters, to wit, such as draw down -from the upper into the lower parts, wherein the Physical drugs are; -and if the guts be too dry, or dryer then their nature requires, -they prescribe moistening Clysters, such as have not onely wetting, -but slimy qualities. And surely Clysters properly and timely applyed, -are a safe, speedy, easie and profitable medicine, and far more safe -then Chymical Salts, Tartars, Spirits, or the like. Next concerning -Issues and Cauteries, your _Author_, I say, is so much against them, -as he counts them a blasphemy; for says he,[1] _I have beheld always -an implicite blasphemy in a Cautery, whereby they openly accuse the -Creator of insufficiency in framing the emunctories; for I have bidden -above a thousand Issues to be filled up with flesh._ Also, _That which -God hath made whole and entire, that it might be very good, seems to -the Schools, that it should be better if it be kept wounded._ Truly, -_Madam_, in my opinion, it is no blasphemy at all, neither directly -nor indirectly, to make Issues, but a meer superstition to believe the -contrary, _viz._ that they are blasphemy, and a great folly not to make -them when need requires it to the preservation of ones health. _God has -made our body whole and intire_, says your _Author_: by which he will -prove that no holes must be made in the body to let out excrementious -matter, and therefore he thinks that body to be whole and intire which -is without an Issue, when as yet our bodies have numerous issues, -which are the pores of the skin, to let out sweat; and therefore if -he counts that body not to be whole and intire that has Issues, then -no humane body is intire. Certainly, no Artificial Issue will make -the body maimed, but it will nevertheless continue whole and intire -although it has Issues. He says it is Blasphemy; But how will he prove -it? Surely not by the Scripture; and if not by the Scripture, then it -is a blasphemy according to his own brain and fancy. 'Tis true, God -gave no express Command to make Issues; but according to your _Author_, -God did never create Diseases, and so there was no need either to -make such Issues in bodies as to let out distempered Matter, or to -give any command for them; but we might as well say, we must not use -any Physick, because it is not so natural to man as food, and serves -not for the nourishment of the body, but onely to keep off, or drive -out diseases: Also no stone must be cut, but man must rather indure -torment and death. But setting aside this superstitious doctrine of -your _Author_, it is evident enough, and needs no proof, that Cancers, -Fistulas, Wenns, Eating-evils, Madness, Fevers, Consumptions, Rheumes, -Pleurisies, and numerous other diseases, are not better cured then by -Issues, or making of wounds, either by Lancets, Pen-knifes, Scissers, -Rasors, Corrosives, Causticks, Leeches, or the like. And although -your _Author_ says, That _that Matter which proceeds from, or out of -an Issue, is made in the lips of the wound, and not in the body; for -it cannot possibly drain or draw out any moisture, either from within -or between the skin and the flesh, having no passages_: Yet if this -were so, how come Fistulas, Cancers, and the like diseases, to have -passages from within the body to the exterior parts, so, as to make -a wound, out of which much sharp and salt humor issues? which humor -certainly is not made in the lips of the wound, but in the body: Also -whence comes the humor that makes the Gout? For though the swelling and -inflammation will sometimes appear exteriously, yet after some time -those tumors and humors retire back into the body from whence they did -flow; but he might as well say that Pit-falls or Sluces do not drain -Land from a superfluity of Water, as that Issues do not drain the body -of superfluous humors. Wherefore I am absolutely of opinion, that the -Practice of the Schools is the best and wisest Practice, as well in -making Issues, letting blood, Purging by Siege or Vomits, as any other -means used by them; for by Issues I have seen many cured, when no -other medicines would do any good with them; and letting blood, I am -confident, hath rescued more lives, then the Universal Medicine, could -Chymists find it out, perchance would do. So also Clysters and Vomits, -skilfully applied, have done great benefits to the life of men; for -every part and member hath its peculiar way to be purged and cleansed; -for example, Clysters principally cleanse the Guts, Purges the Stomack, -Vomits the Chest, Sneezing the Head, Bleeding the Veins, and Issues -drain the whole body of naughty humors: All which remedies, properly -and timely used, keep the body from being choak'd with superfluities. -There are several other ways of cures besides for several diseases, but -I leave those to learned and skilful Physicians, who know best how and -when to use them to the benefit and health of their Patients, although -your _Author_ finds much fault with them, and blames them for suffering -men to die miserably; but God has given power to Nature to make certain -dissolutions, although uncertain diseases, and uncertain remedies. -Neither hath she in her power to give Immortal Life to particular -Creatures, for this belongs to God alone, and therefore no Universal -Medicine will keep out death, or prolong life further then its thread -is spun, which I doubt is but a Chymæra, and an impossible thing, -by reason there are not onely so many different varieties in several -diseases, but in one and the same disease, as no Universal remedy -would do any good. But your _Author_ is much pleased with Paradoxes, -and Paradoxes are not certain Truths: Wherefore it is better, in my -judgment, to follow the old approved and practised way of the Schools, -grounded upon Experience and Reason, then his Paradoxical Opinions. -To which Schools, as your _Author_ is a great Enemy, so I am a great -Friend, as well as, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble Servant._ - -[1] Of Cauteries. - - - - -XXXVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I approve well of your _Authors_ opinion,[1] That _Drink ought not -to be forbidden in Fevers_; but yet I would not allow so much as to -drown and oppress the Patients life, but onely so much as to refresh -and moisten him; and therefore the best way is to drink little and -often. But as for Wine, which your _Author_ commends in Fevers, I am -utterly against it, unless the Fever proceed from a cold or crude -cause, otherwise cooling Ptisans are most beneficial to those that are -sick of a continual Fever, which for the most part is a general Fever -throughout the whole body, one part infecting the other, until they -be all infected, like as in the Plague. And to let you know the proof -of it; when I was once sick beyond the Seas, I sent for a Doctor of -Physick who was an Irish-man: and hearing of some that knew him, and -his practice, that he was not successful in his Cures, but that his -Patients most commonly died, I asked him what he used to prescribe in -such or such diseases? where amongst the rest, as I remember, he told -me, That he allowed his Patients to drink Wine in a Fever. I thought -he was in a great error, and told him my opinion, that though Wine -might be profitable, perhaps, to some few, yet for the most part it -was very hurtful and destructive, alledging another famous Physician -in _France_, Dr. _Davison_, who used in continual Fevers, to prescribe -onely cooling Ptisan, made of a little Barley, and a great quantity -of Water, so thin as the Barley was hardly perceived, and a spoonfull -of syrup of Limmon put into a quart of the said Ptisan; but in case -of a Flux, he ordered some few seeds of Pomegranats to be put into -it, and this cold Ptisan was to be the Patients onely drink: Besides, -once in Twenty four hours he prescribed a couple of potched Eggs, with -a little Verjuice, and to let the Patient blood, if he was dry and -hot; I mean dry exteriously, as from sweat; and that either often or -seldom, according as occasion was found: Also he prescribed two grains -of Laudanum every night, but neither to give the Patient meat nor drink -two hours before and after: Which advice and Practice of the mentioned -Physician concerning Fevers, with several others, I declared to this -Irish Doctor, and he observing this rule, cured many, and so recovered -his lost esteem and repute. But your _Author_ being all for Wine, and -against cooling drinks, or Julips, in hot Fevers, says, _That cooling -means are more like to death, to cessation from motion, and to defect; -but heat from moderate Wine is a mean like unto life._ To which I -answer, first, That cold, or cooling things, are as active as hot or -heating things; neither is death more cold then hot, nor life more hot -then cold; for we see that Frost is as active and strong as burning -heat; and Water, Air, and Earth, are as full of life, as Fire; and -Vegetables, Minerals, and Elements, have life as well as Animals: But -we, feeling a Man's flesh cold when he is dissolving from an Animal, -think death is cold; and seeing he was hot before the same alteration, -say, Life is hot: Also finding an animal, when it is dissolving, to be -without external local Motion, we say it is dead; and when it hath as -yet this local motion before its alteration, we call it alive; which -certainly is not proper. Next I say, that a wise Man when his house is -fired, will fling or squirt water upon it, to quench it, and take out -all moveables lest they should increase the flame; likewise he will -make vent for the flame to issue forth. But perchance your _Author_ may -say, that Fevers are not hot. Truly, in my opinion, he might say as -well that Fire is cold. Again, he may say, That although the effect -be hot, yet the cause is cold. I answer: That in some diseases, the -effects become so firmly rooted, and so powerfull, that they must be -more look'd upon then the cause: for such variety there is in Nature, -that oftentimes, that which was now an effect, turns to be a cause, and -again a cause an effect: For example; A cold cause often produces a hot -effect, and this hot effect becomes again a cause of a cold effect: -Which variation is not onely a trouble, but a great obstruction to wise -Physicians; for Nature hath more varieties in diseases, then Physicians -have remedies, And as for drink, if Fevers be neither hot, nor dry, -nor require drink for want of moisture; then I see no reason why drink -should be urged, and those Physicians blamed that forbid it; for if -thirst proceed from an evil digestion, drink will rather weaken the -stomack; for heat and driness draw soon away the drink in the stomack, -and putting much into a weak stomack doth rather hurt then good. But -if necessity require it, then I approve rather of raw and crude Water, -then of hot inflaming Wine. And so taking my leave, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] Of Fevers, _Ch._ 12. - - - - -XXXVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In your _Authors_ Treatise of Fevers, I find one Chapter[1] whose -Inscription is, _A Perfect Curing of all Fevers_, wherein he declares -the secrets of the Cures of Fevers, consisting all in Chymical -Medicines. But considering, that if all Fevers could be cured by such -Medicines, then all Physicians would strive to obtain them; I can -hardly believe (by your _Authors_ favour) that any such perfect curing -of all Fevers can be effected, but that your _Authors_ prescriptions, -if they should come to the tryal, might fail as well as any other. -Likewise he mentions a Medicine of _Paracelsus_, Named _Diaceltesson_, -or the _Coraline Secret_; which, he says, cures radically the Gout no -less then Fevers: Which if so, I wonder why so many Great, Noble and -Rich Persons, groan so much under the pains of the Gout; certainly -it is not for want of cost to have them prepared, nor for want of an -ingenious and experienced Chymist; for this age doth not want skilful -workmen in that Art, nor worthy and wise Physicians, which if they knew -such soveraign medicines, would soon apply them to their Patients; -but I suppose that they finding their effects to be less then the -cost and labour bestowed upon them, forbear to use them. Moreover, he -mentions[2] another remedy for most diseases, by him call'd _Driff_, -prepared also by the Art of Chymistry; but I believe all those remedies -will not so often cure, as fail of cure, like as the Sympathetical -Powder; for if there were such soveraign medicines that did never fail -of a successful effect, certainly men being curious, inquisitive, -and searching, would never leave till they had found them out. Also -amongst Vegetables, the herb _Chameleon_ and _Arsmart_ are in great -request with your _Author_; For, says he, _they by their touching -alone, do presently take away cruel diseases, or at leastwise ease -them._ Which if so, I wonder that there is not more use made of them, -and they held in greater esteem then they are; Also that your _Author_ -doth not declare the vertue of them, and the manner and way how, and -in what diseases to use them, for the benefit of his neighbour, to -which end, he says, all his labours and actions are directed? But -again, your _Author_ confirms, as an Eye-witness, _That the bone of -the arm of a Toad presently has taken away the Tooth-ach at the first -co-touching._ Which remedy, if it was constant, few, in my opinion, -would suffer such cruel pains, and cause their teeth to be drawn out, -especially if sound. Likewise of the mineral _Electrum or Amber_ of -_Paracelsus_, he affirms[3] to have seen, that _hung about the neck, it -has freed those that were persecuted by unclean spirits_, and that many -simples have done the like effects; but surely, _Madam_, I cannot be -perswaded that the Devil should be put away so easily; for he being a -Spirit, will not be chased by corporeal means, but by spiritual, which -is Faith, and Prayer; and the cure of dispossessing the Devil belongs -to Divines, and not to Natural Philosophers or Physicians. But though -exterior remedies, as Amulets, Pomanders, and the like, may perform -sometimes such effects as to cure or preserve from some diseases, yet -they are not ordinary and constant, but meerly by chance. But there are -more false remedies then true ones, and if one remedy chance to work -successfully with one distempered person, it may fail of its success -applyed to others in the same kind of distemper; nay, it may cure -perhaps one and the same person of a distemper once, and in the return -of the same disease effect little or nothing; witness those remedies -that are applyed in Agues, Tooth-aches, and the like, especially -Amulets; for one and the same disease in several persons, or in one and -the same person at several times, may vary and change so often, and -proceed from so different causes, and be of so different tempers, and -have such different motions, as one and the same medicine can do no -good: And what would the skill of Physicians be, if one remedy should -cure all diseases? Why should they take so much pains in studying the -various causes, motions, and tempers of diseases, if one medicine had a -general power over all? Nay, for what use should God have created such -a number of different simples, Vegetables, and Minerals, if one could -do all the business? Lastly, your _Author_ rehearses[4] some strange -examples of Child-bearing Women, who having seen terrible and cruel -sights, as Executions of Malefactors, and dismembring of their bodies, -have brought forth monstrous births, without heads, hands, arms, leggs, -&c. according to the objects they had seen. I must confess, _Madam_, -that all Creatures are not always formed perfect; for Nature works -irregularly sometimes, wherefore a Child may be born defective in some -member or other, or have double members instead of one, and so may -other animal Creatures; but this is nevertheless natural, although -irregular to us: but to have a Child born perfect in the womb, and the -lost member to be taken off there, and so brought forth defective, -as your _Author_ mentions, cannot enter my belief; neither can your -_Author_ himself give any reason, but he makes onely a bare relation -of it; for certainly, if it was true, that the member was chopt, rent -or pluckt off from the whole body of the Child, it could not have -been done without a violent shock or motion of the Mother, which I am -confident would never have been able to endure it; for such a great -alteration in her body, would of necessity, besides the death of the -Child, have caused a total dissolution of her own animal parts, by -altering the natural animal motions: But, as I said above, those births -are caused by irregular motions, and are not frequent and ordinary; for -if upon every strange sight, or cruel object, a Child-bearing-woman -should produce such effects, Monsters would be more frequent then they -are. In short, Nature loves variety, and this is the cause of all -strange and unusual natural effects; and so leaving Nature to her will -and pleasure, my onely delight and pleasure is to be, - -Madam, - -_[Your] faithful Friend, and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ 14. - -[2] In the _Ch._ named _Butler_. - -[3] Ch. Of the manner of entrance of things darted into the body. - -[4] _Ch._ Of things injected into the body. - - - - -XXXVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ reproving the Schools, that they forbid Salt to some -diseased persons, as pernicious to their health: _Good God_, says -he,[1] _how unsavoury are the Schools, and how unsavoury do they bid us -to be!_ But I suppose the Schools do not absolutely forbid all diseased -persons to abstein from salt, but onely not to use it excessively, or -too frequently; for experience proves, that salt meats have not onely -increased, but caused diseases, as the Stone, the Gout, Sciatica, -Fistula's, Cancers, sore Eyes, sore Throats, and the like: I do not -say, that those diseases are always bred with the excess of salt diets; -for diseases of one and the same kind, may be bred variously; but this -hath been observed, that whosoever is affected with such diseases, -shall after a salt meal find himself in more pain then before; -wherefore a constant or common salt diet cannot but be hurtful. Neither -are those persons that feed much on salt meats, or use strong drinks, -take number for number, so healthful or long-lived, as those that are -temperate and abstaining. Next, your _Author_[2] bewails _The shameful -simplicity of those, that give their Patients Leaf-Gold, Pearls, and -bruised or powder'd pretious Stones, as Cordials, in fainting fits, -and other distempers: For_, says he, _they may be dissolved, but not -altered; wherefore they cannot produce any powerful effect to the -health of the Patient._ Truly, _Madam_, I am not of his mind; for were -it that those remedies or cordials could not be transchanged, yet their -vertues may nevertheless be very beneficial to the sick: For example; -a man that is assaulted by enemies, or by chance is fallen into a -deep Pit, or is ready to be strangled, and in all not able to help -himself, yet by the help of another man, may be rescued and freed from -his danger, and from death, using such means as are able to release -him, which either by drawing his Sword against his enemies, or by -throwing a rope down into the Pit, and haling him out, or by cutting -the rope by which he hung, may save him, and yet neither the man, nor -any of his Instruments, as Sword, Rope, Knife, and the like, need to -be transchanged. The like may be said of the aforementioned medicines -or remedies; which if they be not transchangeable, yet they may -nevertheless do such operations, as by their natural active qualities -and proprieties to over-power the irregular motions in the natural -parts of the body of the Patient; for many diseases proceed more from -irregular motions then irregular parts: and although there is no motion -without matter, yet one and the same matter may have divers and various -changes of motions, and moving parts will either oppose or assist -each other without transchanging. And truly, _Madam_, I wonder that -your _Author_ doth condemn such Cordials made of Leaf-gold, Pearls, -powdered precious Stones, or the like, and yet verily believe, that -Amber, Saphires, Emeraulds, Beads, Bracelets, &c. outwardly applied or -worn, can cure more then when inwardly taken; surely, if this be so, -they cure more by Faith, then by Reason. But it seems your _Author_ -regulates the actions of Nature to the artificial actions of his -Furnace, which although sometimes they produce wonderful effects, yet -not such as Nature doth; for if they cure one, they commonly kill ten; -nay, the best of their Medicine is so dangerous, as it ought not to be -applied but in desperate cases: Wherefore Wise Physicians must needs be -Provident and Cautious when they use them. And so leaving them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] Of the disease of the Stone, _c._ 3. - -[2] _Ch._ Of the reason or consideration of diet. - - - - -XXXIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I will not dispute your _Authors_ opinion concerning the Plague of Men, -which he says,[1] _doth not infect Beasts, neither doth the plague of -Beasts infect Men_; but rather believe it to be so: for I have observed -that Beasts infect onely each other, to wit, those of their own kind, -as Men do infect other Men. For example: the Plague amongst Horses -continues in their own kind, and so doth the Plague amongst Sheep; -and for any thing we know, there may be a plague amongst Vegetables, -as well as amongst Animals, and they may not onely infect each other -but also those Animals that do feed on those infectious Vegetables: -so that Infections may be caused several ways; either by inbreathing -and attracting or sucking in the Poyson of the Plague, or by eating -and converting it into the substance of the body; for some kinds of -poyson are so powerful, as to work onely by way of inbreathing. Also -some sorts of Air may be full of infection, and infect many Men, -Beasts, Birds, Vegetables, and the like; for Infections are variously -produced, Internally as well as Externally, amongst several particular -Creatures; for as the Plague may be made internally, or within the body -of a particular Creature, without any exterior infection entring from -without into the body, so an external Infection again may enter many -several ways into the body. And thus there be many contagious diseases -caused meerly by the internal motions of the body, as by fright, -terror, conceit, fancy, imagination, and the like, and many by the -taking of poysonous matter from without into the body; but all are made -by the natural motions or actions of animate matter, by which all is -made that is in Nature, and nothing is new, as _Solomon_ says; but what -is thought or seems to be new, is onely the variation of the Motions -of this old Matter, which is Nature. And this is the reason that not -every Age, Nation, or Creature, has always the like diseases; for as -all the actions of Nature vary, so also do diseases. But to speak of -the Plague, although I am of opinion, that the Plague of Beasts doth -not infect Men, unless they be eaten; nor the plague of Men, Beasts; -yet Magistrates do wisely in some places, that in the beginning of the -plague of Men, they command Dogs and Cats to be kill'd, by reason, as -your _Author_ saith, _The skins and flesh of Brutes may be defiled with -our Plague, and they may be pestiferous contagions unto us._ I will -add one thing more, which doth concern the Poyson of Measels, whereof -your _Author_ is saying,[2] That _it is onely proper to humane kind._ -What kind of Measles he means, I know not; but certainly Hogs are often -affected with that disease, as is vulgarly known; but whether they be -different diseases in their kinds, and proceed from different motions, -I will let others inquire. And so I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] In the Plague-grave, _ch._ 17. - -[2] _Ch._ Call'd, _The Lunar Tribute_. - - - - -XL. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning the disease of the Stone, your _Author_ seems to be of an -opinion, That the stone in the Bladder, and the stone in the Kidnies, -are not made after one and the same manner: For, says he,[1] _The -Bladder and the same Urine in number procreates a duelech of another -condition, then that which is made in the Kidney._ And truly, _Madam_, -it may be so; for there are several ways or modes in irregularities, -as well as regularities, and not every kind is alike, no not every -Particular, but there is some difference between them: Wherefore, it -may very well be, that the corporeal motions that make the stone in -the Kidneys, are not just alike to those that make the stone in the -Bladder; and as each sort of stone is different, so their particular -causes ought to be different; but this is to be observed, that -generally all diseases which produce hardness, are made by contracting, -condensing and retenting motions, and therefore the remedies of them -must be dilating, rarifying and dissolving. Next your _Author_ says, -_The Stone is not bred by heat, but heat is rather an effect of the -stone; neither is a certain muscilage, or a slimy, snivelly Phlegme -the cause or matter of the stone, but the stone is the cause of the -phlegme._ But, in my judgment, it seems more probable, that a slimy -matter is more proper for a stone to be made of, then that a stone -should make slime, except it be in its dissolution; that is, when the -stone, as in its generation or production it did change from a slimy -or liquid substance to a stone by condensing and contracting motions, -doth, by dilating and rarifying motions, dissolve again into such a -liquid and slimy body. I will not say always, to wit, that the stone -must needs be resolved into a slimy matter, but oftentimes it may be -so. Neither can I absolutely affirm that either heat or cold onely is -the cause of a stone; for some may be produced by hot, and some by -cold contractions and densations, there being as many several sorts of -stones as there are of other Creatures: But this is to be well noted, -that as some sorts of hot contractions do make stones, so some sorts -of hot dilations do dissolve them: The like of cold contractions and -dilations. Again: your _Author_ speaking of the womb wherein the stone -is made; _Every generated thing or being_, says he, _must of necessity -have a certain place or womb where it is produced; for there must -needs be places wherein things may be made before they are bred._ I -answer: As there is not any body without place, nor any place without -body, so the womb is not the place of the body generated, neither -before nor after its generation, no more then a man can be said to -be in a room when he is not there, but every body carries its place -along with it. Moreover, concerning the voiding of bloody Urine, which -happens sometimes in the disease of the Stone, my opinion is, That -it doth not always proceed from the Stone, but many times from the -breaking or voluntary opening of some Veins. But as for the cure of the -disease of the Stone your _Author,_[2] is pleased to affirm, _That no -disease is incurable_, and so neither the disease of the Stone, _For -he himself has cured many of the Stone to which they had been obedient -for some years._ Indeed, _Madam_, I fear his words are more cheerful -then effectual; however it may be possible, if the Kidneys be no ways -impaired, or the Bladder hurt; but if there be some such imperfection -in either or both, then it is as much, in my opinion, as to say, Man -can do more then Nature doth: Neither can I believe, that then any of -your _Authors_ Chymical preparations, as _Aroph, Ludus, Alkahest_, -and the like, if they were to be had, would do any good, no nor -_Daucus_, or wild Carrot-seed, if the disease be as yet curable, will -prove an effectual remedy for it, although your _Author_ is pleased -to relate an example of a man, to whom it did much good; for I can -affirm the contrary by other the like Examples, that it never did any -good to those that used it; nor the liquor of the Birch-tree, whose -venue and efficacy I do not believe to be so great as your _Author_ -describes:[3] But for the stoppage of Urine, Marsh-mallow and oyl of -Almonds, which he despises, I approve to be good, and better then any -of his Unknown, Chymical Secrets; for those Chymical Medicines, as he -himself confesses, are hard to be had, especially _Alkahest_, which is -onely to be obtained by a Particular favour from Heaven, and is rather -a supernatural Gift, then a natural remedy. But your _Author_ doth -wisely, to commend such remedies as can never, or with great difficulty -be obtained, and then to say that no disease is incurable. And so -leaving him to his unknown secrets, and those to them that will use -them, I am resolved to adhere to the Practice of the Schools, which I -am confident will be more beneficial to the health of, - -Madam, - -_Your real and faithful_ - -_Friend and Servant._ - -[1] Of the Stone, _ch._ 6. See the _ch._ called, _A Numero-Critical -Paradox of supplies_. - -[2] _Ch._ 7. - -[3] _Ch._ 8. - - - - -XLI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ speaking of the _Gout_, and of that kind of Gout which -is called _Hereditary_, says, _It consists immediately in the Spirit -of Life._ First, as for that which is called an Hereditary Disease, -propagated from Parents upon their Children; my opinion is, That it -is nothing else but the same actions of the animate matter, producing -the same effect in the Child as they did in the Parent: For example; -the same motions which made the Gout in the Parent, may make the same -disease in the Child; but every Child has not his Parents diseases, and -many Children have such diseases as their Parents never had; neither is -any disease tied to a particular Family by Generation, but they proceed -from irregular motions, and are generally in all Mankind; and therefore -properly there is no such thing as an hereditary propagation of -diseases; for one and the same kind of disease may be made in different -persons, never a kin to one another, by the like motions; but because -Children have such a neer relation to their Parents by Generation, if -they chance to have the same diseases with their Parents, men are apt -to conclude it comes by inheritance; but we may as well say, that all -diseases are hereditary; for there is not any disease in Nature but is -produced by the actions of Nature's substance; and if we receive life -and all our bodily substance by Generation from our Parents, we may be -said to receive diseases too; for diseases are inherent in the matter -or substance of Nature, which every Creature is a part of, and are real -beings made by the corporeal motions of the animate matter, although -irregular to us; for as this matter moves, so is Life or Death, -Sickness or Health, and all natural effects; and we consisting of the -same natural matter, are naturally subject as well to diseases as to -health, according as the Matter moves. Thus all diseases are hereditary -in Nature; nay, the Scripture it self confirms it, informing us, that -diseases, as well as death, are by an hereditary propagation derived -from _Adam_ upon all Posterity. But as for the Gout, your _Authors_ -doctrine is,[1] _That Life is not a body, nor proper to a body, nor the -off-spring of corporeal Proprieties_,[2] but a _meer No-thing_; and -that _the Spirit of Life is a real being, to wit, the arterial blood -resolved by the Ferment of the heart into salt air, and enlightned by -life_,[3] and that the Gout doth immediately consist in this spirit of -life. All which how it doth agree, I cannot conceive; for that a real -being should be enlightned by Nothing, and be a spirit of Nothing, is -not imaginable, nor how the Gout should inhabit in the spirit of life; -for then it would follow, that a Child, as soon as it is brought forth -into the world, would be troubled with the Gout, if it be as natural -to him as life, or have its habitation in the Spirit of Life. Also -your _Author_ is speaking of _an Appoplexy in the head, which takes -away all sense and motion._ But surely, in my opinion, it is impossible -that all sense and motion should be out of the head; onely that sense -and motion, which is proper to the head, and to the nature of that -Creature, is altered to some other sensitive and rational motions, -which are proper to some other figure; for there is no part or particle -of matter that has not motion and sense. I pray consider, _Madam_, -is there any thing in Nature that is without motion? Perchance you -will say, Minerals; but that is proved otherwise; as for example, by -the sympathetical motion between the Loadstone and Iron, and between -the Needle and the North, as also by the operation of Mercury, and -several others; Wherefore there is no doubt, but all kinds, sorts and -particulars of Creatures have their natural motions, although they are -not all visible to us, but not such motions as are made by Gas, or -Blas, or Ideas, &c. but corporeal sensitive and rational motions, which -are the actions of Natural Matter. You may say, Some are of opinion, -that Sympathy and Antipathy are not Corporeal motions. Truly, whosoever -says so, speaks no reason; for Sympathy and Antipathy are nothing else -but the actions of bodies, and are made in bodies; the Sympathy betwixt -Iron and the Loadstone is in bodies; the Sympathy between the Needle -and the North is in bodies; the Sympathy of the Magnetic powder is in -bodies. The truth is, there is no motion without a body, nor no body -without motion. Neither doth Sympathy and Antipathy work at distance -by the power of Immaterial Spirits, or rays, issuing out of their -bodies, but by agreeable or disagreeable corporeal motions; for if -the motions be agreeable, there is Sympathy; if disagreeable, there -is Antipathy; and if they be equally found in two bodies, then there -is a mutual Sympathy or Antipathy; but if in one body onely, and not -in the other, there is but Sympathy or Antipathy on one side, or in -one Creature. Lastly, concerning _swoonings or fainting fits_, your -_Authors_ opinion is, that they _proceed from the stomack_: Which I -can hardly believe; for many will swoon upon the sight of some object, -others at a sound, or report, others at the smell of some disagreeable -odour, others at the taste of some or other thing that is not agreeable -to their nature, and so forth: also some will swoon at the apprehension -or conceit of something, and some by a disorder or irregularity of -motions in exterior parts. Wherefore, my opinion is, that swoonings -may proceed from any part of the body, and not onely from the stomack. -But, _Madam_, I being no Physicianess may perhaps be in an error, -and therefore I will leave this discourse to those that are thorowly -learned and practised in this Art, and rest satisfied that I am, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble Servant._ - -[1] Of the disease of the Stone, _c._ 9. - -[2] Of the subject of inhering of diseases in the point of life. - -[3] Of the Spirit of Life. - - - - -XLII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_[1] is inquiring whether some cures of diseases may be -effected by bare co-touchings; and I am of his opinion, they may; -for co-touchings of some exterior objects may cause alterations of -some particular motions in some particular parts of matter, without -either transferring their own motions into those parts, (for that this -is impossible, I have heretofore declared) or without any corporeal -departing from their own parts of matter into them, and alterations may -be produced both in the motions and figures of the affected parts: but -these cures are not so frequent as those that are made by the entring -of medicines into the diseased parts, and either expel the malignant -matter, or rectifie the irregular and disordered motions, or strengthen -the weak, or reduce the straying, or work any other ways according to -the nature and propriety of their own substance, and the disposition of -the distempered parts: Nevertheless, those cures which are performed -exteriously, as to heal inward affects by an outward bare co-touching, -are all made by natural motions in natural substances, and not by -_Non_-beings, substancelesse Ideas, or spiritual Rays; for those that -will cure diseases by _Non_-beings, will effect little or nothing; for -a disease is corporeal or material, and so must the remedies be, there -being no cure made but by a conflict of the remedy with the disease; -and certainly, if a _non_-being fight against a being, or a corporeal -disease, I doubt it will do no great effect; for the being will be too -strong for the _non_-being: Wherefore my constant opinion is, that -all cures whatsoever, are perfected by the power of corporeal motions, -working upon the affected parts either interiously or exteriously, -either by applying external remedies to external wounds, or by curing -internal distempers, either by medicines taken internally, or by bare -external co-touchings. And such a remedy, I suppose, has been that -which your _Author_ speaks of, a stone of a certain Irish-man, which -by a meer external contact hath cured all kinds of diseases, either -by touching outwardly the affected parts, or by licking it but with -the tip of the Tongue, if the disease was Internal: But if the vertue -of the Stone was such, as your _Author_ describes, certainly, what -man soever he was that possessed such a jewel, I say, he was rather -of the nature of the Devil, then of man, that would not divulge it -to the general benefit of all mankind; and I wonder much, that your -_Author_, who otherwise pretends such extraordinary Devotion, Piety, -and Religiousness, as also Charity, _viz._ that all his works he has -written, are for the benefit of his neighbour, and to detect the errors -of the Schools meerly for the good of man, doth yet plead his cause, -saying, That _secrets, as they are most difficultly prepared, so they -ought to remain in secret forever in the possession of the Privy -Councel_, what Privy Counsels he means, I know not; but certainly some -are more difficult to be spoken to, or any thing to be obtained from, -then the preparation of a Physical Arcanum. However, a general good -or benefit ought not to be concealed or kept in privy Councels, but -to be divulged and publickly made known, that all sorts of People, of -what condition, degree, or Nation soever, might partake of the general -blessing and bounty of God. But, _Madam_, you may be sure, that many, -who pretend to know Physical secrets, most commonly know the least, as -being for the most part of the rank of them that deceive the simple -with strange tales which exceed truth; and to make themselves more -authentical, they use to rail at others, and to condemn their skill, -onely to magnifie their own: I say, many, _Madam_, as I have observed, -are of that nature, especially those, that have but a superficial -knowledg in the Art of Physick; for those that are thorowly learned, -and sufficiently practised in it, scorn to do the like; which I wish -may prosper and thrive by their skill. And so I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble Servant._ - -[1] In the _ch._ call'd _Butler_. - - - - -XLIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your _Author_ is pleased to relate a story[1] of one that died -suddenly, and being dissected, there was not the least sign of decay -or disorder found in his body. But I cannot add to those that wonder, -when no sign of distemper is found in a man's body after he is dead; -because I do not believe, that the subtillest, learnedst, and most -practised Anatomist, can exactly tell all the Interior Government -or motions, or can find out all obscure and invisible passages in a -mans body; for concerning the motions, they are all altered in death, -or rather in the dissolution of the animal figure; and although the -exterior animal figure or shape doth not alter so soon, yet the animal -motions may alter in a moment of time; which sudden alteration may -cause a sudden death, and so the motions being invisible, the cause -of death cannot be perceived; for no body can find that which is not -to be found, to wit, animal motions in a dead man; for Nature hath -altered these motions from being animal motions to some other kind -of motions, she being as various in dissolutions, as in productions, -indeed so various, that her ways cannot be traced or known thorowly -and perfectly, but onely by piece-meals, as the saying is, that is, -but partly: Wherefore man can onely know that which is visible, or -subject to his senses; and yet our senses do not always inform us -truly, but the alterations of grosser parts are more easily known, then -the alterations of subtil corporeal motions, either in general, or in -particular; neither are the invisible passages to be known in a dead -Carcass, much less in a living body. But, I pray, mistake me not, when -I say, that the animal motions are not subject to our exterior senses; -for I do not mean all exterior animal motions, nor all interior animal -motions; for though you do see no interior motion in an animal body, -yet you may feel some, as the motion of the Heart, the motion of the -Pulse, the motion of the Lungs, and the like; but the most part of -the interior animal motions are not subject to our exterior senses; -nay, no man, he may be as observing as he will, can possibly know by -his exterior senses all the several and various interior motions in -his own body, nor all the exterior motions of his exterior parts: and -thus it remains still, that neither the subtillest motions and parts -of matter, nor the obscure passages in several Creatures, can be known -but by several parts; for what one part is ignorant of, another part -is knowing, and what one part is knowing, another part is ignorant -thereof; so that unless all the Parts of Infinite Matter were joyned -into one Creature, there can never be in one particular Creature a -perfect knowledg of all things in Nature. Wherefore I shall never -aspire to any such knowledg, but be content with that little particular -knowledg, Nature has been pleased to give me, the chief of which is, -that I know my self, and especially that I am, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - -[1] _Ch._ 61. called, _The Preface_. - - - - -XLIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I perceive you are desirous to know the cause, _Why a man is more weak -at the latter end of a disease then at the beginning, and is a longer -time recovering health, then loosing health_; as also _the reason of -relapses and intermissions?_ First, as for weakness and strength, my -opinion is, they are caused by the regular and irregular motions in -several parts, each striving to over-power the other in their conflict; -and when a man recovers from a disease, although the regular motions -have conquered the irregular, and subdued them to their obedience, yet -they are not so quite obedient as they ought, which causes weakness: -Neither do the regular motions use so much force in Peace, as in War; -for though animate matter cannot lose force, yet it doth not always -use force; neither can the parts of Nature act beyond their natural -power, but they do act within their natural power; neither do they -commonly act to the utmost of their power. And as for Health, why it -is sooner lost then recovered; I answer, That it is easier to make -disorders then to rectifie them: as for example, in a Common-wealth, -the ruines of War are not so suddenly repaired, as made. But concerning -Relapses and Intermissions of diseases, Intermissions are like truces -or cessations from War for a time; and Relapses are like new stirs or -tumults of Rebellion; for Rebels are not so apt to settle in peace as -to renew the war upon slight occasions; and if the regular motions -of the body be stronger, they reduce them again unto obedience. But -diseases are occasioned many several ways; for some are made by a home -Rebellion, and others by forreign enemies, and some by natural and -regular dissolutions, and their cures are as different; but the chief -Magistrates or Governors of the animal body, which are the regular -motions of the parts of the body, want most commonly the assistance -of forreign Parts, which are Medicines, Diets, and the like; and if -there be factions amongst these chief Magistrates, or motions of the -parts of the body, then the whole body suffers a ruine. But since -there would be no variety in Nature, nor no difference between Natures -several parts or Creatures, if her actions were never different, but -always agreeing and constant, a war or rebellion in Nature cannot be -avoided: But, mistake me not, for I do not mean a war or rebellion in -the nature or substance of Matter, but between the several parts of -Matter, which are the several Creatures, and their several Motions; for -Matter being always one and the same in its nature, has nothing to war -withal; and surely it will not quarrel with its own Nature. Next you -desire to know, that if Nature be in a Perpetual motion, _Whence comes -a duration of some things, and a Tiredness, Weariness, Sluggishness, -or Faintness?_ I answer, first, That in some bodies, the Retentive -motions are stronger then the dissolving motions; as for example, Gold, -and Quicksilver or Mercury; the separating and dissolving motions of -Fire have onely power to melt and rarifie them for a time, but cannot -alter their nature: so a Hammer, or such like instrument, when used, -may beat Gold, and make it thin as a Cobweb, or as dust, but cannot -alter its interior nature: But yet this doth not prove it to be either -without motion, or to be altogether unalterable, and not subject to any -dissolution; but onely that its retentive motions are too strong for -the dissolving motions of the Fire, which by force work upon the Gold; -and we might as well say, that Sand, or an Earthen Vessel, or Glass, -or Stone, or any thing else, is unalterable, and will last eternally, -if not disturbed. But some of Natures actions are as industrious to -keep their figures, as others are to dissolve, or alter them; and -therefore Retentive motions are more strong and active in some figures, -then dissolving motions are in others, or producing motions in other -Figures. Next, as for Tiredness, or Faintness of motions, there is no -such thing as tiredness or faintness in Nature, for Nature cannot be -tired, nor grow faint, or sick, nor be pained, nor die, nor be any -ways defective; for all this is onely caused through the change and -variety of the corporeal motions of Nature, and her several parts; -neither do irregular motions prove any defect in Nature, but a prudence -in Natures actions, in making varieties and alterations of Figures; -for without such motions or actions, there could not be such varieties -and alterations in Nature as there are: neither is slackness of some -motions a defect, for Nature is too wise to use her utmost force in -her ordinary works; and though Nature is infinite, yet it is not -necessary she should use an infinite force and power in any particular -act. Lastly, you desire my opinion, _Whether there be motion in a dead -animal Creature._ To which, I answer: I have declared heretofore, that -there is no such thing as death in Nature, but what is commonly named -death, is but an alteration or change of corporeal motions, and the -death of an animal is nothing else but the dissolving motions of its -figure; for when a man is dying, the motions which did formerly work -to the consistence of his figure do now work to the dissolution of -his figure, and to the production of some other figures, changing and -transforming every part thereof; but though the figure of that dead -animal is dissolved, yet the parts of that dissolved figure remain -still in Nature although they be infinitely changed, and will do so -eternally, as long as Nature lasts by the Will of God; for nothing can -be lost or annihilated in Nature. And this is all, _Madam_, that I can -answer to your questions, wherein, I hope, I have obeyed your commands, -according to the duty of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -XLV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I have thus far discharged my duty, that according to your commands, -I have given you my judgment of the works of those four famous -Philosophers of our age, which you did send me to peruse, and have -withal made reflexions upon some of their opinions in Natural -Philosophy, especially those, wherein I did find them dissent from the -Ground and Principles of my own Philosophy. And since by your leave -I am now publishing all those Letters which I have hitherto written -to you concerning those aforesaid Authors, and their Works, I am -confident I shall not escape the censures of their followers; But, I -shall desire them, that they will be pleased to do me this Justice, and -to examine first my opinions well, without any partiality or wilful -misinterpretation of my sence, before they pass their censure: Next, -I desire them to consider, That I have no skill in School-learning, -and therefore for want of terms of Art may easily chance to slip, or -at least, not express my opinions so clearly as my readers expected; -However, I have done my endeavour, and to my sense and reason they -seem clear and plain enough, especially as I have expressed them in -those Letters I have sent you; for concerning my other Work, called -_Philosophical Opinions_, I must confess, that it might have been done -more exactly and perspicuously, had I been better skilled in such -words and expressions as are usual in the Schools of Philosophers; -and therefore, if I be but capable to learn names and terms of Art, -(although I find my self very untoward to learn, and do despair of -proving a Scholar) I will yet endeavour to rectifie that work, and -make it more intelligible; for my greatest ambition is to express my -conceptions so, that my Readers may understand them: For which I would -not spare any labour or pains, but be as industrious as those that gain -their living by their work; and I pray to God, that Nature may give me -a capacity to do it. But as for those that will censure my works out of -spite and malice, rather then according to justice, let them do their -worst; for if God do but bless them, I need not to fear the power of -Nature, much less of a part of Nature, as Man. Nay, if I have but your -Ladiships approbation, it will satisfie me; for I know you are so wise -and just in your judgment, that I may safely rely upon it: For which I -shall constantly and unfeignedly remain as long as I live, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships most faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -SECT. IV. - - -I. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I perceive, you take great delight in the study of Natural Philosophy, -since you have not onely sent me some Authors to peruse, and give my -judgment of their opinions, but are very studious your self in the -reading of Philosophical Works: and truly, I think you cannot spend -your time more honourably, profitably, and delightfully, then in the -study of Nature, as to consider how Variously, Curiously, and Wisely, -she acts in her Creatures; for if the particular knowledg of a mans -self be commendable, much more is the knowledg of the general actions -of Nature, which doth lead us to the knowledg of our selves. The truth -is, by the help of Philosophy our minds are raised above our selves, -into the knowledg of the Causes of all natural effects. But leaving the -commending of this noble study, you are pleased to desire my opinion of -a very difficult and intricate argument in Natural Philosophy, to wit, -of Generation, or Natural Production. I must beg leave to tell you, -first, that some (though foolishly) believe, it is not fit for Women to -argue upon so subtil a Mystery: Next, there have been so many learned -and experienced Philosophers, Physicians, and Anatomists, which have -treated of this subject, that it might be thought a great presumption -for me, to argue with them, having neither the learning nor experience -by practice which they had: Lastly, There are so many several ways -and manners of Productions in Nature, as it is impossible for a single -Creature to know them all: For there are Infinite variations made -by self-motion in Infinite Matter, producing several Figures, which -are several Creatures in that same Matter. But you would fain know, -how Nature, which is Infinite Matter, acts by self-motion? Truly, -_Madam_, you may as well ask any one part of your body, how every -other part of your body acts, as to ask me, who am but a small part of -Infinite Matter, how Nature works. But yet, I cannot say, that Nature -is so obscure, as her Creatures are utterly ignorant; for as there -are two of the outward sensitive organs in animal bodies, which are -more intelligible then the rest, to wit, the Ear, and the Eye; so in -Infinite Matter, which is the body of Nature, there are two parts, -which are more understanding or knowing then the rest, to wit, the -Rational and Sensitive part of Infinite Matter; for though it be true, -That Nature, by self-division, made by self-motion into self-figures, -which are self-parts, causes a self-obscurity to each part, motion, -and figure; nevertheless, Nature being infinitely wise and knowing, -its infinite natural wisdom and knowledg is divided amongst those -infinite parts of the infinite body: and the two most intelligible -parts, as I said, are the sensitive and rational parts in Nature, -which are divided, being infinite, into every Figure or Creature; I -cannot say equally divided, no more, then I can say, all creatures are -of equal shapes, sizes, properties, strengths, quantities, qualities, -constitutions, semblances, appetites, passions, capacities, forms, -natures, and the like; for Nature delights in variety, as humane -sense and reason may well perceive: for seldom any two creatures are -just alike, although of one kind or sort, but every creature doth vary -more or less. Wherefore it is not probable, that the production or -generation of all or most Creatures, should be after one and the same -manner or way, for else all Creatures would be just alike without any -difference. But this is to be observed, that though Nature delights -in variety, yet she doth not delight in confusion, but, as it is the -propriety of Nature to work variously, so she works also wisely; which -is the reason, that the rational and sensitive parts of Nature, which -are the designing and architectonical parts, keep the species of every -kind of Creatures by the way of Translation in Generation, or natural -Production; for whatsoever is transferred, works according to the -nature of that figure or figures from whence it was transferred, But -mistake me not; for I do not mean always according to their exterior -Figure, but according to their interior Nature; for different motions -in one and the same parts of matter, make different figures, wherefore -much more in several parts of matter and changes of motion; But, as I -said, Translation is the chief means to keep or maintain the species -of every kind of Creatures, which Translation in natural production -or generation, is of the purest and subtilest substances, to wit, the -sensitive and rational, which are the designing and architectonical -parts of Nature. You may ask me, _Madam_, what this wise and ingenious -Matter is. I answer: It is so pure, subtil, and self-active, as our -humane shares of sense and reason cannot readily or perfectly perceive -it; for by that little part of knowledg that a humane creature hath, it -may more readily perceive the strong action then the purer substance; -for the strongest action of the purest substance is more perceivable -then the matter or substance it self; which is the cause, that most -men are apt to believe the motion, and to deny the matter, by reason -of its subtilty; for surely the sensitive and rational matter is so -pure and subtil, as not to be expressed by humane sense and reason. -As for the rational matter, it is so pure, fine, and subtil, that it -may be as far beyond lucent matter, as lucent matter is beyond gross -vapours, or thick clouds; and the sensitive matter seems not much less -pure: also there is very pure inanimate matter, but not subtil and -active of it self; for as there are degrees in the animate, so there -are also degrees in the inanimate matter; so that the purest degree -of inanimate matter comes next to the animate, not in motion, but in -the purity of its own degree; for it cannot change its nature so, as -to become animate, yet it may be so pure in its own nature, as not to -be perceptible by our grosser senses. But concerning the two degrees -of animate Matter, to wit, the sensitive and rational, I say that the -sensitive is much more acute then Vitriol, Aqua-fortis, Fire, or the -like; and the rational much more subtil and active then Quicksilver, -or Light, so as I cannot find a comparison fit to express them, onely -that this sensitive and rational self-moving Matter is the life and -soul of Nature; But by reason this Matter is not subject to our -gross senses, although our senses are subject to it, as being made, -subsisting and acting through the power of its actions, we are not -apt to believe it, no more then a simple Country-wench will believe, -that Air is a substance, if she neither hear, see, smell, taste, or -touch it, although Air touches and surrounds her: But yet the effects -of this animate matter prove that there is such a matter; onely, as I -said before, this self-moving matter causing a self-division as well -as a general action, is the cause of a self-obscurity, which obscurity -causes doubts, disputes, and inconstancies in humane opinions, although -not so much obscurity, as to make all Creatures blind-fold, for surely -there is no Creature but perceives more or less. But to conclude, The -Rational degree of Matter is the most intelligible, and the wisest part -of Nature, and the Sensitive is the most laborious and provident part -in Nature, both which are the Creators of all Creatures in Infinite -Matter; and if you intend to know more of this Rational and Sensitive -Matter, you may consult my Book of Philosophy, to which I refer you. -And so taking my leave for the present, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -II. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I understand by your last, that you have read the Book of that most -learned and famous Physician and Anatomist, Dr. _Harvey_, which treats -of Generation; and in the reading of it, you have mark'd several -scruples, which you have framed into several questions concerning that -subject, to which you desire my answer. Truly, _Madam_, I am loth to -imbarque my self in this difficult argument, not onely for the reasons -I have given you heretofore, but also that I do not find my self -able enough to give you such a satisfactory answer as perhaps you do -expect. But since your Commands are so powerful with me, that I can -hardly resist them, and your Nature so good that you easily pardon any -thing that is amiss, I will venture upon it according to the strength -of my Natural Reason, and endeavour to give you my opinion as well -and as clearly as I can. Your first question is; _Whether the action -of one or more producers be the onely cause of Natural Production -or Generation, without imparting or transferring any of their own -substance or Matter._ I answer: The sole co-action of the Producers may -make a change of exterior forms or figures, but not produce another -Creature; for if there were not substance or matter, as well as action, -both transferred together, there would not be new Creatures made out -of old Matter, but every production would require new Matter, which -is impossible, if there be but one Matter, and that infinite; and -certainly, humane sense and reason may well perceive, that there can be -but one Matter, for several kinds of Matter would make a confusion; and -thus if new Creatures were made onely by substanceless motion, it would -not onely be an infinite trouble to Nature, to create something out of -nothing perpetually, but, as I said, it would make a confusion amongst -all Nature's works, which are her several Parts or Creatures. But by -reason there is but one Matter, which is Infinite and Eternal, and this -Matter has self-motion in it, both Matter and Motion must of necessity -transmigrate, or be transferred together without any separation, as -being but one thing, to wit, Corporeal Motion. 'Tis true, one part of -animate or self-moving Matter, may without Translation move, or rather -occasion other parts to move; but one Creature cannot naturally produce -another without the transferring of its corporeal motions. But it is -well to be observed, that there is great difference between the actions -of Nature; for all actions are not generating, but some are patterning, -and some transforming, and the like; and as for the transforming -action, that may be without translation, as being nothing else but -a change of motions in one and the same part or parts of Matter, to -wit, when the same parts of Matter do change into several figures, -and return into the same figures again. Also the action of Patterning -is without Translation; for to pattern out, is nothing else but to -imitate, and to make a figure in its own substance or parts of Matter -like another figure. But in generation every producer doth transfer -both Matter and Motion, that is, Corporeal Motion into the produced; -and if there be more producers then one, they all do contribute to -the produced; and if one Creature produces many Creatures, those many -Creatures do partake more or less of their producer. But you may say, -If the producer transfers its own Matter, or rather its own corporeal -motions into the produced, many productions will soon dissolve the -producer, and he will become a sacrifice to his off-spring. I answer; -That doth not follow: for as one or more Creatures contribute to one -or more other Creatures, so other Creatures do contribute to them, -although not after one and the same manner or way, but after divers -manners or ways; but all manners and ways must be by translation to -repair and assist; for no Creature can subsist alone and of it self, -but all Creatures traffick and commerce from and to each other, and -must of necessity do so, since they are all parts of the same Matter: -Neither can Motion subsist without Matter, nor quit Matter, nor act -without Matter, no more, then an Artificer can work without materials, -and without self-motion Matter would be dead and useless; Wherefore -Matter and Motion must upon necessity not onely be inseparable, but -be one body, to wit, corporeal motion; which motion by dividing and -composing its several parts, and acting variously, is the cause of all -Production, Generation, Metamorphosing, or any other thing that is done -in Nature. But if, according to your _Author_, the sole action be the -cause of Generation without transferring of substance, then Matter is -useless, and of none or little effect; which, in my opinion, is not -probable. - -Your second question is, _Whether the Production or Generation of -animals is as the Conceptions of the Brain, which the Learned say are -Immaterial?_ I answer: The Conceptions of the Brain, in my opinion, -are not Immaterial, but Corporeal; for though the corporeal motions -of the brain, or the matter of its conceptions, is invisible to -humane Creatures, and that when the brain is dissected, there is no -such matter found, yet that doth not prove, that there is no Matter, -because it is not so gross a substance as to be perceptible by our -exterior senses: Neither will your _Authors_ example hold, that as a -builder erects a house according to his conception in the brain, the -same happens in all other natural productions or generations; for, in -my opinion, the house is materially made in the brain, which is the -conception of the builder, although not of such gross materials, as -Stone, Brick, Wood, and the like, yet of such matter as is the Rational -Matter, that is, the house when it is conceived in the brain, is made -by the rational corporeal figurative motions of their own substance -or degree of Matter; But if all Animals should be produced by meer -fancies, and a Man and a Woman should beget by fancying themselves -together in copulation, then the produced would be a true Platonick -Child; But if a Woman being from her Husband should be so got with -Child, the question is, whether the Husband would own the Child; and -if amorous Lovers (which are more contagious for appetite and fancy -then Married persons) should produce Children by Immaterial contagions, -there would be more Children then Parents to own them. - -Your third question is, _Whether Animals may not be produced, as many -Diseases are, by contagion?_ I answer: Although contagions may be made -at a distance, by perception; yet those diseases are not begotten -by immaterial motions, but by the rational and sensitive corporeal -motions, which work such diseases in the body of a Creature, by the -association of parts, like as the same disease is made in another body: -Neither are diseases always produced after one and the same manner, but -after divers manners; whereas animals are produced as animals, that -is, after one natural and proper way; for although all the effects in -particular be not alike, yet the general way or manner to produce those -effects is the same: As for example; there is no other way to produce -a fruitful Egg, but by a Cock and a Hen; But a Contagious disease, as -the small-Pox, or the like, may be produced by the way of Surfeits or -by Conceit, which may cause the sensitive corporeal parts, through the -irregular motions of the rational corporeal parts, to work and produce -such a disease, or any other ways. But neither a disease, nor no -creature else can be produced without matter, by substanceless motion; -for wheresoever is motion, there is also matter, matter and motion -being but one thing. - -Your fourth question is, _Whether an Animal Creature is perfectly -shaped or formed at the first Conception?_ I answer: If the Creature -be composed of many and different parts, my opinion is, it cannot be. -You may say, That if it hath not all his parts produced at there will -be required many acts of generation to beget or produce every part, -otherwise the producers would not be the Parents of the produced in -whole, but in part. I answer: The Producer is the designer, architect, -and founder of the whole Creature produced; for the sensitive and -rational corporeal motions, which are transferred from the producer or -producers, joyn to build the produced like to the producer in specie, -but the transferred parts may be invisible and insensible to humane -Creatures, both through their purity and little quantity, until the -produced is framed to some visible degree; for a stately building may -proceed from a small beginning, neither can humane sense tell what -manner of building is designed at the first foundation. But you may -say, That many Eggs may be made by one act of the producers, to wit, -the Cock and the Hen, and those many Eggs may be laid at several -times, as also hatched at several times, and become Chickens at several -times. I answer; It may well and easily be so: for the rational and -sensitive parts or corporeal motions which were transferred in one act, -designed many produced through that one act; for those transferred -corporeal motions, although they have not a sufficient quantity of -themselves to make all the produced in their perfect shapes at once, -yet they are the chief designer, architect and founder of all that are -to be produced; for the corporeal motions which are transferred, joyn -with those they are transferred to, and being associates, work to one -design, the sensitive being the architect, the rational the designer, -which together with the inanimate parts of matter, can never want -materials, neither can the materials want labourers; for the degrees of -matter are inseparable, and do make but one body or substance. Again -you may say, That some parts of Matter may produce another Creature -not like to the producer in its species, as for example, Monsters. -I answer, That is possible to be done, but yet it is not usual; for -Monsters are not commonly born, but those corporeal motions which dwell -in one species, work according to the nature of the same species; and -when the parts of Matter are transferred from Creature to Creature, -that is, are separated from some parts, and joyned to other parts of -the same species, and the same nature; those transferred parts of -matter, although invisible in quantity, by reason of their purity and -subtilty, begin the work of the produced according to its natural -species, and the labourers in other parts of matter work to the same -end; just as it is in the artificial building of a house, where the -house is first designed by the Architect, or Master, and then the -labourers work not after their own fancy, (else it would not be the -same house that was designed, nor any uniformity in it) but according -to the architects or surveyors design; so those parts of matter or -corporeal motions that are transferred from the producer, are like the -architect, but the labourers or workmen are the assisting and adjoyning -parts of matter. But you will say, How comes it, that many creatures -may be made by one or two? I answer: As one owner or two partners may -be the cause of many buildings, so few or more transferred rational -and sensitive corporeal motions may make and produce as many creatures -as they can get materials and labourers; for if they get one, they -get the other, by reason the degrees of matter, _viz._ animate and -inanimate, are inseparably mixt, and make but one body or substance; -and the proof of it is, that all animals are not constant in the number -of their off-spring, but sometimes produce more, and sometimes fewer, -and sometimes their off-spring is less, and sometimes larger, according -to the quantity of matter. Again you may say, That in some Creatures -there is no passage to receive the transferred matter into the place -of the architecture. I answer: That all passages are not visible to -humane sense; and some humane Creatures have not a sufficient humane -reason to conceive, that most of Natures works are not so gross as -to be subject to their exterior senses; but as for such parts and -passages, whether exterior or interior, visible or invisible, as also -for copulation, conception, formation, nourishment, and the like in -Generation, I leave you to Physicians and Anatomists. And to conclude -this question, we may observe, that not any animal Creatures shape -dissolveth in one instant of time, but by degrees; why should we -believe then, that Animals are generated or produced in their perfect -shape in one instant of time, and by one act of Nature? But sense and -reason knows by observation, that an animal Creature requires more time -to be generated, then to be dissolved, like as an house is sooner and -with less pains pull'd down, then built up. - -Your Fifth question is, _Whether Animals are not generated by the way -of Metamorphosing?_ To which I answer, That it is not possible that a -third Creature can be made without translation of corporeal motions; -and since Metamorphosing is onely a change of motions in the same parts -of Matter, without any translation of corporeal motions, no animal -Creature can be produced or generated by the way of Metamorphosing. - -Your Sixth question is, _Whether a whole may be made out of a part?_ I -answer: There is no whole in Nature, except you will call Nature her -self a whole; for all Creatures are but parts of Infinite Matter. - -Your Seventh question is, _Whether all Animals, as also Vegetables, -are made or generated by the way of Eggs?_ I have said heretofore, -That it is not probable, that different sorts, nay, different kinds -of Creatures, should all have but one manner or way of production; -for why should not Nature make different ways of productions, as well -as different Creatures? And as for Vegetables, if all their Seeds be -likened unto Eggs, then Eggs may very well be likened to Seeds; which -if so, then a Peas-cod is the Hen, and the Peas in the Cod is the -cluster of Eggs: the like of ears of Corn. And those animals that -produce but one creature or seed at a time, may be like the kernel -of a Nut, when the shell is broke, the creature comes forth. But how -this will agree with your _Author_, who says, that the creature in the -shell must make its own passage, I cannot tell; for if the Nut be not -broken by some external means or occasion, the kernel is not like to -get forth. And as for humane Eggs, I know not what to answer; for it is -said, that the first Woman was made of a mans ribb; but whether that -ribb was an egg, I cannot tell. And why may not Minerals and Elements -be produced by the way of Eggs as well as Vegetables and Animals? Nay, -why may not the whole World be likened unto an Egg? Which if so, the -two Poles are the two ends the Egg; and for the Elements, the Yolk is -the Fire, the White, the Water; the Film, the Air; and the Shell it -self will very well serve for the Earth: But then it must first be -broken, and pounded into one lump or solid mass, and so sink or swim -into the midst of the liquid parts, as to the Center; and as for the -several foetuses in this great Egg, they are the several Creatures in -it. Or it might be said, that the Chaos was an Egg, and the Universe, -the Chicken. But leaving this similizing, it is like, that some -studious Men may by long study upon one part of the body, conceive and -believe that all other parts are like that one part; like as those that -have gazed long upon the Sun, all they see for a time, are Suns to -them; or like as those which having heard much of Hobgoblins, all they -see are Hobgoblins, their fancies making such things. But, _Madam_, to -make a conclusion also of this question, I repeat what I said before, -that all Creatures have not one way of production; and as they have -not all one way of production, so they have neither one instant of -time either for perfection or dissolution, but their perfection and -dissolution is made by degrees. - -Your Eighth question is, _Whether it may not be, that the sensitive and -rational corporeal motions in an Egg do pattern out the figure of the -Hen and Cock, whilest the Hen sits upon the Egg, and so bring forth -Chickens by the way of patterning?_ I answer: The action of patterning, -is not the action of Generation; for as I said heretofore, the actions -of Nature are different, and Generation must needs be performed by the -way of translation, which translation is not required in the action -of Patterning; but according as the Producers are, which transfer -their own matter into the produced, so is the produced concerning its -species; which is plainly proved by common examples; for if Pheasants, -or Turky, or Goose-eggs, be laid under an ordinary Hen, or an ordinary -Hens-egg be laid under a Pheasant, Turky, or Goose, the Chickens of -those Eggs will never be of any other species then of those that -produced the Egg; for an ordinary Hen, if she sit upon Pheasants, -Turky, or Goose-eggs, doth not hatch Chickens of her own species, but -the Chickens will be of the species either of the Pheasant, or Turky, -or Goose, which did at first produce the Egg; which proves, that in -Generation, or Natural production, there is not onely required the -action of the Producers, but also a Transferring of some of their own -parts to form the produced. But you may say, What doth the sitting Hen -contribute then to the production of the Chicken? I answer: The sitting -Hen doth onely assist the Egg in the production of the Chicken, as the -Ground doth the Seed. - -Your Ninth question is, _Concerning the Soul of a particular Animal -Creature, as whether it be wholly of it self and subsists wholly in -and by it self?_ But you must give me leave first to ask you what Soul -you mean, whether the Divine, or the Natural Soul, for there is great -difference betwixt them, although not the least that ever I heard, -rightly examined and distinguished; and if you mean the Divine Soul, -I shall desire you to excuse me, for that belongs to Divines, and not -to Natural Philosophers; neither am I so presumptuous as to intrench -upon their sacred order. But as for the Natural Soul, the Learned have -divided it into three parts, to wit, the Vegetative, Sensitive, and -Rational Soul; and according to these three Souls, made three kinds -of lives, as the Vegetative, Sensitive, and Rational Life. But they -might as well say, there are infinite bodies, lives, and souls, as -three; for in Nature there is but one life, soul, and body, consisting -all of one Matter, which is corporeal Nature. But yet by reason this -life and soul is material, it is divided into numerous parts, which -make numerous lives and souls in every particular Creature; for each -particular part of the rational self-moving Matter, is each particular -soul in each particular Creature, but all those parts considered in -general, make but one soul of Nature; and as this self-moving Rational -Matter hath power to unite its parts, so it hath ability or power to -divide its united parts. And thus the rational soul of every particular -Creature is composed of parts, (I mean parts of a material substance; -for whatsoever is substanceless and incorporeal, belongs not to -Nature, but is Supernatural;) for by reason the Infinite and Onely -matter is by self-motion divided into self-parts, not any Creature can -have a soul without parts; neither can the souls of Creatures subsist -without commerce of other rational parts, no more then one body can -subsist without the assistance of other bodies; for all parts belong -to one body, which is Nature: nay, if any thing could subsist of it -self, it were a God, and not a Creature: Wherefore not any Creature -can challenge a soul absolutely to himself, unless Man, who hath a -divine soul, which no other Creature hath. But that which makes so many -confusions and disputes amongst learned men is, that they conceive, -first, there is no rational soul but onely in man; next, that this -rational soul in every man is individable. But if the rational soul is -material, as certainly to all sense and reason it is, then it must not -onely be in all material Creatures, but be dividable too; for all that -is material or corporeal hath parts, and is dividable, and therefore -there is no such thing in any one Creature as one intire soul; nay, we -might as well say, there is but one Creature in Nature, as say, there -is but one individable natural soul in one Creature. - -Your Tenth question is, _Whether Souls are producible, or can be -produced?_ I answer: in my opinion, they are producible, by reason all -parts in Nature are so. But mistake me not; for I do not mean that any -one part is produced out of Nothing, or out of new matter; but one -Creature is produced by another, by the dividing and uniting, joyning -and disjoyning of the several parts of Matter, and not by substanceless -Motion out of new Matter. And because there is not any thing in -Nature, that has an absolute subsistence of it self, each Creature is a -producer, as well as a produced, in some kind or other; for no part of -Nature can subsist single, and without reference and assistance of each -other, or else every single part would not onely be a whole of it self, -but be as a God without controle; and though one part is not another -part, yet one part belongs to another part, and all parts to one whole, -and that whole to all the parts, which whole is one corporeal Nature. -And thus, as I said before, productions of one or more creatures, by -one or more producers, without matter, meerly by immaterial motions, -are impossible, to wit, that something should be made or produced -out of nothing; for if this were so, there would consequently be an -annihilation or turning into nothing, and those creatures, which -produce others by the way of immaterial motions, would rather be as a -God, then a part of Nature, or Natural Matter. Besides, it would be an -endless labour, and more trouble to create particular Creatures out -of nothing, then a World at once; whereas now it is easie for Nature -to create by production and transmigration; and therefore it is not -probable, that any one Creature hath a particular life, soul, or body -to it self, as subsisting by it self, and as it were precised from the -rest, having its own subsistence without the assistance of any other; -nor is it probable, that any one Creature is new, for all that is, was, -and shall be, till the Omnipotent God disposes Nature otherwise. - -As for the rest of your questions, as whether the Sun be the cause of -all motions, and of all natural productions; and whether the life of a -Creature be onely in the blood, or whether it have its beginning from -the blood, or whether the blood be the chief architect of an animal, or -be the seat of the soul; sense and reason, in my opinion, doth plainly -contradict them; for concerning the blood, if it were the seat of the -Soul, then in the circulation of the blood, if the Soul hath a brain, -it would become very dizzie by its turning round; but perchance some -may think the Soul to be a Sun, and the Blood the Zodiack, and the body -the Globe of the Earth, which the Soul surrounds in such time as the -Blood is flowing about. And so leaving those similizing Fancies, I'le -add no more, but repeat what I said in the beginning, that I rely upon -the goodness of your Nature, from which I hope for pardon, if I have -not so exactly and solidly answered your desire; for the argument of -this discourse being so difficult, may easily lead me into an error, -which your better judgment will soon correct; and in so doing you will -add to those favours for which I am already, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships most obliged Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -III. - - -_MADAM,_ - -You thought verily, I had mistaken my self in my last, concerning the -Rational Souls of every particular Creature, because I said, all -Creatures had numerous Souls; and not onely so, but every particular -Creature had numerous Souls. Truly, _Madam_, I did not mistake my self, -for I am of the same opinion still; for though there is but one Soul -in infinite Nature, yet that soul being dividable into parts, every -part is a soul in every single creature, were the parts no bigger -in quantity then an atome. But you ask whether Nature hath Infinite -souls? I answer: That Infinite Nature is but one Infinite body, divided -into Infinite parts, which we call Creatures; and therefore it may -as well be said, That Nature is composed of Infinite Creatures or -Parts, as she is divided into Infinite Creatures or Parts; for Nature -being Material, is dividable, and composable. The same may be said -of Nature's Soul, which is the Rational part of the onely infinite -Matter, as also of Nature's Life, which is the sensitive part of the -onely Infinite self-moving Matter; and of the Inanimate part of the -onely Infinite Matter, which I call the body for distinction sake, -as having no self-motion in its own nature, for Infinite Material -Nature hath an Infinite Material Soul, Life, and Body. But, _Madam_, -I desire you to observe what I said already, _viz._ that the parts -of Nature are as apt to divide, as to unite; for the chief actions -of Nature are to divide, and to unite; which division is the cause, -that it may well be said, every particular Creature hath numerous -souls; for every part of rational Matter is a particular Soul, and -every part of the sensitive Matter is a particular Life; all which, -mixed with the Inanimate Matter, though they be Infinite in parts, yet -they make but one Infinite whole, which is Infinite Nature; and thus -the Infinite division into Infinite parts is the cause, that every -particular Creature hath numerous Souls, and the transmigration of -parts from, and to parts, is the reason, that not any Creature can -challenge a single soul, or souls to it self; the same for life. But -most men are unwilling to believe, that Rational Souls are material, -and that this rational Matter is dividable in Nature; when as humane -sense and reason may well perceive, that Nature is active, and -full of variety; and action, and variety cannot be without motion, -division, and composition: but the reason that variety, division, and -composition, runs not into confusion, is, that first there is but -one kind of Matter; next, that the division and composition of parts -doth ballance each other into a union in the whole. But, to conclude, -those Creatures which have their rational parts most united, are the -wisest; and those that have their rational parts most divided, are the -wittiest; and those that have much of this rational matter, are much -knowing; and those which have less of this rational matter, are less -knowing; and there is no Creature that hath not some; for like as all -the parts of a humane body are indued with life, and soul; so are all -the parts of Infinite Nature; and though some parts of Matter are not -animate in themselves, yet there is no part that is not mixt with the -animate matter; so that all parts of Nature are moving, and moved. -And thus, hoping I have cleared my self in this point, to your better -understanding, I take my leave, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -IV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In the Works of that most famous Philosopher and Mathematician of our -age _Gal._ which you thought worth my reading, I find, he discourses -much of upwards and downwards, backwards and forwards; but to tell -you really, I do not understand what he means by those words, for, in -my opinion, there is properly no such thing as upwards, downwards, -backwards, or forwards in Nature, for all this is nothing else but -natural corporeal motions, to which in respect of some particulars we -do attribute such or such names; for if we conceive a Circle, I pray -where is upwards and downwards, backwards and forwards? Certainly, it -is, in my opinion, just like that, they name Rest, Place, Space, Time, -&c. when as Nature her self knows of no such things, but all these are -onely the several and various motions of the onely Matter. You will -say, How can Rest be a motion? I answer: Rest is a word which expresses -rather mans ignorance then his knowledg; for when he sees, that a -particular Creature has not any external local motion perceptible by -his sight, he says it resteth, and this rest he calls a cessation from -motion, when as yet there is no such thing as cessation from motion -in Nature; for motion is the action of natural Matter, and its Nature -is to move perpetually; so that it is more probable for motion to be -annihilated, then to cease. But you may say, It is a cessation from -some particular motion. I answer: You may rather call it an alteration -of a particular motion, then a cessation; for though a particular -motion doth not move in that same manner as it did before, nevertheless -it is still there, and not onely there, but still moving; onely it is -not moving after the same manner as it did move heretofore, but has -changed from such a kind of motion to another kind of motion, and being -still moving it cannot be said to cease: Wherefore what is commonly -called cessation from motion, is onely a change of some particular -motion, and is a mistake of change for rest. Next, I find in the same -_Author_ a long discourse of circular and strait motions; to wit, _That -they are simple motions, and that all others are composed out of them, -and are mixt motions; Also, That the Circular Motion is perfect, and -the Right imperfect; and that all the parts of the world, if moveable -of their own nature, it is impossible, that their motions should be -Right, or any other then Circular: That a Circular motion is never to -be gotten naturally, without a preceding right motion: That a Right -motion cannot naturally be perpetual: That a Right motion is impossible -in the World well ordered:_ and the like. First, I cannot conceive why -natural Matter should use the Circle-figure more then any other in -the motions of her Creatures; for Nature, which is Infinite Matter, -is not bound to one particular motion, or to move in a Circle more -then any other figure, but she moves more variously then any one part -of hers can conceive; Wherefore it is not requisite that the natural -motions of natural bodies should be onely Circular. Next, I do not -understand, why a Circular Motion cannot be gotten naturally without -a precedent right motion; for, in my opinion, corporeal motions may -be round or circular, without being or moving straight before; and if -a straight line doth make a circle, then an imperfect figure makes -a perfect; but, in my opinion, a circle may as well make a straight -line, as a strait line a circle; except it be like a Gordian knot, -that it cannot be dissolved, or that Nature may make some corporeal -motions as constant as she makes others inconstant, for her motions -are not alike in continuance and alteration. And as for right motion, -that naturally it cannot be perpetual; my opinion is, that it cannot -be, if Nature be finite; but if Nature be infinite, it may be: But the -circular motion is more proper for a finite, then an infinite, because -a circle-figure is perfect and circumscribed, and a straight line is -infinite, or at least producible in infinite; and there may be other -worlds in infinite Nature, besides these round Globes perceptible by -our sight, which may have other figures; for though it be proper for -Globes or Spherical bodies to move round, yet that doth not prove, that -Infinite Matter moves round, or that all worlds must be of a Globous -figure; for there may be as different Worlds, as other Creatures. He -says, That a Right motion is impossible in the World well ordered; But -I cannot conceive a Right motion to be less orderly then a Circular -in Nature, except it be in some Particulars; but oftentimes that, -which is well ordered in some cases, seems to some mens understandings -and perceptions ill ordered in other cases; for man, as a part, most -commonly considers but the Particulars, not the Generals, like as every -one in a Commonwealth considers more himself and his Family, then the -Publick. Lastly, Concerning the simplicity of Motions, as that onely -circular and straight motions are simple motions, because they are made -by simple Lines; I know not what they mean by simple Lines; for the -same Lines which make straight and circular figures, may make as well -other figures as those; but, in my opinion, all motions may be called -simple, in regard of their own nature; for they are nothing else but -the sensitive and rational part of Matter, which in its own nature is -pure, and simple, and moves according to the Nature of each Figure, -either swiftly or slowly, or in this or that sort of motion; but the -most simple, purest and subtillest part is the rational part of matter, -which though it be mixed with the sensitive and inanimate in one body, -yet it can and doth move figuratively in its own matter, without the -help or assistance of any other. But I desire you to remember, _Madam_, -that in the compositions and divisions of the parts of Nature, there -is as much unity and agreement as there is discord and disagreement; -for in Infinite, there is no such thing, as most, and least; neither is -there any such thing as more perfect, or less perfect in Matter. And -as for Irregularities, properly there is none in Nature, for Nature is -Regular; but that, which Man (who is but a small part of Nature, and -therefore but partly knowing) names Irregularities, or Imperfections, -is onely a change and alteration of motions; for a part can know the -variety of motions in Nature no more, then Finite can know Infinite, or -the bare exterior shape and figure of a mans body can know the whole -body, or the head can know the mind; for Infinite natural knowledg is -incorporeal; and being corporeal, it is dividable; and being dividable, -it cannot be confined to one part onely; for there is no such thing as -an absolute determination or subsistence in parts without relation or -dependance upon one another. And since Matter is Infinite, and acts -wisely, and all for the best, it may be as well for the best of Nature, -when parts are divided antipathetically, as when they are united -sympathetically: Also Matter being Infinite, it cannot be perfect, -neither can a part be called perfect, as being a part. But mistake me -not, _Madam;_ for when I say, there is no perfection in Nature, as I do -in my _Philosophical Opinions_,[1] I mean by Perfection, a finiteness, -absoluteness, or compleatness of figure; and in this sense I say Nature -has no perfection by reason it is Infinite; but yet I do not deny, but -that there is a perfection in the nature or essence of Infinite Matter; -for Matter is perfect Matter; that is, pure and simple in its own -substance or nature, as meer Matter, without any mixture or addition of -some thing that is not Matter, or that is between Matter and no Matter; -and material motions are perfect motions although Infinite: just as -a line may be called a perfect line, although it be endless, and -Gold, or other Mettal, may be called perfect Gold, or perfect Metal, -although it be but apart, And thus it may be said of Infinite Nature, -or Infinite Matter, without any contradiction, that it is both perfect, -and not perfect; perfect in its nature or substance, not perfect in its -exterior figure. But you may say, If Infinite Matter be not perfect, -it is imperfect, and what is imperfect, wants something. I answer, -That doth not follow: for we cannot say, that what is not perfect, must -of necessity be imperfect, because there is something else, which it -may be, to wit, Infinite; for as imperfection is beneath perfection, -so perfection is beneath Infinite; and though Infinite Matter be not -perfect in its figure, yet it is not imperfect, but Infinite; for -Perfection and Imperfection belongs onely to Particulars, and not to -Infinite. And thus much for the present. I conclude, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_most obliged Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Part._ 1. _c._ 14. - - - - -V. - - -_MADAM,_ - -The _Author_, mentioned in my former Letter, says, _That Quietness is -the degree of Infinite slowness, and that a moveable body passing -from quietness, passes through all the degrees of slowness without -staying in any._ But I cannot conceive that all the Parts of Matter -should be necessitated to move by degrees; for though there be degrees -in Nature, yet Nature doth not in all her actions move by degrees. You -may say, for example, from one to twenty, there are eighteen degrees -between One, and Twenty; and all these degrees are included in the -last degree, which is twenty. I answer; That may be: but yet there -is no progress made through all those degrees; for when a body doth -move strong at one time, and the next time after moves weak; I cannot -conceive how any degrees should really be made between. You may say, by -Imagination. But this Imagination of degrees, is like the conception of -Space and Place, when as yet there is no such thing as Place or Space -by it self; for all is but one body, and Motion is the action of this -same body, which is corporeal Nature; and because a particular body -can and doth move after various manners, according to the change of -its corporeal motion, this variety of motions man call's Place, Space, -Time, Degrees, &c. considering them by themselves, and giving them -peculiar names, as if they could be parted from body, or at least be -conceived without body; for the Conception or Imagination it self is -corporeal, and so are they nothing else but corporeal motions. But it -seems as if this same _Author_ conceived also motion to be a thing by -it self, and that motion begets motion, when he says, That a body by -moving grows stronger in motion by degrees, when as yet the strength -was in the matter of the body eternally; for Nature was always a grave -Matron, never a sucking Infant: and though parts by dissolving and -composing may lose and get acquaintance of each other, yet no part -can be otherwise in its nature, then ever it was; Wherefore change of -corporeal motions is not losing nor getting strength or swiftness; for -Nature doth not lose force, although she doth not use force in all -her various actions; neither can any natural body get more strength -than by nature it hath, although it may get the assistance of other -bodies joyned to it. But swiftness and slowness are according to -the several figurative actions of self-moving matter; which several -actions or motions of Nature, and their alterations, cannot be found -out by any particular Creature: as for example, the motions of Lead, -and the motions of Wood, unless Man knew their several causes; for -Wood, in some cases, may move slower then Lead; and Lead, in other -cases, slower then Wood. Again: the same _Author_ says, _That an heavy -moveable body descending, gets force enough to bring it back again to -as much height._ But I think, it might as well be said, That a Man -walking a mile, gets as much strength as to walk back that mile; when -'tis likely, that having walked ten miles, he may not have so much -strength as to walk back again one mile; neither is he necessitated to -walk back, except some other more powerful body do force him back: for -though Nature is self-moving, yet every part has not an absolute power, -for many parts may over-power fewer; also several corporeal motions may -cross and oppose as well as assist each other; for if there were not -opposition, as well as agreement and assistance amongst Nature's parts, -there would not be such variety in Nature as there is. Moreover, he -makes mention of a _Line, with a weight hung to its end, which being -removed from the perpendicular, presently falls to the same again._ -To which, I answer: That it is the appetite and desire of the Line, -not to move by constraint, or any forced exterior motion; but that -which forces the Line to move from the Perpendicular, doth not give it -motion, but is onely an occasion that it moves in such a way; neither -doth the line get that motion from any other exterior body, but it -is the lines own motion; for if the motion of the hand, or any other -exterior body, should give the line that motion, I pray, from which -doth it receive the motion to tend to its former state? Wherefore, when -the Line moves backwards or forwards, it is not, that the Line gets -what it had not before, that is, a new corporeal motion, but it uses -its own motion; onely, as I said, that exterior body is the occasion -that it moves after such a manner or way, and therefore this motion -of the line, although it is the lines own motion, yet in respect of -the exterior body that causes it to move that way, it may be called a -forced, or rather an occasioned motion. And thus no body can get motion -from another body, except it get matter too; for all that motion that a -body has, proceeds from the self-moving part of matter, and motion and -matter are but one thing; neither is there any inanimate part of matter -in Nature, which is not co-mixed with the animate, and consequently, -there is no part which is not moving, or moved; the Animate part of -matter is the onely self-moving part, and the Inanimate the moved: -not that the animate matter doth give away its own motion to the -inanimate, and that the inanimate becomes self-moving; but the animate, -by reason of the close conjunction and commixture, works together with -the inanimate, or causes the inanimate to work with it; and thus the -inanimate remains as simple in its own nature, as the animate doth in -its nature, although they are mixt; for those mixtures do not alter the -simplicity of each others Nature. But having discoursed of this subject -in my former Letters, I take my leave, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -VI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -It seems, my former Letter concerning Motion, has given you occasion to -propound this following question to me, to wit, _When I throw a bowl, -or strike a ball with my hand; whether the motion, by which the bowl -or ball is moved, be the hands, or the balls own motion? or whether -it be transferred out of my hand into the ball?_ To which I return -this short answer: That the motion by which (for example) the bowl is -moved, is the bowls own motion, and not the hands that threw it: for -the hand cannot transfer its own motion, which hath a material being, -out of it self into the bowl, or any other thing it handles, touches, -or moves; or else if it did, the hand would in a short time become weak -and useless, by losing so much substance, unless new motions were as -fast created, as expended. You'll say, perhaps, that the hand and the -bowl may exchange motions, as that the bowls own motion doth enter -into the hand, and supply that motion which went out of the hand into -the bowl, by a close joyning or touch, for in all things moving and -moved, must be a joyning of the mover to the moved, either immediate, -or by the means of another body. I answer: That this is more probable, -then that the hand should give out, or impart motion to the bowl, and -receive none from the bowl; but by reason motion cannot be transferred -without matter, as being both inseparably united, and but one thing; -I cannot think it probable, that any of the animate or self-moving -matter in the hand, quits the hand, and enters into the bowl; nor -that the animate matter, which is in the bowl, leaves the bowl, and -enters into the hand, because that self-moving substance is not readily -prepared for so sudden a Translation or Transmigration. You may say, -It may as easily be done as food is received into an animal body and -excrement discharged, or as air is taken in, and breath sent out, by -the way of respiration; and that all Creatures are not onely produced -from each other, but do subsist by each other, and act by each others -assistance. I answer: It is very true, that all Creatures have more -power and strength by a joyned assistance, then if every part were -single, and subsisted of it self. But as some parts do assist each -other, so on the other side, some parts do resist each other; for -though there be a unity in the nature of Infinite Matter, yet there are -divisions also in the Infinite parts of Infinite Matter, which causes -Antipathy as much as Sympathy; but they being equal in assistance as -well as in resistance, it causes a conformity in the whole nature of -Infinite Matter; for if there were not contrary, or rather, I may -say, different effects proceeding from the onely cause, which is the -onely matter, there could not possibly be any, or at least, so much -variety in Nature, as humane sense and reason perceives there is. -But to return to our first argument: You may say, that motion may be -transferred out of one body into another, without transferring any -of the Matter. I answer: That is impossible, unless motion were that -which some call No-thing, but how No-thing can be transferred, I cannot -imagine: Indeed no sense and reason in Nature can conceive that which -is No-thing; for how should it conceive that which is not in Nature -to be found. You'll say, perhaps, It is a substanceless thing, or an -incorporeal, immaterial being or form. I answer: In my opinion, it is -a meer contradiction, to say, a substanceless thing, form, or being, -for surely in Nature it cannot be. But if it be not possible that -motion can be divided from matter, you may say, that body from whence -the motion is transferred, would become less in bulk and weight, and -weaker with every act of motion; and those bodies into which corporeal -motion or self-moving matter was received, would grow bigger, heavier, -and stronger. To which, I answer: That this is the reason, which denies -that there can be a translation of motion out of the moving body into -the moved; for questionless, the one would grow less, and the other -bigger, that by loosing so much substance, this by receiving. Nay if it -were possible, as it is not, that motion could be transferred without -matter, the body out of which it goes, would nevertheless grow weaker; -for the strength lies in the motion, unless you believe, this motion -which is transferred to have been useless in the mover, and onely -useful to the moved; or else it would be superfluous in the moved, -except you say, it became to be annihilated after it was transferr'd -and had done its effect; but if so, then there would be a perpetual and -infinite creation and annihilation of substanceless motion, and how -there could be a creation and annihilation of nothing, my reason cannot -conceive, neither is it possible, unless Nature had more power then -God, to create Nothing, and to annihilate Nothing. The truth is, it is -more probable for sense and reason to believe a Creation of Something -out of Nothing, then a Creation of Nothing out of Nothing. Wherefore -it cannot in sense and reason be, that the motion of the hand is -transferr'd into the bowl. But yet I do not say, that the motion of the -hand doth not contribute to the motion of the bowl; for though the bowl -hath its own natural motion in itself, (for Nature and her creatures -know of no rest, but are in a perpetual motion, though not always -exterior and local, yet they have their proper and certain motions, -which are not so easily perceived by our grosser senses) nevertheless -the motion of the bowl would not move by such an exterior local motion, -did not the motion of the hand, or any other exterior moving body give -it occasion to move that way; Wherefore the motion of the hand may -very well be said to be the cause of that exterior local motion of the -bowl, but not to be the same motion by which the bowl moves. Neither -is it requisite, that the hand should quit its own motion, because it -uses it in stirring up, or putting on the motion of the bowl; for it -is one thing to use, and another to quit; as for example, it is one -thing to offer his life for his friends service, another to imploy it, -and another to quit or lose it. But, _Madam_, there may be infinite -questions or exceptions, and infinite answers made upon one truth; but -the wisest and most probable way is, to rely upon sense and reason, -and not to trouble the mind, thoughts, and actions of life, with -improbabilities, or rather impossibilities, which sense and reason -knows not of, nor cannot conceive. You may say, A Man hath sometimes -improbable, or impossible Fancies, Imaginations, or Chymæra's, in -his mind, which are No-things. I answer, That those Fancies and -Imaginations are not No-things, but as perfectly imbodied as any other -Creatures; but by reason, they are not so grossly imbodied, as those -creatures that are composed of more sensitive and inanimate matter, man -thinks or believes them to be no bodies; but were they substanceless -figures, he could not have them in his mind or thoughts: The truth is, -the purity of reason is not so perspicuous and plain to sense, as sense -is to reason, the sensitive matter being a grosser substance then the -rational. And thus, _Madam_, I have answered your proposed question, -according to the ability of my Reason, which I leave to your better -examination, and rest in the mean while, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -VII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Having made some mention in my former Letter of the Receiving of Food, -and discharging of Excrements, as also of Respiration, which consists -in the sucking in of air, and sending out of breath in an animal body; -you desire to know, _Whether Respiration be common to all animal -Creatures?_ Truly, I have not the experience, as to tell you really, -whether all animals respire, or not; for my life being, for the most -part, solitary and contemplative, but not active, I please my self -more with the motions of my thoughts, then of my senses; and therefore -I shall give you an answer according to the conceivement of my reason -onely, which is, That I believe, all animals require Respiration; not -onely those, which live in the air, but those also, which live in -waters, and within the earth; but they do not respire all after one -and the same manner; for the matter which they imbreath, is not every -where the same, nor have they all the same organs, or parts, nor the -same motions. As for example: Some Creatures require a more thin and -rarer substance for their imbreathing or inspiring, then others, and -some a more thick and grosser substance then others, according to -their several Natures; for as there are several kinds of Creatures, -according to their several habitations or places they live in, so they -have each a distinct and several sort of matter or substance for their -inspiration. As for example: Some live in the Air, some upon the face -of the Earth, some in the bowels Earth, and some in Waters. There is -some report of a Salamander, who lives in the Fire; but it being not -certainly known, deserves not our speculation. And, as in my opinion, -all animal Creatures require Respiration, so I do verily believe, that -also all other kinds of Creatures, besides animals, have some certain -manner of imbreathing and transpiring, _viz._ Vegetables, Minerals, -and Elements, although not after the same way as Animals, yet in a -way peculiar and proper to the nature of their own kind. For example: -Take away the earth from Vegetables, and they will die, as being, in -my opinion, stifled or smothered, in the same manner, as when the Air -is taken away from some Animals. Also, take Minerals out of the bowels -of the Earth, and though we cannot say, they die, or are dead, because -we have not as yet found out the alterative motions of Minerals, as -well as of Vegetables, or Animals, yet we know that they are dead from -production and increase, for not any Metal increases being out of the -Earth. And as for Elements, it is manifest that Fire will die for want -of vent; but the rest of the Elements, if we could come to know the -matter, manner, and ways of their Vital Breathing, we might kill or -revive them as we do Fire. And therefore all Creatures, to my Reason, -require a certain matter and manner of inspiration and expiration, -which is nothing else but an adjoyning and disjoyning of parts to and -from parts; for not any natural part or creature can subsist single, -and by it self, but requires assistance from others, as this, and the -rest of my opinions in Natural Philosophy, desire the assistance of -your favour, or else they will die, to the grief of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -VIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Th'other day I met with the Work of that Learned _Author_ Dr. _Ch._ -which treats of Natural Philosophy; and amongst the rest, in the -Chapter of Place, I found that he blames _Aristotle_ for saying, there -are none but corporeal dimensions, Length, Breadth, and Depth in -Nature, making besides these corporeal, other incorporeal dimensions -which he attributes to _Vacuum_. Truly, _Madam_, an incorporeal -dimension or extension, seems, in my opinion, a meer contradiction; for -I cannot conceive how nothing can have a dimension or extension, having -nothing to be extended or measured. His words are these: _Imagine we -therefore, that God should please to annihilate the whole stock or -mass of Elements, and all concretions resulting therefrom, that is, -all corporeal substances now contained within the ambit or concave -of the lowest Heaven, or Lunar sphear; and having thus imagined, can -we conceive that all the vast space or region circumscribed by the -concave superfice of the Lunar sphere, would not remain the same in all -its dimensions, after as before the reduction of all bodies included -therein to nothing?_ To which, I answer: That, in my opinion, he makes -Nature Supernatural; for although God's Power may make Vacuum, yet -Nature cannot; for God's and Nature's Power are not to be compared, -neither is God's invisible Power perceptible by Natures parts; but -according to Natural Perception, it is impossible to conceive a Vacuum, -for we cannot imagine a Vacuum, but we must think of a body, as your -_Author_ of the Circle of the Moon; neither could he think of space -but from one side of the Circle to the other, so that in his mind he -brings two sides together, and yet will have them distant; but the -motions of his thoughts being subtiler and swifter then his senses, -skip from side to side without touching the middle parts, like as a -Squirrel from bough to bough, or an Ape from one table to another; -without touching the ground, onely cutting the air. Next, he says, -That an absolute Vacuum, is neither an Accident, nor a Body, nor yet -Nothing, but Something, because it has a being; which opinion seems to -me like that of the divine Soul; but I suppose Vacuum is not the divine -Soul, nor the divine Soul, Vacuum; or else it could not be sensible -of the blessed happiness in Heaven, or the Torments in Hell. Again -he says, _Let us screw our supposition one pin higher, and farther -imagine, that God, after the annihilation of this vast machine, the -Universe, should create another in all respects equal to this, and -in the same part of space wherein this now consists: First, we must -conceive, that as the spaces were immense before God created the world, -so also must they eternally persist of infinite extent, if he shall -please at any time to destroy it; next, that these immense spaces are -absolutely immoveable._ By this opinion, it seems, that Gods Power -cannot so easily make or annihilate Vacuum, as a substance; because he -believes it to be before all Matter, and to remain after all Matter, -which is to be eternal; but I cannot conceive, why Matter, or fulness -of body, should not as well be Infinite and Eternal, as his Conceived -Vacuum; for if Vacuum can have an eternal and infinite being, why may -not fulness of body, or Matter? But he calls Vacuum Immovable, which -in my opinion is to make it a God; for God is onely Immoveable and -Unalterable, and this is more Glorious then to be dependant upon God; -wherefore to believe Matter to be Eternal, but yet dependent upon -God, is a more humble opinion, then his opinion of Vacuum; for if -Vacuum be not created, and shall not be annihilated, but is Uncreated, -Immaterial, Immoveable, Infinite, and Eternal, it is a God; but if it -be created, God being not a Creator of Nothing, nor an annihilator of -Nothing, but of Something, he cannot be a Creator of Vacuum; for Vacuum -is a pure Nothing. But leaving Nothing to those that can make something -of it, I will add no more, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - - -IX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -That Learned _Author_, of whom I made mention in my last, is pleased to -say in his Chapter of Time, that Time is the _Twin-brother to Space_; -but if Space be as much as Vacuum, then I say, they are Twin-nothings; -for there can be no such thing as an empty or immaterial space, but -that which man calls space, is onely a distance betwixt several -corporeal parts, and time is onely the variation of corporeal motions; -for were there no body, there could not be any space, and were there no -corporeal motion, there could not be any time. As for Time, considered -in General, it is nothing else but the corporeal motions in Nature, and -Particular times are the Particular corporeal motions; but Duration is -onely a continuance, or continued subsistence of the same parts, caused -by the consistent motions of those parts; Neither are Time, Duration, -Place, Space, Magnitude, &c. dependents upon corporeal motions, but -they are all one and the same thing; Neither was Time before, nor can -be after corporeal motion, for none can be without the other, being all -one: And as for Eternity, it is one fixed instant, without a flux, or -motion. Concerning his argument of Divisibility of Parts, my opinion -is, That there is no Part in Nature Individable, no not that so small a -part, which the Epicureans name an Atome; neither is Matter separable -from Matter, nor Parts from Parts in General, but onely in Particulars; -for though parts can be separated from parts, by self-motion, yet upon -necessity they must joyn to parts, so as there can never be a single -part by it self. But hereof, as also of Place, Space, Time, Motion, -Figure, Magnitude, &c. I have sufficiently discoursed in my former -Letters, as also in my Book of Philosophy; and as for my opinion of -Atoms, their figures and motions, (if any such things there be) I will -refer you to my Book of Poems, out of which give me leave to repeat -these following lines, containing the ground of my opinion of Atomes:[1] - - - _All Creatures, howsoe're they may be nam'd, - Are of_ long, square, flat, _or_ sharp _Atoms fram'd._ - - _Thus several figures several tempers make, - But what is mixt, doth of the four partake._ - - _The onely cause, why things do live and die, - 'S according as the mixed Atomes lie._ - - _Thus life, and death, and young, and old, - Are as the several Atoms hold: - Wit, understanding in the brain - Are as the several atomes reign:_ - _And dispositions, good, or ill, - Are as the several atomes still; - And every Passion, which doth rise, - Is as each several atome lies. - Thus sickness, health, and peace, and war, - Are as the several atomes are._ - -If you desire to know more, you may read my mentioned Book of Poems -whose first Edition was printed in the year, 1653. And so taking my -leave of you, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - -[1] _Pag._ 7. in the second Impression. _Pag._ 9. _Pag._ 22. _Pag._ 24. - - - - -X. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I received the Book of your new _Author_ that treats of Natural -Philosophy, which I perceive is but lately come forth; but although -it be new, yet there are no new opinions in it; for the _Author_ doth -follow the opinions of some old Philosophers, and argues after the -accustomed Scholastical way, with hard, intricate, and nonsensical -words: Wherefore I shall not take so much pains as to read it quite -over, but onely pick out here and there some few discourses, which I -shall think most convenient for the clearing of my own opinion; in -the number of which, is, first, that of Matter, whereof the _Author_ -is pleased to proclaim the opinion that holds Matter to be Infinite, -not onely absurd, but also impious. Truly, _Madam_, it is easily -said, but hardly proved; and not to trouble you with unnecessary -repetitions, I hope you do remember as yet what I have written to you -in the beginning concerning the infiniteness of Nature, or natural -Matter, where I have proved that it implies no impiety, absurdity, or -contradiction at all, to believe that Matter is Infinite; for your -_Authors_ argument, concluding from the finiteness of particular -Creatures to Nature her self, is of no force; for though no part of -Nature is Infinite in bulk, figure, or quantity, nevertheless, all the -parts of Infinite Nature are Infinite in number, which infinite number -of parts must needs make up one Infinite body in bulk, or quantity; -for as a finite body or substance is dividable into finite parts, so -an Infinite body, as Nature, or natural Matter, must of necessity be -dividable into infinite parts in number, and yet each part must also -be finite in its exterior figure, as I have proved in the beginning -by the example of a heap of grains of corn. Certainly, _Madam_, I see -no reason, but since, according to your _Author_, God, as the prime -Cause, Agent, and Producer of all things, and the action by which he -produced all things, is Infinite; the Matter out of which he produced -all particular Creatures may be Infinite also. Neither doth it, to my -sense and reason, imply any contradiction or impiety; for it derogates -nothing from the Glory and Omnipotency of God, but God is still the -God of Nature, and Nature is his Servant, although Infinite, depending -wholly upon the will and pleasure of the All-powerful God: Neither -do these two Infinites obstruct each other; for Nature is corporeal, -and God is a supernatural and spiritual Infinite Being, and although -Nature has an Infinite power, yet she has but an Infinite Natural -power, whereas Gods Omnipotency is infinitely extended beyond Nature. -But your _Author_ is pleased to refute that argument, which concludes -from the effect to the cause, and proves Matter to be infinite, because -God as the Cause is Infinite, saying, that this Rule doth onely hold -in Univocal things, (by which, I suppose, he understands things of -the same kind and nature) and not in opposites. Truly, _Madam_, by -this he limits God's power, as if God were not able to work beyond -Nature, and Natural Reason or Understanding; and measures Gods actions -according to the rules of Logick; which whether it be not more impious, -you may judg your self. And as for opposites, God and Nature are not -opposites, except you will call opposites those which bear a certain -relation to one another, as a Cause, and its Effect; a Parent, and a -Child; a Master, and a Servant; and the like. Nay, I wonder how your -_Author_ can limit Gods action, when as he confesses himself, that the -Creation of the World is an Infinite action. God acted finitely, says -he, by an Infinite action; which, in my opinion, is meer non-sense, and -as much as to say, a man can act weakly by a strong action, basely by -an honest action, cowardly by a stout action. The truth is, God being -Infinite, cannot work finitely; for, as his Essence, so his Actions -cannot have any limitation, and therefore it is most probable, that -God made Nature Infinite; for though each part of Nature is finite -in its own figure, yet considered in general, they are Infinite, as -well in number, as duration, except God be pleased to destroy them; -nay, every particular may in a certain sense be said Infinite, to -wit, Infinite in time or duration; for if Nature be Infinite and -Eternal, and there be no annihilation or perishing in Nature, but a -perpetual successive change and alteration of natural figures, then -no part of Nature can perish or be annihilated; and if no part of -Nature perishes, then it lasts infinitely in Nature, that is, in the -substance of natural Matter; for though the corporeal motions, which -make the figures, do change, yet the ground of the figure, which is -natural matter, never changes. The same may be said of corporeal -motions: for though motions change and vary infinite ways, yet none is -lost in Nature, but some motions are repeated again: As for example; -the natural motions in an Animal Creature, although they are altered -in the dissolution of the figure, yet they may be repeated again by -piece-meals in other Creatures; like as a Commonwealth, or united body -in society, if it should be dissolved or dispersed, the particulars -which did constitute this Commonwealth or society, may joyn to the -making of another society; and thus the natural motions of a body do -not perish when the figure of the body dissolves, but joyn with other -motions to the forming and producing of some other figures. But to -return to your _Author_. I perceive his discourse is grounded upon a -false supposition, which appears by his way of arguing from the course -of the Starrs and Planets, to prove the finiteness of Nature; for by -reason the Stars and Planets rowl about, and turn to the same point -again, each within a certain compass of time, he concludes Nature or -Natural Matter to be finite too. And so he takes a part for the whole, -to wit, this visible World for all Nature, when as this World is -onely a part of Nature, or Natural Matter, and there may be more, and -Infinite worlds besides; Wherefore his conclusion must needs be false, -since it is built upon a false ground. Moreover, he is as much against -the Eternity of Matter, as he is against Infiniteness; concluding -likewise from the parts to the whole; For, _says he_, since the parts -of Nature are subject to a beginning and ending, the whole must be -so too. But he is much mistaken, when he attributes a beginning and -ending to parts, for there is no such thing as a beginning and ending -in Nature, neither in the whole, nor in the parts, by reason there is -no new creation or production of Creatures out of new Matter, nor any -total destruction or annihilation of any part in Nature, but onely a -change, alteration and transmigration of one figure into another; which -change and alteration proves rather the contrary, to wit, that Matter -is Eternal and Incorruptible; for if particular figures change, they -must of necessity change in the Infinite Matter, which it self, and -in its nature, is not subject to any change or alteration: besides, -though particulars have a finite and limited figure, and do change, -yet their species do not; for Mankind never changes, nor ceases to be, -though _Peter_ and _Paul_ die, or rather their figures dissolve and -divide; for to die is nothing else, but that the parts of that figure -divide and unite into some other figures by the change of motion in -those parts. Concerning the Inanimate Matter, which of it self is a -dead, dull, and idle matter, your _Author_ denies it to be a co-agent -or assistant to the animate matter: For, says he, how can dead and idle -things act? To which, I answer: That your _Author_ being, or pretending -to be a Philosopher, should consider that there is difference betwixt a -Principal and Instrumental cause or agent; and although this inanimate, -or dull matter, doth not act of it self as a principal agent, yet it -can and doth act as an Instrument, according as it is imploy'd by the -animate matter: for by reason there is so close a conjunction and -commixture of animate and inanimate Matter in Nature, as they do make -but one body, it is impossible that the animate part of matter should -move without the inanimate; not that the inanimate hath motion in her -self, but the animate bears up the inanimate in the action of her own -substance, and makes the inanimate work, act, and move with her, by -reason of the aforesaid union and commixture. Lastly, your _Author_ -speaks much of Minima's, _viz._ That all things may be resolved into -their minima's, and what is beyond them, is nothing, and that there -is one maximum, or biggest, which is the world, and what is beyond -that, is Infinite. Truly, _Madam_, I must ingeniously confess, I am -not so high learned, as to penetrate into the true sense of these -words; for he says, they are both divisible, and indivisible, and yet -no atomes, which surpasses my Understanding; for there is no such -thing, as biggest and smallest in Nature, or in the Infinite matter; -for who can know how far this World goes, or what is beyond it? There -may be Infinite Worlds, as I said before, for ought we know; for God -and Nature cannot be comprehended, nor their works measured, if we -cannot find out the nature of particular things, which are subject -to our exterior senses, how shall we be able to judg of things not -subject to our senses. But your _Author_ doth speak so presumptuously -of Gods Actions, Designs, Decrees, Laws, Attributes, Power, and secret -Counsels, and describes the manner, how God created all things, and the -mixture of the Elements to an hair, as if he had been Gods Counsellor -and assistant in the work of Creation; which whether it be not more -impiety, then to say, Matter is Infinite, I'le let others judg. -Neither do I think this expression to be against the holy Scripture; -for though I speak as a natural Philosopher, and am unwilling to cite -the Scripture, which onely treats of things belonging to Faith, and -not to Reason; yet I think there is not any passage which plainly -denies Matter to be Infinite, and Eternal, unless it be drawn by force -to that sense: _Solomon_ says, _That there is not any thing new_: -and in another place it is said, _That God is all fulfilling_; that -is, that the Will of God is the fulfilling of the actions of Nature: -also the Scripture says, _That Gods ways are unsearchable, and past -finding out._ Wherefore, it is easier to treat of Nature, then the God -of Nature; neither should God be treated of by vain Philosophers, but -by holy Divines, which are to deliver and interpret the Word of God -without sophistry, and to inform us as much of Gods Works, as he hath -been pleased to declare and make known. And this is the safest way, in -the opinion of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your new _Author_ endeavours to prove, that Water in its own proper -nature is thicker then Earth; which, to my sense and reason, seems not -probable; for although water is less porous then earth in its exterior -figure, yet 'tis not so thick as earth in its interior nature: Neither -can I conceive it to be true, that water in its own nature, and as long -as it remains water, should be as hard as Crystal, or stone, as his -opinion is; for though Elements are so pliant (being not composed of -many different parts and figures) as they can change and rechange their -exterior figures, yet they do not alter their interior nature without a -total dissolution; but your _Author_ may as well say, that the interior -nature of man is dust and ashes, as that water in its interior nature -is as thick as earth, and as hard as Christal, or stone; whereas yet -a man, when he becomes dust and ashes, is not a man; and therefore, -when water is become so thick as earth, or so hard as stone, it is not -water; I mean when it is so in its interior nature, not in its exterior -figure; for the exterior figure may be contracted, when yet the -interior nature is dilative; and so the exterior may be thick or hard, -when the interior is soft and rare. But you may say, that water is a -close, and heavy, as also a smooth and glossy body. I answer: That doth -not prove its interior nature to be hard, dense, thick, or contracted; -for the interior nature and parts of a body may be different from the -exterior figure or parts; neither doth the close joyning of parts -hinder dilatation; for if so, a line or circle could not dilate or -extend: But this close uniting of the parts of water is caused through -its wet and glutinous quality, which wet and sticking quality is -caused by a watery dilatation; for though water hath not interiously -so rare a dilatation as Air, Fire, and Light, yet it hath not so close -a contraction as Earth, Stone, or Metal; neither are all bodies that -are smooth and shining, more solid and dense, then those that are -rough and dark; for light is more smooth, glossy, and shining, then -Water, Metal, Earth, or Transparent-stones, and yet is of a dilative -nature. But because some bodies and figures which are transparent and -smooth, are dense, hard, and thick, we cannot in reason, or sense, -say, that all bodies and figures are so. As for Transparency, it is -caused through a purity of substance, and an evenness of parts: the -like is glossiness, onely glossiness requires not so much regularity, -as transparency. But to return to Water; its exterior Circle-figure -may dilate beyond the degree of the propriety or nature of water, or -contract beneath the propriety or nature of water. Your _Author_ may -say, Water is a globous body, and all globous bodies tend to a Center. -I answer: That my sense and reason cannot perceive, but that Circles -and Globes do as easily dilate, as contract: for if all Globes and -Circles should endeavour to draw or fall from the circumference to the -Center, the Center of the whole World, or at least of some parts of the -World, would be as a Chaos: besides, it is against sense and reason, -that all Matter should strive to a Center; for humane sense and reason -may observe, that all Creatures, and so Matter, desire liberty, and a -Center is but a Prison in comparison to the Circumference; wherefore -if Matter crowds, it is rather by force, then a voluntary action. You -will say, All Creatures desire rest, and in a Center there's rest. I -answer; Humane sense and reason cannot perceive any rest in Nature: for -all things, as I have proved heretofore, are in a perpetual motion. -But concerning Water, you may ask me, _Madam_, Whether congeal'd -Water, as Ice, if it never thaw, remains Water? To which, I answer: -That the interior nature of Water remains as long as the Ice remains, -although the outward form is changed; but if Ice be contracted into -the firmness and density of Crystal, or Diamond, or the like, so as -to be beyond the nature of Water, and not capable to be that Water -again, then it is transformed into another Creature, or thing, which -is neither Water, nor Ice, but a Stone; for the Icy contraction doth -no more alter the interior nature of Water, which is dilating, then -the binding of a man with Chains alters his nature from being a man; -and it might be said as well, that the nature of Air is not dilating, -when inclosed in a bladder, as that Water doth not remain Water in -its interior nature, when it is contracted into Ice. But you may ask, -Whether one extreme can change into another? I answer: To my sense -and reason it were possible, if extremes were in Nature; but I do not -perceive that in Nature there be any, although my sense and reason doth -perceive alterations in the effects of Nature; for though one and the -same part may alter from contraction to dilation, and from dilation -to contraction; yet this contraction and dilation are not extremes, -neither are they performed at one and the same time, but at different -times. But having sufficiently declared my opinion hereof in my former -Letters, I'l add no more, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -My discourse of Water in my last Letter has given you occasion to -enquire after the reason, _Why the weight of a great body of water doth -not press so hard and heavily as to bruise or crush a body, when it is -sunk down to the bottom?_ As for example: If a man should be drowned, -and afterwards cast out from the bottom of a great Sea, or River, upon -the shore; he would onely be found smother'd or choak'd to death, and -not press'd, crush'd, or bruised, by the weight of water. I answer; -The reasons are plain: for, first, the nature of a mans respiration -requires such a temperature of breath to suck in, as is neither too -thick, nor too thin for his lungs, and the rest of his interior parts, -as also for the organs and passages of his exterior senses, but fit, -proper, and proportionable to those mentioned parts of his body: As for -example; in a too thin and rarified air, man will be as apt to die for -want of breath, as in a too gross and thick air he is apt to die with -a superfluity of the substance he imbreaths; for thick smoak, or thick -vapour, as also too gross air, will soon smother a man to death; and as -for choaking, if a man takes more into his throat then he can swallow, -he will die; and if his stomack be filled with more food then it is -able to digest, if it cannot discharge it self, he will die with the -excess of food; and if there be no food, or too little put into it, he -will also die for want of food. So the eye, if it receives too many, -or too gross, or too bright objects, it will be dazled or blinded, -and some objects through their purity are not to be seen at all: The -same for Hearing, and the rest of the exterior senses: And this is the -reason, why man, or some animal Creatures are smother'd and choak'd -with water; because water is thicker then the grossest air or vapour; -for if smoak, which is rarer then water, will smother and choak a man, -well may water, being so much thicker. But yet this smothering or -choaking doth not prove, that water hath an interior or innate density -(as your _Authors_ opinion is) no more then smoak, or thick and gross -air hath; but the density of water is caused more through the wet and -moist exterior parts, joyning and uniting closely together; and the -interior nature of smoak being more moist or glutinous then thin air, -and so more apt to unite its exterior parts, it makes it to come in -effect nearer to water; for though water and smoak are both of rare -natures, yet not so rare as clear and pure air; neither is water or -smoak so porous as pure air, by reason the exterior parts of water and -smoak are more moist or glutinous then pure air. But the thickness -of water and smoak is the onely cause of the smothering of men, or -some animals, as by stopping their breath, for a man can no more live -without air, then he can without food; and a well tempered or middle -degree of air is the most proper for animal Respiration; for if the -air be too thick, it may soon smother or choak him; and if too thin, -it is not sufficient to give him breath: And this is the reason that -a man being drown'd, is not onely smother'd, but choak'd by water; -because there enters more through the exterior passages into his body -then can be digested; for water is apt to flow more forcibly and with -greater strength then air; not that it is more dilating then air, but -by reason it is thicker, and so stronger, or of more force; for the -denser a body is, the stronger it is; and a heavy body, when moved, is -more forcible then a light body. But I pray by this expression mistake -not the nature of water; for the interior nature of water hath not -that gravity, which heavy or dense bodies have, its nature being rare -and light, as air, or fire; but the weight of water, as I said before, -proceeds onely from the closeness and compactness of its exterior -parts, not through a contraction in its interior nature; and there is -no argument, which proves better, that water in its interior nature -is dilating, then that its weight is not apt to press to a point; for -though water is apt to descend, through the union of its parts, yet it -cannot press hard, by reason of its dilating nature, which hinders that -heavy pressing quality; for a dilating body cannot have a contracted -weight, I mean, so as to press to a Center, which is to a point; and -this is the reason, that when a grave or heavy body sinks down to the -bottom of water, it is not opprest, hurt, crusht, or bruised by the -weight of water; for, as I said, the nature of water being dilating, -it can no more press hard to a center, then vapour, air, or fire: The -truth is, water would be as apt to ascend as descend, if it were not -for the wet, glutinous and sticking, cleaving quality of its exterior -parts; but as the quantity and quality of the exterior parts makes -water apt to sink, or descend, so the dilating nature makes it apt to -flow, if no hinderance stop its course; also the quantity and quality -of its exterior parts is the cause, that some heavy bodies do swim -without sinking: as for example; a great heavy Ship will not readily -sink, unless its weight be so contracted as to break asunder the united -parts of water; for the wet quality of water causing its exterior parts -to joyn close, gives it such an united strength, as to be able to bear -a heavy burden, if the weight be dilated, or level, and not piercing or -penetrating; for those bodies that are most compact, will sink sooner, -although of less weight then those that are more dilated although of -greater weight: Also the exterior and outward shape or form makes some -bodies more apt to sink then others; Indeed, the outward form and shape -of Creatures is one of the chief causes of either sinking or swimming. -But to conclude, water in its interior nature is of a mean or middle -degree, as neither too rare, nor too grave a body; and for its exterior -quality, it is in as high a degree for wetness, as fire is for heat; -and being apt both to divide, and to unite, it can bear a burden, and -devour a burden, so that some bodies may swim, and others sink; and -the cause, that a sunk body is not opprest, crush'd, or squeesed, is -the dilating nature and quality of water, which hinders its parts -from pressing or crowding towards a point or center; for although -water is heavy, and apt to descend, yet its weight is not caused by -a contraction of its substance, but by a union of its parts. Thus, -_Madam_, I have obeyed your commands, in giving you my reasons to your -propounded question, which if you approve, I have my aim; if not, I -submit to your better judgment: for you know I am in all respects, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_to serve you._ - - - - -XIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am glad, you are pleased with my reasons I gave to your propounded -question concerning the weight of Water; and since you have been -pleased to send me some more of that subject, I shall be ready also -to give my answer to them, according to the capacity of my judgment. -First, you desire to know, _How it comes, that Water will by degrees -ascend through a narrow pipe, when the pipe is placed straight upright; -or perpendicular?_ The reason, in my opinion is, that Water, having a -dilative nature, when it finds an obstruction to descend or flow even, -will dilate it self ascendingly, according as it hath liberty, or -freedom, and strength, or quantity; the truth is, water would be more -apt to ascend then to descend, were it not for the close uniting of -its liquid Parts, which causes its exterior density, and this density -makes it of more weight then its nature is; and the proof that water -is apt in its nature to ascend, is, that some sorts of vapours are -made onely by the dilation and rarefaction of ascending Water. Your -second question is, _Why the surface of water seems to be concave in -its middle, and higher on every side?_ I answer, The interior figure -of water is a circular figure, which being a round figure, is both -concave, and convex; for where one is, the other must be; and the -motions of ebbing and flowing, and ascending or descending, are partly -of that figure; and so according to the exterior dilating strength -or weakness, the exterior parts of water become either concave or -convex; for in a full strength, as a full stream, the exterior parts -of water flow in a convex figure, but when they want strength, they -ebb in a concave figure. Your third question is, _What makes frozen -water apt to break those Vessels wherein it is contained, in the act -of freezing or congealing?_ I answer: The same cause that makes water -clear, as also more swell'd then usually it is: which cause is the -inherent dilative nature of water; for water being naturally dilative, -when as cold attractions do assault it, the moist dilations of water -in the conflict use more then their ordinary strength to resist those -cold contracting motions, by which the body of water dilates it self -into a larger compass, according as it hath liberty or freedom, or -quantity of parts; and the cold parts not being able to drive the -water back to its natural compass, bind it as it is extended, like as -if a beast should be bound when his legs and neck are thrust out at -the largest extent, in striving to kick or thrust away his enemies and -imprisoners: And so the reason why water breaks these vessels wherein -it is inclosed, in the act of its freezing or congealing is, that when -the cold contractions are so strong as they endeavour to extinguish the -dilating nature of water, the water refilling, forces its parts so, as -they break the vessel which incloses them: The same reason makes Ice -clear and transparent; for it is not the rarefaction of water that doth -it, but the dilation, which causes the parts of water to be not onely -more loose and porous, but also more smooth and even, by resisting the -cold contractions; for every part endeavours to defend their borders -with a well ordered and regular flowing or streaming, and not onely to -defend, but to enlarge their compass against their enemies. Your fourth -question is, How it comes _that Snow and Salt mixt together doth make -Ice?_ The reason, in my judgment, is, that Salt being very active, and -partly of the nature of fire, doth sometimes preserve, and sometimes -destroy other bodies, according to its power, or rather according to -the nature of those bodies it works on; and salt being mixt with snow, -endeavours to destroy it; but having not so much force, melts it onely -by its heat, and reduces it into its first principle, which is water, -altering the figure of snow; but the cold contractions remaining in -the water, and endeavouring to maintain and keep their power, straight -draw the water or melted snow into the figure of ice, so as neither -the salts heat, nor the waters dilative nature, are able to resist or -destroy those cold contractions; for although they destroy'd the first -figure, which is snow, yet they cannot hinder the second, which is Ice. -Your last question is, _How the Clouds can hang so long in the Skie -without falling down?_ Truly, _Madam_, I do not perceive that Clouds, -being come to their full weight and gravity, do keep up in the air, -but some of them fall down in showres of rain, others in great and -numerous flakes of snow; some are turned into wind, and some fall down -in thick mists, so that they onely keep up so long, until they are of -a full weight for descent, or till their figure is altered into some -other body, as into air, wind, rain, lightning, thunder, snow, hail, -mist, and the like. But many times their dilating motions keep or -hinder them from descending, to which contracting motions are required. -In my opinion, it is more to be admired, that the Sea doth not rise, -then that Clouds do not fall; for, as we see, Clouds fall very often, -as also change from being Clouds, to some other figure: Wherefore it -is neither the Sun, nor Stars, nor the Vapours, which arise from the -Earth, and cause the Clouds, nor the porosity of their bodies, nor the -Air, that can keep or hinder them from falling or changing to some -other body; but they being come to their full weight, fall or change -according as is fittest for them. And these are all the reasons I can -give you for the present; if they do not satisfie you, I will study for -others, and in all occasions endeavour to express my self, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - - - - -XIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since in my last, I made mention of the Congealing of Water into Ice -and Snow, I cannot choose, but by the way tell you, that I did lately -meet with an _Author_, who is of opinion, That Snow is nothing else but -Ice broken or ground into small pieces. To which, I answer: That this -opinion may serve very well for a Fancy, but not for a Rational Truth, -or at least for a Probable Reason; For why may not the cold motions -make snow without beating or grinding, as well as they make Ice? Surely -Nature is wiser then to trouble her self with unnecessary labour, and -to make an easie work difficult, as Art her Creature doth, or as some -dull humane capacities conceive; for it is more easie for Nature to -make Snow by some sorts of cold contractions, as she makes Ice by other -sorts of cold contractions, then to force Air and Wind to beat, grinde, -or pound Ice into Snow, which would cause a confusion and disturbance -through the Irregularity of several parts, being jumbled in a confused -manner together. The truth is, it would rather cause a War in Nature, -then a natural production, alteration, or transformation: Neither can -I conceive, in what region this turbulent and laborious work should be -acted; certainly not in the caverns of the Earth, for snow descends -from the upper Region. But, perchance, this _Author_ believes, that -Nature imploys Wind as a Hand, and the Cold air as a Spoon, to beat Ice -like the white of an Egg into a froth of Snow. But the great quantity -of Snow, in many places, doth prove, that Snow is not made of the -fragments of Ice, but that some sorts of cold contractions on a watery -body, make the figure of snow in the substance of water, as other sorts -of cold contractions make the figure of ice; which motions and figures -I have treated of in my Book of Philosophy, according to that Judgment -and Reason which Nature has bestowed upon me. The Author of this Fancy, -gives the same reason for Snow being white: _For Ice_, says he, _is -a transparent body, and all transparent bodies, when beaten into -powder, appear white; and since Snow is nothing else but Ice powder'd -small, it must of necessity shew white._ Truly, _Madam_, I am not so -experienced, as to know that all transparent bodies, being beaten -small, shew white; but grant it be so, yet that doth not prove, that -the whiteness of snow proceeds from the broken parts of Ice, unless it -be proved that the whiteness of all bodies proceeds from the powdering -of transparent bodies, which I am sure he cannot do; for Silver, and -millions of other things are white, which were never produced from the -powder of transparent bodies: Neither do I know any reason against -it, but that which makes a Lilly white, may also be the cause of the -whiteness of Snow, that is, such a figure as makes a white colour; for -different figures, in my opinion, are the cause of different colours, -as you will find in my Book of Philosophy, where I say, that Nature -by contraction of lines draws such or such a Figure, which is such or -such a Colour; as such a Figure is red, and such a Figure is green, -and so of all the rest: But the Palest colours, and so white, are the -loosest and slackest figures; Indeed, white, which is the nearest -colour to light, is the smoothest, evenest and straightest figure, and -composed of the smallest lines: As for example; suppose the figure of -8. were the colour of Red, and the figure of 1. the colour of White; or -suppose the figure of Red to be a _z._ and the figure of an _r._ to be -the figure of Green, and a straight _l._ the figure of White; And mixt -figures make mixt colours: The like examples may be brought of other -Figures, as of a Harpsichord and its strings, a Lute and its strings, -a Harp and its strings, &c. By which your Reason shall judg, whether -it be not easier for Nature, to make Snow and its whiteness by the way -of contraction, then by the way of dissolution: As for example; Nature -in making Snow, contracts or congeals the exterior figure of Water into -the figure of a Harp, which is a Triangular figure with the figure -of straight strings within it; for the exterior figure of the Harp -represents the exterior figure of Snow, and the figure of the strings -extended in straight lines represent the figure of its whiteness. And -thus it is easier to make Snow and its whiteness at one act, then first -to contract or congeal water into Ice, and then to cause wind and cold -air to beat and break that Ice into powder, and lastly to contract -or congeal that powder into flakes of Snow. Which would be a very -troublesom work for Nature, _viz._ to produce one effect by so many -violent actions and several labours, when the making of two figures by -one action will serve the turn. But Nature is wiser then any of her -Creatures can conceive; for she knows how to make, and how to dissolve, -form; and transform, with facility and ease, without any difficulty; -for her actions are all easie and free, yet so subtil, curious and -various, as not any part or creature of Nature can exactly or throughly -trace her ways, or know her wisdom. And thus leaving her, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I have taken several questions out of your new _Author_, which I -intend to answer in this present Letter according to the conceptions -of my own sense and reason, and to submit them to your censure; which -if you vouchsafe to grant me without partiality, I shall acknowledg -my self much obliged to you for this favour. The first question is, -_Why wet Linnen is dried in the Air?_ I answer; That, according to my -sense and reason, the water which is spred upon the linnen, being not -united in a full and close body, dilates beyond the Circle-degree of -water and wetness, and so doth easily change from water to vapour, -and from vapour to air, whereby the linnen becomes as dry, as it -was before it became wet. The second question is, _Why Water and -Wine intermix so easily and suddenly together?_ I answer: All wet -liquors, although their exterior figures do differ, yet their interior -natures, figures and forms are much alike, and those things that are -of the same interior nature, do easily and suddenly joyn as into one: -Wherefore Wine and Water having both wet natures, do soon incorporate -together, whereas, were they of different natures, they would not so -peaceably joyn together, but by their contrary natures become enemies, -and strive to destroy each other; but this is to be observed, that -the sharp points of the Circle-lines of Wine, by passing through the -smooth Circle-lines of Water, help to make a more hasty and sudden -conjunction. The third question, is, _Why Light, which in its nature is -white, shining through a coloured Glass, doth appear of the same colour -which the Glass is of, either Blew, Green, Red, or the like?_ I answer: -The reason is, that though Light in its nature be white, and the Glass -clear and transparent, yet when as the Glass is stained or painted with -colours, both the clearness of the glass, and the whiteness of the -light, is obstructed by the figure of that colour the glass is stained -or painted withal, and the light spreading upon or thorow the glass, -represents it self in the figure of that same colour; indeed, in all -probability to sense and reason, it appears, that the lines or beams -of light, which are straight, small, even, and parallel, do contract -in their entrance through the glass into the figure of the colour the -glass is stained or painted with, so that the light passes through the -glass figuratively, in so much, as it seems to be of the same colour -the glass is of, although in it self it is white, lucent, and clear; -and as the light appears, so the eye receives it, if the sight be not -destructive. The fourth question, is, _Whether_ (as your _Authors_ -opinion is) _kisses feel pleasing and delightful by the thinness of -the parts, and a gentle stirring and quavering of the tangent spirits, -that give a pleasing tact?_ I answer: If this were so, then all kisses -would be pleasing, which surely are not; for some are thought very -displeasing, especially from thin lips; wherefore, in my opinion, it -is neither the thinness of the parts of the lips, nor the quavering of -the tangent spirits, but the appetites and passions of life, reason, -and soul, that cause the pleasure; Nevertheless, I grant, the stirring -up of the spirits may contribute to the increasing, heightening, or -strengthning of that tact, but it is not the prime cause of it. The -fifth question, is, _Whether the greatest man have always the greatest -strength?_ I answer, Not: for strength and greatness of bulk doth not -always consist together, witness experience: for a little man may be, -and is oftentimes stronger then a tall man. The like of other animal -Creatures: As for example, some Horses of a little or middle size, -have a great deal more strength then others which are high and big; -for it is the quantity of sensitive matter that gives strength, and -not the bigness or bulk of the body. The sixth question, is, _Whether -this World or Universe be the biggest Creature?_ I answer: It is not -possible to be known, unless Man could perfectly know its dimension -or extension, or whether there be more Worlds then one: But, to speak -properly, there is no such thing as biggest or least in Nature. The -seventh question, is, _Whether the Earth be the Center of Matter, or of -the World?_ As for Matter, it being Infinite, has no Center, by reason -it has no Circumference; and, as for this World, its Center cannot be -known, unless man knew the utmost parts of its circumference, for no -Center can be known without its circumference; and although some do -imagine this world so little, that in comparison to Infinite Matter, it -would not be so big as the least Pins head, yet their knowledg cannot -extend so far as to know the circumference of this little World; by -which you may perceive the Truth of the old saying, Man talks much, but -knows little. The eighth question is, _Whether all Centers must needs -be full, and close, as a stufft Cushion; and whether the matter in -the Center of the Universe or World be dense, compact, and heavy?_ I -answer: This can no more be known, then the circumference of the World; -for what man is able to know, whether the Center of the world be rare, -or dense, since he doth not know where its Center is; and as for other -particular Centers, some Centers may be rare, some dense, and some may -have less matter then their circumferences. The ninth question is, -_Whether Finite Creatures can be produced out of an Infinite material -cause?_ I answer: That, to my sense and reason, an Infinite cause must -needs produce Infinite effects, though not in each Particular, yet in -General; that is, Matter, being Infinite in substance, must needs be -dividable into Infinite parts in number, and thus Infinite Creatures -must needs be produced out of Infinite Matter; but Man being but a -finite part, thinks all must be finite too, not onely each particular -Creature, but also the Matter out of which all Creatures are produced, -which is corporeal Nature. Nevertheless, those Infinite effects in -Nature are equalized by her different motions which are her different -actions; for it is not _non_-sence, but most demonstrable to sense and -reason that there are equalities or a union in Infinite. The tenth -question is, _Whether the Elements be the onely matter out of which -all other Creatures are produced?_ I answer: The Elements, as well as -all other Creatures, as it appears to humane sense and reason, are all -of one and the same Matter, which is the onely Infinite Matter; and -therefore the Elements cannot be the Matter of all other Creatures, -for several sorts of Creatures have several ways of productions, and -I know no reason to the contrary, but that Animals, Vegetables, and -Minerals, may as well derive their essence from each other, as from -the Elements, or the Elements from them; for as all Creatures do -live by each other, so they are produced from each other, according -to the several ways or manners of productions. But mistake me not, -_Madam_, for I speak of production in General, and not of such natural -production whereby the several species of Creatures are maintained: As -for example, Generation in Animals; for an Element cannot generate an -Animal in that manner as an Animal can generate or produce its like; -for as Nature is wise, so her actions are all wise and orderly, or -else it would make a horrid confusion amongst the Infinite parts of -Nature. The eleventh question is, _What is meant by Natural Theology?_ -I answer: Natural Theology, in my opinion, is nothing else but Moral -Philosophy; for as for our belief, it is grounded upon the Scripture, -and not upon Reason. - -These, _Madam_, are the questions which I have pickt out of your new -_Author_, together with my answers, of which I desire your impartial -Judgment: But I must add one thing more before I conclude, which is, -I am much pleased with your _Authors_ opinion, That Sound may be -perceived by the Eye, Colour by the Ear, and that Sound and Colour may -be smell'd and tasted; and I have been of this opinion eleven years -since, as you will find in my Book of Poems, whose first Edition was -printed in the Year, 1653. And thus I take my leave of you, and remain -constantly, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_to serve you._ - - - - -XVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning your question of the ascending nature of fire, I am -absolutely of _Aristotle's_ Opinion, that it is as natural for Fire -to ascend, as it is for Earth to descend; And why should we believe -the nature of one, and doubt the nature of the other? For if it be -granted, that there are as well ascending, as descending bodies in -Nature, as also low and high places, (according to the situation of -Particulars) and Circumferences, as well as Centers, (considering the -shape of bodies) I cannot perceive by humane reason, but that the -Nature of fire is ascending, and that it is very improbable, it should -have a descending or contracting nature, as to tend or endeavour to a -Center. But, _Madam_, give me leave to ask what sort of Fire you mean, -whether a Celestial, or a Terrestrial Fire, _viz._ that which is named -an Elemental fire, or any other sort of fire? for there may be as many -several sorts of fire, as of other Creatures; or whether you mean onely -that sort of fire that belongs to this terrestrial Globe, or all the -fire in general that is in Infinite Nature? and if you mean onely that -sort of fire which belongs to this Terrestrial World we live upon; I -answer, There are many several sorts of that fire too; for all the -fire belonging to this Earthly Globe, doth not lie in one place, body, -or part, no more then all metal, or but one sort of metal, as Gold, -lies in one mine, or all Mankind in one womb. Neither can I believe, -that the Sun is the onely Celestial Fire in Nature, but that there may -be as numerous Suns, as there are other sorts of Creatures in Nature. -But as for the ascending propriety of this terrestrial Fire, you may -say, That the Elements do commix and unite in this worldly Globe, and -if Fire should have an ascending motion, it would pierce into other -Globes, or Worlds, and never leave ascending. I answer: That, first of -all, the strength of fire is to be considered, consisting not onely -in its quantity, but also in its quality; as whether it can ascend -to those bodies and places which are far above it: For example; A -Man, or any other Creature, hath never so much strength, or ability, -or length of life, as to travel to the utmost parts of the Universe, -were the way never so plain and free, and the number of men never so -great: the like for Elementary fire, which hath life and death, that -is, generation and dissolution, and successive motion, as well as other -Creatures. But you would fain know, whether fire, if it were left at -liberty, would not turn to a Globous figure? I answer; That, to my -sense and reason, it would not: but some men, seeing the flame of fire -in an arched Oven, descend round the sides of the Oven in a Globous -figure, do perhaps imagine the nature of fire to be descending, and its -natural figure round as a Globe, which is ridiculous; for the fire in -the Oven, although every where incompassed and bound, yet, according -to its nature, ascends to the top of the Oven; and finding a stoppage -and suppression, offers to descend perpendicularly; but by reason of -a continual ascending of the following flame, the first, and so all -the following parts of flame are forced to spread about, and descend -round the sides of the Oven, so that the descension of the flame is -forced, and not natural, and its Globous figure is caused, as it were, -by a mould, which is the Oven. But some are of opinion, that all bodies -have descending motions towards the Center of this worldly Globe, and -therefore they do not believe, that any bodies do ascend naturally: -But what reason have they to believe one, and not the other? Besides, -how do they know that all bodies would rest in the Center of this -terrestrial Globe, if they came thither? For if it was possible, that a -hole could be digged from the superficies of this Earthly Globe thorow -the middle or Center of it unto the opposite superficies, and a stone -be sent thorow; the question is, whether the stone would rest in the -Center, and not go quite thorow? Wherefore this is but an idle Fancy; -and the proof that Fire tends not to a Center, is, because it cannot -be poised or weighed, not onely by reason of its rarity, but of its -dilative and aspiring Nature; and as fire is ascending, or aspiring, -so likewise do I, _Madam_, aspire to the top of your favour, and shall -never descend from the ambition to serve you, but by the suppression of -death. Till then, I remain, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend,_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - - - - -XVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In your last, you were pleased to desire my answer to these following -questions: First, _What the reason is, that a Vessel, although it be -of a solid and compact substance, yet will retain the smell or odour -of a forreign substance poured into it, for a long time?_ I answer: -The Vessel, or rather the perceptive corporeal motions of the Vessel, -having patterned out the figure of the sent of the odorous substance, -retain that same figure of sent, although the odorous substance is -gone; and as long as that patterned figure is perfect, the sent will -remain in the Vessel, either more or less, according as the figure -doth last or alter. But you must consider, _Madam_, that although it -be the natural motions that make those patterns of odours, yet those -patterned figures are but as it were artificial, like as a man who -draws a Copy from an Original; for Nature has divers and several ways -of such motions as we call Art, for whatsoever is an imitation, is that -which man calls Art. Your second question was, _How it came, that the -mind and understanding in many did die or dissolve before the body?_ -I answer: The reason is, because the rational corporeal motions alter -before the sensitive; for as in some, as for example, in Natural fools, -the rational motions never move to a regular humane understanding, -so in some dying Persons they do make a general alteration before -the sensitive. Your third question was, _Why a man, being bitten by -a mad Dog, is onely distempered in his mind, and not in his body?_ -The reason, according to my judgment, is, that the rational part of -Matter is onely disturbed, and not the sensitive. The fourth question -was, _Why a Basilisk will kill with his eyes?_ I answer: It is the -sensitive corporeal motions in the organ of sight in the man, which -upon the printing of the figure of the eyes of the Basilisk, make a -sudden alteration. Your fifth question was, _Why an Asp will kill -insensibly by biting?_ The reason, in my opinion, is, That the biting -of the Asp hath the same efficacy as deadly _Opium_ hath, yea, and much -stronger. Your sixth question was, _Why a Dog that rejoyces, swings his -tail, and a Lyon when angry, or a Cat when in a fear, do lift up their -tails?_ I answer: The several motions of the mind may produce either -but one, or several sorts of motions in some part or parts of the body; -and as the sensitive motions of anger will produce tears, so will the -motions of joy; but grief made by the rational motions of the mind, -may by excess disturb and make a general alteration of the sensitive -motions in an animal: the same may excessive joy. But, _Madam_, you may -perhaps find out better reasons for your own questions then these are; -for my endeavour was onely to frame my answer to the ground of my own -opinions, and so to satisfie your desire, which was, and is still the -ambition of, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - - -XVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In your last, you were pleased to desire an account, how far, or how -much I did understand the ancient and modern Philosophers in their -Philosophical Writings. Truly, _Madam_, I can more readily tell you -what I do not understand, then what I do understand: for, first, I do -not understand their sophistical Logick, as to perswade with arguments -that black is white, and white is black; and that fire is not hot, nor -water wet, and other such things; for the glory in Logick is rather -to make doubts, then to find truth; indeed, that Art now is like -thick, dark clouds, which darken the light of truth. Next: I do not -understand in particular, what they mean by second matter; for if they -name figures and forms second matter, they may as well say, all several -motions, which are the several actions of Nature, are several matters, -and so there would be infinite several matters, which would produce a -meer confusion in Nature. Neither do I understand, when they say, a -body dissolves into the first matter; for I am not able to conceive -their first matter, nor what they mean by _magna_ and _major materia_; -for I believe there is but one matter, and the motion of that matter is -its action by which it produces several figures and effects; so that -the nature of the matter is one and the same, although its motions, -that is, its actions, be various, for the various effects alter not -the nature or unity of the onely matter. Neither do I understand what -they mean by corruption, for surely Nature is not corruptible. Nor do -I understand their individables in Nature, nor a bodiless form, nor -a privation, nor a being without a body; nor any such thing as they -call rest, for there's not any thing without motion in Nature: Some do -talk of moving _minima's_, but they do not tell what those _minima's_ -or their motions are, or how they were produced, or how they came to -move. Neither do I understand when they say there is but one World, -and that finite; for if there be no more Matter then that which they -call the whole World, and may be measured by a _Jacob's_ staff, then -certainly there is but little matter, and that no bigger then an atome -in comparison to Infinite. Neither can my reason comprehend, when they -say, that not any thing hath power from its interior nature to move -exteriously and locally; for common sense and reason, that is sight -and observation, doth prove the contrary. Neither do I know what they -mean by making a difference between matter and form, power and act; -for there can be no form without matter, nor no matter without form; -and as act includes power, so power is nothing without act: Neither -can I conceive Reason to be separable from matter; nor what is meant -when they say, that, onely that is real, which moves the understanding -without. Nor do I understand what they mean by intentionals, -accidentals, incorporeal beings, formal _ratio_, formal _unity_, and -hundreds the like; enough to puzle truth, when all is but the several -actions of one cause, to wit, the onely matter. But most men make such -cross, narrow, and intricate ways in Nature, with their over-nice -distinctions, that Nature appears like a Labyrinth, whenas really she -is as plain as an un-plowed, ditched, or hedged champion: Nay, some -make Nature so full, that she can neither move nor stir; and others -again will have her so empty, as they leave not any thing within her; -and some with their penetrations, pressings, squeezings, and the like, -make such holes in her, as they do almost wound, press and squeeze -her to death: And some are so learned, witty, and ingenious, as they -understand and know to discourse of the true compass, just weight, -exact rules, measures and proportions of the Universe, as also of the -exact division of the _Chaos_, and the architecture of the world, to -an atome. Thus, _Madam_, I have made my confession to you of what I -understand not, and have endeavoured to make my ignorance as brief as I -could; but the great God knows, that my ignorance is longer then that -which is named life and death; and as for my understanding, I can onely -say, that I understand nothing better, but my self to be, - -Madam, - -_Your most faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -XIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since I have given you, in my last, an account how much I did -understand the Philosophical works of both the ancient and modern -Philosophers, or rather what I did not understand of them, you would -fain have my opinion now of the persons themselves. Truly, _Madam_, as -for those that are dead, or those that are living, I cannot say any -thing, but that I believe they all were or are worthy persons, men -of vast understandings, subtil conceptions, ingenious wits, painful -students, and learned writers. But as for their works, as I told you -heretofore, I confess ingeniously, I understand them not, by reason -I am ignorant in their Scholastical Arts, as Logick, Metaphysick, -Mathematicks, and the like: For to my simple apprehension, when as -Logicians argue of natural causes and effects, they make natural -causes to produce natural effects with more difficulty and enforcement -then Nature knows of; and as for Mathematicians, they endeavour to -inchant Nature with Circles, and bind her with lines so hard, as if she -were so mad, that she would do some mischief, when left at liberty. -Geometricians weigh Nature to an Atome, and measure her so exactly, as -less then a hairs breadth; besides, they do press and squeeze her so -hard and close, as they almost stifle her. And Natural Philosophers do -so stuff her with dull, dead, senceless _minima's_, like as a sack with -meal, or sand, by which they raise such a Dust as quite blinds Nature -and natural reason. But Chymists torture Nature worst of all; for they -extract and distil her beyond substance, nay, into no substance, if -they could. As for natural Theologers, I understand them least of any; -for they make such a gallamalfry of Philosophy and Divinity, as neither -can be distinguished from the other. In short, _Madam_, They all with -their intricate definitions and distinctions set my brain on the rack: -but some Philosophers are like some Poets, for they endeavour to write -strong lines. You may ask me, what is meant by strong lines? I answer: -Weak sense. To which leaving them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I am not of your opinion, That nice distinctions and Logistical -arguments discover truth, dissolve doubts, and clear the understanding; -but I say, they rather make doubts of truth, and blind-fold the -understanding; Indeed, nice distinctions and sophistical arguments, are -very pernicious both in Schools, Church, and State: As for the Church, -although in Divinity there is but one Truth, yet nice distinctions, and -Logistical sophistry, have made such confusion in it, as has caused -almost as many several opinions as there are words in the Scripture; -and as for natural Theology, which is moral Philosophy, they have -divided vertues and vices into so many parts, and minced them so small, -that neither can be clearly distinguished. The same in Government; they -endeavour to cut between command and obedience to a hairs breadth. -Concerning causes of Law, they have abolish'd the intended benefit, and -banish'd equity; and instead of keeping Peace, they make War, causing -enmity betwixt men: As for Natural Philosophy, they will not suffer -sense and reason to appear in that study: And as for Physick, they have -kill'd more men then Wars, Plagues, or Famine. Wherefore from nice -distinctions and Logistical sophistry, Good God deliver us, especially, -from those that concern Divinity; for they weaken Faith, trouble -Conscience, and bring in Atheism: In short, they make controversies, -and endless disputes. But least the opening of my meaning in such plain -terms should raise a controversie also between you and me, I'le cut off -here, and rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Yesterday I received a visit from the Lady _N. M._ who you know hath -a quick wit, rational opinions, and subtil conceptions; all which she -is ready and free to divulge in her discourse. But when she came to -my Chamber, I was casting up some small accounts; which when she did -see, What, said she, are you at Numeration? Yes, said I: but I cannot -number well, nor much, for I do not understand Arithmetick. Said she, -You can number to three. Yes, said I, I can number to four: Nay, faith, -said she, the number of three is enough, if you could but understand -that number well, for it is a mystical number. Said I, There is no -great mystery to count that number; for one, and two, makes three. Said -she, That is not the mystery; for the mystery is, That three makes -one: and without this mystery no man can understand Divinity, Nature, -nor himself. Then I desired her to make me understand that mystery. -She said, It required more time to inform me, then a short visit, for -this mystery was such, as did puzle all wise men in the world; and -the not understanding of this mystery perfectly, had caused endless -divisions and disputes. I desired, if she could not make me understand -the mystery, she would but inform me, how three made one in Divinity, -Nature, and Man. She said, That was easie to do; for in Divinity there -are three Persons in one Essence, as God the Father, the Son, and the -holy Ghost, whose Essence being individable, they make but one God; -And as for Philosophy, there is but Matter, Motion, and Figure, which -being individable, make but one Nature; And as for Man, there is Soul, -Life, and Body, all three joyned in one Man. But I replied, Man's Life, -Soul and Body, is dividable. That is true, said she, but then he is no -more a Man; for these three are his essential parts, which make him to -be a man; and when these parts are dissolved, then his interior nature -is changed, so that he can no longer be call'd a man: As for example; -Water being turned into Air, and having lost its interior nature, can -no more be called Water, but it is perfect Air; the same is with Man: -But as long as he is a Man, then these three forementioned parts which -make him to be of that figure are individably united as long as man -lasts. Besides, said she, this is but in the particular, considering -man single, and by himself; but in general, these three, as life, -soul, and body, are individably united, so that they remain as long -as mankind lasts. Nay, although they do dissolve in the particulars, -yet it is but for a time; for they shall be united again at the last -day, which is the time of their resurrection; so that also in this -respect we may justly call them individable, for man shall remain -with an united soul, life, and body, eternally. And as she was thus -discoursing, in came a Sophisterian, whom when she spied, away she -went as fast as she could; but I followed her close, and got hold of -her, then asked her, why she ran away? She answer'd, if she stayed, -the Logician would dissolve her into nothing, for the profession of -Logicians is to make something nothing, and nothing something. I pray'd -her to stay and discourse with the Logician: Not for a world, said she, -for his discourse will make my brain like a confused _Chaos_, full of -senseless _minima's_; and after that, he will so knock, jolt, and jog -it, and make such whirls and pits, as will so torture my brain, that I -shall wish I had not any: Wherefore, said she, I will not stay now, but -visit you again to morrow. And I wish with all my heart, _Madam_, you -were so near as to be here at the same time, that we three might make -a Triumvirate in discourse, as well as we do in friendship. But since -that cannot be, I must rest satisfied that I am, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -You were pleased to desire my opinion of the works of that Learned -and Ingenious Writer _B._ Truly, _Madam_, I have read but some part -of his works; but as much as I have read, I have observed, he is a -very civil, eloquent, and rational Writer; the truth is, his style is -a Gentleman's style. And in particular, concerning his experiments, I -must needs say this, that, in my judgment, he hath expressed himself to -be a very industrious and ingenious person; for he doth neither puzle -Nature, nor darken truth with hard words and compounded languages, -or nice distinctions; besides, his experiments are proved by his own -action. But give me leave to tell you, that I observe, he studies the -different parts and alterations, more then the motions, which cause -the alterations in those parts; whereas, did he study and observe -the several and different motions in those parts, how they change in -one and the same part, and how the different alterations in bodies -are caused by the different motions of their parts, he might arrive -to a vast knowledg by the means of his experiments; for certainly -experiments are very beneficial to man. In the next place, you desire -my opinion of the Book call'd, _The Discourses of the Virtuosi in -France_: I am sorry, _Madam_, this book comes so late to my hands, that -I cannot read it so slowly and observingly, as to give you a clear -judgment of their opinions or discourses in particular; however, in -general, and for what I have read in it, I may say, it expresses the -French to be very learned and eloquent Writers, wherein I thought our -English had exceeded them, and that they did onely excel in wit and -ingenuity; but I perceive most Nations have of all sorts. The truth -is, ingenious and subtil wit brings news; but learning and experience -brings proofs, at least, argumental discourses; and the French are -much to be commended, that they endeavour to spend their time wisely, -honourably, honestly, and profitably, not onely for the good and -benefit of their own, but also of other Nations. But before I conclude, -give me leave to tell you, that concerning the curious and profitable -Arts mentioned in their discourses, I confess, I do much admire them, -and partly believe they may arrive to the use of many of them; but -there are two arts which I wish with all my heart I could obtain: the -first is, to argue without error in all kinds, modes, and figures, in -a quarter of an hour; and the other is to learn a way to understand -all languages in six hours. But as for the first, I fear, if I want a -thorow understanding in every particular argument, cause, or point, a -general art or mode of words will not help me, especially, if I, being -a woman, should want discretion: And as for the second, my memory is -so bad, that it is beyond the help of Art, so that Nature has made -my understanding harder or closer then Glass, through which the Sun -of verity cannot pass, although its light doth; and therefore I am -confident I shall not be made, or taught to learn this mentioned Art -in six hours, no not in six months. But I wish all Arts were as easily -practised, as mentioned; and thus I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Concerning your question, _Whether a Point be something, or nothing, -or between both_; My opinion is, that a natural point is material; -but that which the learned name a Mathematical point, is like their -Logistical Egg, whereof there is nothing in Nature any otherwise, -but a word, which word is material, as being natural; for concerning -immaterial beings, it is impossible to believe there be any in Nature; -and though witty Students, and subtil Arguers have both in past, and -this present age, endeavoured to prove something, nothing; yet words -and disputes have not power to annihilate any thing that is in Nature, -no more then to create something out of nothing; and therefore they can -neither make something, nothing; nor nothing to be something: for the -most witty student, nor the subtilest disputant, cannot alter Nature, -but each thing is and must be as Nature made it. As for your other -question, _Whether there be more then five Senses?_ I answer: There -are as many senses as there are sensitive motions, and all sensation -or perception is by the way of patterning; and whosoever is of another -opinion, is, in my judgment, a greater friend to contradiction, then to -truth, at least to probability. Lastly, concerning your question, why a -Gun, the longer its barrel is made, the further it will shoot, until it -come to a certain degree of length; after which, the longer it is made, -the weaker it becomes, so that every degree further, makes it shoot -shorter and shorter, whereas before it came to such a degree of length, -it shot further and further: Give me leave to tell you, _Madam_, that -this question would be put more properly to a Mathematician, then to -me, who am ignorant in the Mathematicks: However, since you are pleased -to desire my opinion thereof, I am willing to give it you. There are, -in my judgment, but three reasons which do produce this alteration: -The one may be the compass of the stock, or barrel, which being too -wide for the length, may weaken the force, or being too narrow for the -length, may retard the force; the one giving liberty before the force -is united, the other inclosing it so long by a streight passage, as -it loses its force before it hath liberty; so that the one becomes -stronger with length, the other weaker with length. The second reason, -in my opinion, is, That degrees of strength may require degrees of the -_medium_. Lastly, It may be, that Centers are required for degrees of -strength; if so, every _medium_ may be a Center, and the middle length -to such a compass may be a Center of such a force. But many times the -force being weaker or stronger, is caused by the good or ill making of -the Powder, or Locks, or the like. But, _Madam_, such questions will -puzle me as much as those of Mr. _V. Z._ concerning those glasses, -one of which being held close in ones hand, and a little piece being -broke of its tail, makes as great a noise as the discharging of a -Gun: Wherefore I beseech you, _Madam_, do not trouble my brain with -Mathematical questions, wherein I have neither skill, learning, nor -experience by Practice; for truly I have not the subtilty to find out -their mystery, nor the capacity to understand arts, no more then I am -capable to learn several languages. If you command me any thing else I -am able to do, assure your self, there is none shall more readily and -cheerfully serve you then my self; who am, and shall ever continue, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXIV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I have heard that Artists do glory much in their Glasses, Tubes, -Engines, and Stills, and hope by their Glasses and Tubes to see -invisible things, and by their Engines to produce incredible effects, -and by their Stills, Fire, and Furnaces, to create as Nature doth; -but all this is impossible to be done: For Art cannot arrive to that -degree, as to know perfectly Natures secret and fundamental actions, -her purest matter, and subtilest motions; and it is enough if Artists -can but produce such things as are for mans conveniencies and use, -although they never can see the smallest or rarest bodies, nor great -and vast bodies at a great distance, nor make or create a Vegetable, -Animal, or the like, as Nature doth; for Nature being Infinite, has -also Infinite degrees of figures, sizes, motions, densities, rarities, -knowledg, &c. as you may see in my Book of Philosophy, as also in my -book of Poems, especially that part that treats of little, minute -Creatures, which I there do name, for want of other expressions, -Fairies; for I have considered much the several sizes of Creatures, -although I gave it out but for a fancy in the mentioned book, lest I -should be thought extravagant to declare that conception of mine for a -rational truth: But if some small bodies cannot be perfectly seen but -by the help of magnifying glasses, and such as they call Microscopia; -I pray, Nature being Infinite, What figures and sizes may there not -be, which our eyes with all the help of Art are not capable to see? -for certainly, Nature hath more curiosities then our exterior senses, -helped by Art, can perceive: Wherefore I cannot wonder enough at those -that pretend to know the least or greatest parts or creatures in -Nature, since no particular Creature is able to do it. But concerning -Artists, you would fain know, _Madam_, whether the Artist be beholden -to the conceptions of the Student? To which I return this short answer: -That, in my judgment, without the Students conceptions, the Artist -could not tell how to make experiments: The truth is, the conceptions -of studious men set the Artists on work, although many Artists do -ungratefully attribute all to their own industry. Neither doth it -always belong to the studious Concepter to make trials or experiments, -but he leaves that work to others, whose time is not so much -imployed with thoughts or speculations, as with actions; for the the -Contemplator is the Designer, and the Artist the Workman, or Labourer, -who ought to acknowledg him his Master, as I do your _Ladiship_, for I -am in all respects, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble and faithful Servant._ - - - - -XXV. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your Command in your last was to send you my opinion concerning the -division of Religions, or of the several opinions in Religions, I -suppose you mean the division of the Religion, not of Religions; for -certainly, there is but one divine Truth, and consequently but one -true Religion: But natural men being composed of many divers parts, as -of several motions and figures, have divers and several Ideas, which -the grosser corporeal motions conceive to be divers and several gods, -as being not capable to know the Great and Incomprehensible God, who -is above Nature. For example: Do but consider, _Madam_, what strange -opinions the Heathens had of God, and how they divided him into so many -several Persons, with so many several bodies, like men; whereas, surely -God considered in his Essence, he being a Spirit, as the Scripture -describes him, can neither have Soul nor body, as he is a God, but -is an Immaterial Being; Onely the Heathens did conceive him to have -parts, and so divided the Incomprehensible God into several Deities, at -least they had several Deitical Ideas, or rather Fancies of him. But, -_Madam_, I confess my ignorance in this great mystery, and honour, and -praise the Omnipotent, Great, and Incomprehensible God, with all fear -and humility as I ought; beseeching his infinite mercy to keep me from -such presumption, whereby I might prophane his holy Name, and to make -me obedient to the Church, as also to grant me life and health, that I -may be able to express how much I am, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXVI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since I spake of Religion in my last, I cannot but acquaint you, that I -was the other day in the company of Sir _P. H._ and Sir _R. L._ where -amongst other discourses they talk'd of Predestination and Free-will. -Sir _P. H._ accounted the opinion of Predestination not onely absurd, -but blasphemous; for, said he, Predestination makes God appear Cruel, -as first to create Angels and Man, and then to make them fall from -their Glory, and damn them eternally: For God, said he, knew before -he made them, they would fall; Neither could he imagine, from whence -that Pride and Presumption did proceed, which was the cause of the -Angels fall, for it could not proceed from God, God being infinitely -Good. Sir _R. L._ answer'd, That this Pride and Presumption did not -come from God, but from their own Nature. But, replyed Sir _P. H._ -God gave them that Nature, for they had it not of themselves, but all -what they were, their Essence and Nature, came from God the Creator -of all things, and to suffer that, which was in his power to hinder, -was as much as to act. Sir _R. L._ said, God gave both Angels and Man -a Free-will at their Creation. Sir _P. H._ answered, that a Free-will -was a part of a divine attribute, which surely God would not give away -to any Creature: Next, said he, he could not conceive why God should -make Creatures to cross and oppose him; for it were neither an act of -Wisdom to make Rebels, nor an act of Justice to make Devils; so that -neither in his Wisdom, Justice, nor Mercy, God could give leave, that -Angels and Man should fall through sin; neither was God ignorant that -Angels and Man would fall; for surely, said he, God knew all things, -past, present, and to come; wherefore, said he, Free-will doth weaken -the Power of God, and Predestination doth weaken the power of man, and -both do hinder each other: Besides, said he, since God did confirm -the rest of the Angels in the same state they were before, so as they -could not fall afterwards, he might as well have created them all so -at first. But Sir _R. L._ replied, That God suffered Angels and Man to -fall for his Glory, to shew his Justice in Devils, and his Mercy in -Man; and that the Devils express'd God's Omnipotency as much as the -Blessed. To which Sir _P. H._ answered, That they expressed more God's -severity in those horrid torments they suffer through their Natural -Imperfections, then his power in making and suffering them to sin. -Thus they discoursed: And to tell you truly, _Madam_, my mind was more -troubled, then delighted with their discourse; for it seemed rather to -detract from the honour of the great God, then to increase his Glory; -and no Creature ought either to think or to speak any thing that is -detracting from the Glory of the Creator: Wherefore I am neither for -Predestination, nor for an absolute Free-will, neither in Angels, -Devils, nor Man; for an absolute Free-will is not competent to any -Creature: and though Nature be Infinite, and the Eternal Servant to -the Eternal and Infinite God, and can produce Infinite Creatures, yet -her Power and Will is not absolute, but limited; that is, she has a -natural free-will, but not a supernatural, for she cannot work beyond -the power God has given her. But those mystical discourses belong to -Divines, and not to any Lay-person, and I confess my self very ignorant -in them. Wherefore I will nor dare not dispute God's actions, being all -infinitely wise, but leave that to Divines, who are to inform us what -we ought to believe, and how we ought to live. And thus taking my leave -of you for the present, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXVII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -You are pleased to honor me so far, that you do not onely spend some -time in the perusing of my Book called _Philosophical Opinions_, but -take it so much into your consideration, as to examine every opinion -of mine which dissents from the common way of the Schools, marking -those places which seem somewhat obscure, and desiring my explanation -of them; All which, I do not onely acknowledg as a great favour, but -as an infallible testimony of your true and unfeigned friendship; and -I cannot chuse but publish it to all the world; both for the honour -of your self, as to let every body know the part of so true a friend, -who is so much concerned for the honour and benefit of my poor Works; -as also for the good of my mentioned Book, which by this means will be -rendred more intelligible; for I must confess that my Philosophical -Opinions are not so plain and perspicuous as to be perfectly understood -at the first reading, which I am sorry for. And there be two chief -reasons why they are so: First, Because they are new, and never vented -before; for the have their original meerly from my own conceptions, and -are not taken out of other Philosophers. Next, because I being a Woman, -and not bred up to Scholarship, did want names and terms of Art, and -therefore being not versed in the Writings of other Philosophers, but -what I knew by hearing, I could not form my named Book so methodically, -and express my opinions so artificially and clearly, as I might have -done, had I been studious in the reading of Philosophical Books, or -bred a Scholar; for then I might have dressed them with a fine coloured -Covering of Logick and Geometry, and set them out in a handsome array; -by which I might have also cover'd my ignorance, like as Stage-Players -do cover their mean persons or degrees with fine Cloathes. But, as I -said, I being void of Learning and Art, did put them forth according to -my own conceptions, and as I did understand them myself; but since I -have hitherto by the reading of those famous and learned _Authors_ you -sent me, attained to the knowledg of some artificial Terms, I shall not -spare any labour and pains to make my opinions so intelligible, that -every one, who without partiality, spleen, or malice, doth read them, -may also easily understand them: And thus I shall likewise endeavour to -give such answers to your scruples, objections, or questions, as may -explain those passages which seem obscure, and satisfie your desire. In -the first place, and in general, you desire to know, _Whether any truth -may be had in Natural Philosophy_: for since all this study is grounded -upon probability, and he that thinks he has the most probable reasons -for his opinion, may be as far off from truth, as he who is thought to -have the least; nay, what seems most probable to day, may seem least -probable to morrow, especially if an ingenious opposer, bring rational -arguments against it: Therefore you think it is but vain for any one -to trouble his brain with searching and enquiring after such things -wherein neither truth nor certainty can be had. To which, I answer: -That the undoubted truth in Natural Philosophy, is, in my opinion, like -the Philosopher's Stone in Chymistry, which has been sought for by many -learned and ingenious Persons, and will be sought as long as the Art -of Chymistry doth last; but although they cannot find the Philosophers -Stone, yet by the help of this Art they have found out many rare things -both for use and knowledg. The like in Natural Philosophy, although -Natural Philosophers cannot find out the absolute truth of Nature, -or Natures ground-works, or the hidden causes of natural effects; -nevertheless they have found out many necessary and profitable Arts and -Sciences, to benefit the life of man; for without Natural Philosophy -we should have lived in dark ignorance, not knowing the motions of -the Heavens, the cause of the Eclipses, the influences of the Stars, -the use of Numbers, Measures, and Weights, the vertues and effects -of Vegetables and Minerals, the Art of Architecture, Navigation, and -the like: Indeed all Arts and Sciences do adscribe their original to -the study of Natural Philosophy; and those men are both unwise and -ungrateful, that will refuse rich gifts because they cannot be masters -of all Wealth; and they are fools, that will not take remedies when -they are sick, because Medicines can onely recover them from death for -a time, but not make them live for ever. But to conclude, Probability -is next to truth, and the search of a hidden cause finds out visible -effects; and this truth do natural Philosophers find, that there are -more fools, then wise men, which fools will never attain to the honour -of being Natural Philosophers. And thus leaving them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships_ - -_humble and faithful Servant._ - - - - -XXVIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Your desire is to know, since I say Nature is Wise, Whether all her -parts must be wise also? To which, I answer; That (by your favour) all -her parts are not fools: but yet it is no necessary consequence, that -because Nature is infinitely wise, all her parts must be so too, no -more then if I should say, Nature is Infinite, therefore every part -must be Infinite: But it is rather necessary, that because Nature -is Infinite, therefore not any single part of hers can be Infinite, -but must be finite. Next, you desire to know, Whether Nature or the -self-moving matter is subject to err, and to commit mistakes? I answer: -Although Nature has naturally an Infinite wisdom and knowledg, yet she -has not a most pure and intire perfection, no more then she has an -absolute power; for a most pure and intire perfection belongs onely -to God: and though she is infinitely naturally wise in her self, yet -her parts or particular creatures may commit errors and mistakes; the -truth is, it is impossible but that parts or particular Creatures must -be subject to errors, because no part can have a perfect or general -knowledg, as being but a part, and not a whole; for knowledg is in -parts, as parts are in Matter: Besides several corporeal motions, that -is, several self-moving parts do delude and oppose each other by their -opposite motions; and this opposition is very requisite in Nature to -keep a mean, and hinder extreams; for were there not opposition of -parts, Nature would run into extreams, which would confound her, and -all her parts. And as for delusion, it is part of Natures delight, -causing the more variety; but there be some actions in Nature which -are neither perfect mistakes, nor delusions, but onely want of a clear -and thorow perception: As for example; when a man is sailing in a -Ship, he thinks the shore moves from the ship, when as it is the ship -that moves from the shore: Also when a man is going backward from a -Looking-glass, he thinks, the figure in the Glass goeth inward, whereas -it is himself that goes backward, and not his figure in the glass. The -cause of it is, That the perception in the eye perceives the distanced -body, but not the motion of the distance or medium; for though the man -may partly see the motion of the visible parts, yet he doth not see the -parts or motion of the distance or medium, which is invisible, and not -subject to the perception of sight; and since a pattern cannot be made -if the object be not visible, hence I conclude, that the motion of the -medium cannot make perception, but that it is the perceptive motions -of the eye, which pattern out an object as it is visibly presented -to the corporeal motions in the eye; for according as the object is -presented, the pattern is made, if the motions be regular: For example; -a fired end of a stick, if you move it in a circular figure, the -sensitive corporeal motions in the eye pattern out the figure of fire, -together with the exterior or circular motion, and apprehend it as a -fiery circle; and if the stick be moved any otherwise, they pattern -out such a figure as the fired end of the stick is moved in; so that -the sensitive pattern is made according to the exterior corporeal -figurative motion of the object, and not according to its interior -figure or motions. And this, _Madam_, is in short my answer to your -propounded questions, by which, I hope, you understand plainly the -meaning of, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXIX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -The scruples or questions you sent me last, are these following. First, -you desire to be informed what I mean by _Phantasmes_ and _Ideas_? I -answer: They are figures made by the purest and subtilest degree of -self-moving matter, that is to say, by the rational corporeal motions, -and are the same with thoughts or conceptions. Next, your question -is, what I do understand by _Sensitive Life_? I answer: It is that -part of self-moving matter, which in its own nature is not so pure and -subtil as the rational, for it is but the labouring, and the rational -the designing part of matter. Your third question is, _Whether this -sensitive self-moving matter be dense or rare?_ I answer: density and -rarity are onely effects caused by the several actions, that is, the -corporeal motions of Nature; wherefore it cannot properly be said, that -sensitive matter is either dense, or rare; for it has a self-power to -contract and dilate, compose and divide, and move in any kind of motion -whatsoever, as is requisite to the framing of any figure; and thus -I desire you to observe well, that when I say the rational part of -matter is purer in its degree then the sensitive, and that this is a -rare and acute matter, I do not mean that it is thin like a rare egg, -but that it is subtil and active, penetrating and dividing, as well as -dividable. Your fourth question is, _What this sensitive matter works -upon?_ I answer: It works with and upon another degree of matter, -which is not self-moving, but dull, stupid, and immoveable in its own -nature, which I call the inanimate part or degree of matter. Your fifth -question is, _Whether this inanimate Matter do never rest?_ I answer; -It doth not: for the self-moving matter being restless in its own -nature, and so closely united and commixed with the inanimate, as they -do make but one body, will never suffer it to rest; so that there is no -part in Nature but is moving; the animate matter in it self, or its own -nature, the inanimate by the help or means of the animate. Your sixth -question is, _If there be a thorow mixture of the parts of animate and -inanimate matter, whether those parts do retain each their own nature -and substance, so that the inanimate part of matter remains dull and -stupid in its essence or nature, and the animate full of self-motion, -or all self-motion?_ I answer: Although every part and particle of -each degree are closely intermixed, nevertheless this mixture doth not -alter the interior nature of those parts or degrees; As for example; -a man is composed of Soul, and Body, which are several parts, but -joyned as into one substance, _viz._ Man, and yet they retain each -their own proprieties and natures; for although soul and body are so -closely united as they do make but one Man, yet the soul doth not -change into the body, nor the body into the soul, but each continues in -its own nature as it is. And so likewise in Infinite Matter, although -the degrees or parts of Matter are so throughly intermixed as they do -make but one body or substance, which is corporeal Nature, yet each -remains in its nature as it is, to wit, the animate part of matter doth -not become dull and stupid in its nature, but remains self-moving; -and the inanimate, although it doth move by the means of the animate, -yet it doth not become self-moving, but each keeps its own interior -nature and essence in their commixture. The truth is, there must of -necessity be degrees of matter, or else there would be no such various -and several effects in Nature, as humane sense and reason do perceive -there are; and those degrees must also retain each their own nature and -proprieties, to produce those various and curious effects: Neither must -those different degrees vary or alter the nature of Infinite Matter; -for Matter must and doth continue one and the same in its Nature, -that is, Matter cannot be divided from being Matter: And this is my -meaning, when I say in my _Philosophical Opinions, There is but one -kind of Matter_: Not that Matter is not dividable into several parts -or degrees, but I say, although Matter has several parts and degrees, -yet they do not alter the nature of Matter, but Matter remains one and -the same in its own kind, that is, it continues still Matter in its -own nature notwithstanding those degrees; and thus I do exclude from -Matter all that which is not Matter, and do firmly believe, that there -can be no commixture of Matter and no Matter in Nature; for this would -breed a meer confusion in Nature. Your seventh question is, _Whether -that, which I name the rational part of self-moving Matter makes as -much variety as the sensitive?_ To which I answer: That, to my sense -and reason, the rational part of animate or self-moving Matter moves -not onely more variously, but also more swiftly then the sensitive; -for thoughts are sooner made, then words spoke, and a certain proof -of it are the various and several Imaginations, Fancies, Conceptions, -Memories, Remembrances, Understandings, Opinions, Judgments, and the -like: as also the several sorts of Love, Hate, Fear, Anger, Joy, Doubt; -and the like Passions. Your eighth question is, _Whether the Sensitive -Matter can and doth work in it self and its own substance and degree?_ -My answer is, That there is no inanimate matter without animate, nor -no animate without inanimate, both being so curiously and subtilly -intermixt, as they make but one body; Nevertheless the several parts of -this one body may move several ways. Neither are the several degrees -bound to an equal mixture, no more then the several parts of one body -are bound to one and the same size, bigness, shape, or motion; or the -Sea is bound to be always at the high tide; or the Moon to be always -at the Full; or all the Veins or Brains in animal bodies are bound to -be of equal quantity; or every Tree of the same kind to bear fruit, or -have leaves of equal number; or every Apple, Pear, or Plum, to have an -equal quantity of juice; or every Bee to make as much honey and wax as -the other. Your nineth question is, _Whether the Sensitive Matter can -work without taking patterns?_ My answer is, That all corporeal motion -is not patterning, but all patterning is made by corporeal motion; -and there be more several sorts of corporeal motions then any single -Creature is able to conceive, much less to express: But the perceptive -corporeal motions are the ground-motions in Nature, which make, rule, -and govern all the parts of Nature, as to move to Production, or -Generation, Transformation, and the like. Your tenth question is, _How -it is possible, that numerous figures can exist in one part of matter? -for it is impossible that two things can be in one place, much less -many._ My answer in short is, That it were impossible, were a part of -Matter, and the numerous figures several and distinct things; but all -is but one thing, that is, a part of Matter moving variously; for there -is neither Magnitude, Place, Figure, nor Motion, in Nature, but what -is Matter, or Body; Neither is there any such thing as Time: Wherefore -it cannot properly be said, _There was_, and _There shall be_; but -onely, _There is_. Neither can it properly be said, from this to that -place; but onely in reference to the several moving parts of the onely -Infinite Matter. And thus much to your questions; I add no more, but -rest, - -Madam, - -_Your faithful Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - - - -XXX. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In your last, you were pleased to express, that some men, who think -themselves wise, did laugh in a scornful manner at my opinion, when -I say that every Creature hath life and knowledg, sense and reason; -counting it not onely ridiculous, but absurd; and asking, whether you -did or could believe, a piece of wood, metal, or stone, had as much -sense as a beast, or as much reason as a man, having neither brain, -blood, heart, nor flesh; nor such organs, passages, parts, nor shapes -as animals? To which, I answer: That it is not any of these mentioned -things that makes life and knowledg, but life and knowledg is the -cause of them, which life and knowledg is animate matter, and is in -all parts of all Creatures: and to make it more plain and perspicuous, -humane sense and reason may perceive, that wood, stone, or metal, acts -as wisely as an animal: As for example; Rhubarb, or the like drugs, -will act very wisely in Purging; and Antimony, or the like, will act -very wisely in Vomiting; and Opium will act very wisely in Sleeping; -also Quicksilver or Mercury will act very wisely, as those that have -the French disease can best witness: likewise the Loadstone acts very -wisely, as Mariners or Navigators will tell you: Also Wine made of -Fruit, and Ale of Malt, and distilled Aqua-vitæ will act very subtilly; -ask the Drunkards, and they can inform you; Thus Infinite examples may -be given, and yet man says, all Vegetables and Minerals are insensible -and irrational, as also the Planets and Elements; when as yet the -Planets move very orderly and wisely, and the Elements are more active, -nay, more subtil and searching then any of the animal Creatures; -witness Fire, Air, and Water: As for the Earth, she brings forth her -fruit, if the other Elements do not cause abortives, in due season; and -yet man believes, Vegetables, Minerals, and Elements, are dead, dull, -senseless, and irrational Creatures, because they have not such shapes, -parts, nor passages as Animals, nor such exterior and local motions -as Animals have: but Man doth not consider the various, intricate and -obscure ways of Nature, unknown to any particular Creature; for what -our senses are not capable to know, our reason is apt to deny. Truly, -in my opinion, Man is more irrational then any of those Creatures, -when he believes that all knowledg is not onely confined to one sort -of Creatures, but to one part of one particular Creature, as the head, -or brain of man; for who can in reason think, that there is no other -sensitive and rational knowledg in Infinite Matter, but what is onely -in Man, or animal Creatures? It is a very simple and weak conclusion to -say, Other Creatures have no eyes to see, no ears to hear, no tongues -to taste, no noses to smell, as animals have; wherefore they have no -sense or sensitive knowledg; or because they have no head, nor brain as -Man hath, therefore they have no reason, nor rational knowledg at all: -for sense and reason, and consequently sensitive and rational knowledg, -extends further then to be bound to the animal eye, ear, nose, tongue, -head, or brain; but as these organs are onely in one kind of Natures -Creatures, as Animals, in which organs the sensitive corporeal motions -make the perception of exterior objects, so there may be infinite other -kinds of passages or organs in other Creatures unknown to Man, which -Creatures may have their sense and reason, that is, sensitive and -rational knowledg, each according to the nature of its figure; for as -it is absurd to say, that all Creatures in Nature are Animals, so it is -absurd to confine sense and reason onely to Animals; or to say, that -all other Creatures, if they have sense and reason, life and knowledg, -it must be the same as is in Animals: I confess, it is of the same -degree, that is, of the same animate part of matter, but the motions -of life and knowledg work so differently and variously in every kind -and sort, nay, in every particular Creature, that no single Creature -can find them out: But, in my opinion, not any Creature is without -life and knowledg, which life and knowledg is made by the self-moving -part of matter, that is, by the sensitive and rational corporeal -motions; and as it is no consequence, that all Creatures must be alike -in their exterior shapes, figures, and motions, because they are all -produced out of one and the same matter, so neither doth it follow, -that all Creatures must have the same interior motions, natures, and -proprieties, and so consequently the same life and knowledg, because -all life and knowledg is made by the same degree of matter, to wit, the -animate. Wherefore though every kind or sort of Creatures has different -perceptions, yet they are not less knowing; for Vegetables, Minerals, -and Elements, may have as numerous, and as various perceptions as -Animals, and they may be as different from animal perceptions as their -kinds are; but a different perception is not therefore no perception: -Neither is it the animal organs that make perception, nor the animal -shape that makes life, but the motions of life make them. But some may -say, it is Irreligious to believe any Creature has rational knowledg -but Man. Surely, _Madam_, the God of Nature, in my opinion, will be -adored by all Creatures, and adoration cannot be without sense and -knowledg. Wherefore it is not probable, that onely Man, and no Creature -else, is capable to adore and worship the Infinite and Omnipotent -God, who is the God of Nature, and of all Creatures: I should rather -think it irreligious to confine sense and reason onely to Man, and to -say, that no Creature adores and worships God, but Man; which, in my -judgment, argues a great pride, self-conceit, and presumption. And -thus, _Madam_, having declared my opinion plainly concerning this -subject, I will detain you no longer at this present, but rest, - -Madam, - -_Your constant Friend_ - -_and faithful Servant._ - - - - -XXXI. - - -_MADAM,_ - -I perceive you do not well apprehend my meaning, when I say in my -_Philosophical Opinions,_[1] _That the Infinite degrees of Infinite -Matter are all Infinite:_ For, say you, the degrees of Matter cannot -be Infinite, by reason there cannot be two Infinites, but one would -obstruct the other. My answer is; I do not mean that the degrees of -Matter are Infinite each in its self, that is, that the animate and -inanimate are several Infinite matters, but my opinion is, that the -animate degree of matter is in a perpetual motion, and the inanimate -doth not move of it self, and that those degrees are infinite in their -effects, as producing and making infinite figures; for since the cause, -which is the onely matter, is infinite, the effects must of necessity -be infinite also; the cause is infinite in its substance, the effects -are Infinite in number. And this is my meaning, when I say,[2] that, -although in Nature there is but one kind of matter, yet there are -Infinite degrees, Infinite motions, and Infinite parts in that onely -matter; and though Infinite and Eternal matter has no perfect or exact -figure, by reason it is Infinite, and therefore unlimited, yet there -being infinite parts in number, made by the infinite variations of -motions in infinite Matter, these parts have perfect or exact figures, -considered as parts, that is, single, or each in its particular figure: -And therefore if there be Infinite degrees, considering the effects -of the animate and inanimate matter, infinite motions for changes, -infinite parts for number, infinite compositions and divisions for -variety and diversity of Creatures; then there may also be infinite -sizes, each part or figure differing more or less, infinite smallness -and bigness, lightness and heaviness, rarity and density, strength and -power, life and knowledg, and the like: But by reason Nature or Natural -matter is not all animate or inanimate, nor all composing or dividing, -there can be no Infinite in a part, nor can there be something biggest -or smallest, strongest or weakest, heaviest or lightest, softest -or hardest in Infinite Nature, or her parts, but all those several -Infinites are as it were included in one Infinite, which is Corporeal -Nature, or Natural Matter. - -Next, you desire my opinion of _Vacuum_, whether there be any, or not? -for you say I determine nothing, of it in my Book of _Philosophical -Opinions_. Truly, _Madam_, my sense and reason cannot believe a -_Vacuum_, because there cannot be an empty Nothing; but change of -motion makes all the alteration of figures, and consequently all that -which is called place, magnitude, space, and the like; for matter, -motion, figure, place, magnitude, &c. are but one thing. But some -men perceiving the alteration, but not the subtil motions, believe -that bodies move into each others place, which is impossible, because -several places are onely several parts, so that, unless one part could -make it self another part, no part can be said to succeed into anothers -place; but it is impossible that one part should make it self another -part, for it cannot be another, and it self, no more then Nature can be -Nature, and not Nature; wherefore change of place is onely change of -motion, and this change of motion makes alteration of Figures. - -Thirdly, you say, You cannot understand what I mean by Creation, for -you think that Creation is a production or making of Something out of -Nothing. To tell you really, _Madam_, this word is used by me for want -of a better expression; and I do not take it in so strict a sense as -to understand by it, a Divine or supernatural Creation, which onely -belongs to God; but a natural Creation, that is, a natural production -or Generation; for Nature cannot create or produce Something out of -Nothing: And this Production may be taken in a double sence; First, -in General, as for example, when it is said, that all Creatures are -produced out of Infinite Matter; and in this respect every particular -Creature which is finite, that is, of a circumscribed and limited -figure, is produced of Infinite Matter, as being a part thereof: Next, -Production is taken in a more strict sense, to wit, when one single -Creature is produced from another; and this is either Generation -properly so called, as when in every kind and sort each particular -produces its like; or it is such a Generation whereby one creature -produces another, each being of a different kind or species, as -for example, when an Animal produces a Mineral, as when a Stone is -generated in the Kidneys, or the like; and in this sence one finite -creature generates or produces another finite creature, the producer -as well as the produced being finite; but in the first sence finite -creatures are produced out of infinite matter. - -Fourthly, you confess, You cannot well apprehend my meaning, when I -say,[3] that the several kinds are as Infinite as the particulars; for -your opinion is, That the number of particulars must needs exceed the -number of kinds. I answer: I mean in general the Infinite effects of -Nature which are Infinite in number, and the several kinds or sorts of -Creatures are Infinite in duration, for nothing can perish in Nature. - -Fifthly, When I say,[4] that ascending and descending is often caused -by the exterior figure or shape of a body; witness a Bird, who although -he is of a much bigger size and bulk then a Worm, yet can by his -shape lift himself up more agilly and nimbly then a Worm; Your opinion -is, That his exterior shape doth not contribute any thing towards his -flying, by reason a Bird being dead retains the same shape, but yet -cannot fly at all. But, truly, _Madam_, I would not have you think that -I do exclude the proper and interior natural motion of the figure of -a Bird, and the natural and proper motions of every part and particle -thereof; for that a Bird when dead, keeps his shape, and yet cannot -fly, the reason is, that the natural and internal motions of the Bird, -and the Birds wings, are altered towards some other shape or figure, -if not exteriously, yet interiously; but yet the interior natural -motions could not effect any flying or ascending without the help of -the exterior shape; for a Man, or any other animal, may have the same -interior motions as a Bird hath, but wanting such an exterior shape, he -cannot fly; whereas had he wings like a Bird, and the interior natural -motions of those wings, he might without doubt fly as well as a Bird -doth. - -Sixthly, Concerning the descent of heavy bodies,[5] that it is more -forcible then the ascent of light bodies, you do question the Truth -of this my opinion. Certainly, _Madam_, I cannot conceive it to be -otherwise by my sense and reason; for though Fire that is rare, doth -ascend with an extraordinary quick motion, yet this motion is, in my -opinion, not so strong and piercing as when grosser parts of Creatures -do descend; but there is difference in strength and quickness; for had -not Water a stronger motion, and another sort of figure then Fire, -it could not suppress Fire, much less quench it. But Smoak, which is -heavier then Flame, flies up, or rises before, or rather, above it: -Wherefore I am still of the same opinion, that heavy bodies descend -more forcibly then light bodies do ascend, and it seems most rational -to me. - -Lastly, I perceive you cannot believe that all bodies have weight; -by reason, if this were so, the Sun, and the Stars would have long -since cover'd the Earth. In answer to this objection, I say, That as -there can be no body without figure and magnitude, so consequently not -without weight, were it no bigger then an atome; and as for the Sun's -and the Stars not falling down, or rising higher, the reason is, not -their being without weight, but their natural and proper motion, which -keeps them constantly in their spheres; and it might as well be said, a -Man lives not, or is not, because he doth not fly like a Bird, or dive -and catch fish like a Cormorant, or dig and undermine like a Mole, for -those are motions not proper to his nature. And these, _Madam_, are my -answers to your objections, which if they do satisfie you, it is all -I desire, if not, I shall endeavour hereafter to make my meaning more -intelligible and study for other more rational arguments then these -are, to let you see how much I value both the credit of my named Book, -and your _Ladiships_ Commands; which assure you self, shall never be -more faithfully performed, then by, - -Madam, - -_Your Ladiships most obliged Friend_ - -_and humble Servant._ - -[1] _Part._ 1. _c._ 4. - -[2] _Ch._ 8. - -[3] _Part._ 4. _c._ 10. - -[4] _Ch._ 20. - -[5] _Ch._ 21. - - - - -XXXII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -Since my opinion is, that the Animate part of Matter, which is sense -and reason, life and knowledg, is the designer, architect, and creator -of all figures in Nature; you desire to know, whence this Animate -Matter, sense and reason, or life and knowledg (call it what you will, -for it is all one and the same thing) is produced? I answer: It is -eternal. But then you say, it is coequal with God. I answer, That -cannot be: for God is above all Natural sense and reason, which is -Natural life and knowledg; and therefore it cannot be coequal with -God, except it be meant in Eternity, as being without beginning and -end. But if Gods Power can make Man's Soul, as also the good and evil -Spirits to last eternally without end, he may, by his Omnipotency -make as well things without beginning. You will say, If Nature were -Eternal, it could not be created, for the word Creation is contrary -to Eternity. I answer, _Madam_, I am no Scholar for words; for if you -will not use the word Creation, you may use what other word you will; -for I do not stand upon nice words and terms, so I can but express my -conceptions: Wherefore, if it be (as in Reason it cannot be otherwise) -that nothing in Nature can be annihilated, nor any thing created out -of nothing, but by Gods special and all-powerful Decree and Command, -then Nature must be as God has made her, until he destroy her. But if -Nature be not Eternal, then the Gods of the Heathens were made in -time, and were no more then any other Creature, which is as subject to -be destroyed as created; for they conceived their Gods, as we do men, -to have Material Bodies, but an Immaterial Spirit, or as some Learned -men imagine, to be an Immaterial Spirit, but to take several shapes, -and so to perform several corporeal actions; which truly is too humble -and mean a conception of an Immaterial Being, much more of the Great -and Incomprehensible God; which I do firmly believe is a most pure, -all-powerful Immaterial Being, which doth all things by his own Decree -and Omnipotency without any Corporeal actions or shapes, such as some -fancy of Dæmons and the like Spirits. But to return to the former -question; you might as well enquire how the world, or any part of it -was created, or how the variety of creatures came to be, as ask how -Reason and sensitive corporeal Knowledg was produced. Nevertheless, -I do constantly believe, that both sensitive and rational Knowledg -in Matter was produced from God; but after what manner or way, is -impossible for any creature or part of Nature to know, for Gods wayes -are incomprehensible and supernatural. And thus much I believe, That -as God is an Eternal Creator, which no man can deny, so he has also -an Eternal Creature, which is Nature, or natural Matter. But put the -case Nature or natural Matter was made when the World was created, -might not God give this Natural Matter self-motion, as well as he gave -self-motion to Spirits and Souls? and might not God endue this Matter -with Sense and Reason, as well as he endued Man? Shall or can we bind -up Gods actions with our weak opinions and foolish arguments? Truly, -if God could not act more then Man is able to conceive, he were not a -God of an infinite Power; but God is Omnipotent, and his actions are -infinite, supernatural, and past finding out; wherefore he is rather to -be admired, adored and worshipped, then to be ungloriously discoursed -of by vain and ambitious men, whose foolish pride and presumption -drowns their Natural Judgment and Reason; to which leaving them, I rest, - -Madam, - -_Your Faithful Friend_ - -_and Servant._ - - - - -XXXIII. - - -_MADAM,_ - -In obedience to your commands, I here send you also an explanation -and clearing of those places and passages in my Book of Philosophy, -which in your last Letter you were pleased to mark, as containing some -obscurity and difficulty of being understood. - -First, When I say,[1] _Nature is an Individable Matter_, I do not mean -as if Nature were not dividable into parts; for because Nature is -material, therefore she must also needs be dividable into parts: But my -meaning is, that Nature cannot be divided from Matter, nor Matter from -Nature, that is, Nature cannot be Immaterial, nor no part of Nature, -but if there be any thing Immaterial, it doth not belong to Nature. -Also when I call Nature a _Multiplying Figure_;[2] I mean, that Nature -makes infinite changes, and so infinite figures. - -Next, when I say,[3] _There are Infinite Divisions in Nature_; my -meaning is not, that there are infinite divisions of one single part, -but that Infinite Matter has Infinite parts, sizes, figures, and -motions, all being but one Infinite Matter, or corporeal Nature. Also -when I say single parts, I mean not parts subsisting by themselves, -precised from each other, but single, that is, several or different, by -reason of their different figures. Likewise, when I name Atomes, I mean -small parts of Matter; and when I speak of Place and Time, I mean onely -the variation of corporeal figurative motions. - -Again: when I say,[4] _Nature has not an absolute Power, because she -has an Infinite power_; I mean by _absolute_, as much as finite, or -circumscribed; and in this sense Nature cannot have an absolute power, -for the Infiniteness hinders the absoluteness; but when in my former -Letters I have attributed an absolute Power onely to God, and said that -Nature has not an absolute power, but that her power, although it be -Infinite, yet cannot extend beyond Nature, but is an Infinite natural -power; I understand by an absolute Power, not a finite power, but such -a power which onely belongs to God, that is, a supernatural and divine -power, which power Nature cannot have, by reason she cannot make any -part of her body immaterial, nor annihilate any part of her Creatures, -nor create any part that was not in her from Eternity, nor make her -self a Deity; for though God can impower her with a supernatural gift, -and annihilate her when he pleases, yet she is no ways able to do it -her self. - -Moreover, when I say,[5] _That one Infinite is contained within -another_; I mean, the several sorts of Infinites, as Infinite in -number, Infinite in duration; as also the Infinite degrees, motions, -figures, sizes, compositions, divisions, &c. all which are contained in -the Infinite body of Nature, which is the onely Infinite in quantity or -substance, neither can the parts of Nature go beyond Infinite. - -Also when I say,[6] _That Matter would have power over Infinite, -and Infinite over Matter, and Eternal over both_; I mean, that some -corporeal actions endeavour to be more powerful then others, and thus -the whole strives to over-power the parts, and the parts the whole: -As for example, if one end of a string were tied about the little -finger of ones hand, and the other end were in the power of the other -whole hand, and both did pull several and opposite ways; certainly, -the little finger would endeavour to over-power the hand, and the hand -again would strive to over-power the little finger: The same may be -said of two equal figures, as two hands, and other the like examples -may be given. And this is also my meaning, when I say, that some -shapes have power over others, and some degrees and temperaments of -matter over others; whereby I understand nothing else, but that some -parts have power over others. Also when I say,[7] that outward things -govern, and a Creature has no power over it self, I mean, that which is -stronger, by what means soever, is superior in power. - -When I say,[8] That _the Animate part of Matter is not so gross an -Infinite as the Inanimate_, I do not attribute an Infiniteness to a -part, as if animate matter considered as a part were infinite; but my -meaning is, that the Animate matter produces infinite effects: For, -it being the Designer, Architect, and Creator of all Figures, as also -the Life and Soul of all Creatures, it must needs be infinite in its -effects, as also infinite in its duration. But you may object, That a -part cannot produce infinite effects. I answer, It is true, if animate -matter should be considered in it self without the inanimate, it could -not produce infinite effects, having nothing to work upon and withal; -but because there is such a close and inseparable conjunction of -those parts of matter, as they make but one body, and that Infinite, -none can be or work without the other, but both degrees of matter, -which make but one infinite Nature, are required in the production of -the infinite effects and figures in Nature: Nevertheless, since the -Animate part of Matter is the onely architect, creator, or producer -of all those effects, by reason it is the self-moving part, and the -Inanimate is onely the instrument which the Animate works withal, and -the materials it works upon, the Production of the infinite effects -in Nature is more fitly ascribed to the Animate then the Inanimate -part of matter; as for example, If an architect should build an -house, certainly he can do nothing without materials, neither can the -materials raise themselves to such a figure as a house without the help -of the architect and workmen, but both are of necessity required to -this artificial production; nevertheless, the building of the house is -not laid to the materials, but to the architect: the same may be said -of animate and inanimate matter in the production of natural effects. -Again, you may reply, That the animate and inanimate parts of matter -are but two parts, and the number of Two is but a finite number, -wherefore they cannot make one infinite body, such as I call Nature -or natural Matter. I answer, _Madam_, I confess, that a finite number -is not nor cannot make an infinite number; but I do not say, that the -animate and inanimate parts or degrees of matter are two finite parts -each subsisting by it self as circumscribed, and having its certain -bounds, limits and circumference; for if this were so, certainly they -being finite themselves, could not produce but finite effects; but my -meaning is, that both the animate and inanimate matter do make but -one Infinite bulk, body, or substance and are not two several and -dividable bodies in themselves, and thus they may be divided not into -two but into Infinite parts; Neither are they two different Matters, -but they are but one Matter; for by the animate Matter I do understand -self-motion; and that I call this self-motion Matter, the reason is, -that no body shall think as if self-motion were immaterial; for my -opinion is, that Nature is nothing but meer Matter, and that nothing is -in Nature which is a part of Nature, that is not material; wherefore -to avoid such a misapprehension (seeing that most learned men are -so much for abstractions and immaterial beings) I called self-motion -animate matter, or the animate part of matter; not as if they were two -several matters, but that all is but one natural Matter, or corporeal -Nature in one bulk, body, or substance, just like as the soul and body -do make but one man; and to avoid also this misapprehension, lest they -might be taken for several matters, I have upon better consideration, -in this volume of _Philosophical Letters_, call'd the animate matter -corporeal self-motion, which expression, I think, is more proper, -plain, and intelligible then any other: Neither would I have you to -scruple at it, when I say, that both parts or degrees of animate and -inanimate matter do retain their own interior natures and proprieties -in their commixture, as if those different natures and proprieties, -where one is self-moving, and the other not, did cause them to be two -different matters; for thus you might say as well, that several figures -which have several and different interior natures and proprieties, -are so many several matters. The truth is, if you desire to have the -truest expression of animate and inanimate matter, you cannot find -it better then in the definition of Nature, when I say, Nature is an -infinite self-moving body; where by the body of Nature I understand the -inanimate matter, and by self-motion the animate, which is the life -and soul of Nature, not an immaterial life and soul, but a material, -for both life, soul and body are and make but one self-moving body or -substance which is corporeal Nature. And therefore when I call _Animate -matter_ an _Extract_,[9] I do it by reason of its purity, subtilty and -agility, not by reason of its immateriality. Also when I name the word -Motion by it self, and without any addition, I understand corporeal -Motion; and when I name Motion, Matter and Figure, I do not mean three -several and distinct things, but onely figurative corporeal motion, or -figurative self-moving matter, all being but one thing; the same when I -speak of Place, Time, Magnitude, and the like. - -Concerning Natural Production or Generation; when I say,[10] _The same -matter or figure of the producers doth not always move after one and -the same manner in producing, for then the same producers would produce -one and the same creature by repetition_, I do not mean the very same -creature in number, unless the same motions and parts of matter did -return into the producers again, which is impossible; but I understand -the like creature, to wit, that one and the same sort of particular -motions would make all particular figures resemble so, as if they were -one and the same creature without any difference. - -When I say,[11] _Sensitive and Rational knowledg lives in sensitive -and rational Matter, and Animate liveth in Inanimate matter_, I mean -they are all several parts and actions of the onely infinite matter -inseparable from each other; for wheresoever is matter, there is also -self-motion, and wheresoever is self-motion, there is sense and reason, -and wheresoever is sense and reason, there is sensitive and rational -knowledge, all being but one body or substance, which is Nature. - -When I say,[12] _The death of particular Creatures causes an obscurity -of Knowledge, and that particular Knowledges increase and decrease, -and may be more or less_, I mean onely that parts divide themselves -from parts, and joyn to other parts; for every several Motion is a -several Knowledge, and as motion varies, so doth knowledge; but there -is no annihilation of any motion, and consequently not of knowledge -in Nature. And as for more or less knowledge, I mean more or less -alteration and variety of corporeal figurative motions, not onely -rational but sensitive, so that that creature which has most variety -of those perceptive motions is most knowing, provided they be regular, -that is, according to the nature and propriety of the figure, whether -animal, vegetable, mineral, or elemental; for though a large figure -is capable of most knowledge, yet it is not commonly or alwayes so -wise or witty as a less, by reason it is more subject to disorders and -irregularities; like as a private Family is more regular and better -ordered then a great State or Common-wealth. Also when I say, _That -some particular Knowledge lasts longer then some other_, I mean that -some corporeal motions in some parts do continue longer then in others. - -When I say,[13] _A little head may be full, and a great head may be -empty of rational matter_, I mean there may be as it were an ebbing -or flowing, that is more or less of Rational Matter joyned with the -Sensitive and Inanimate: And when I say, _That, if all the heads of -Mankind were put into one, and sufficient quantity of Rational Matter -therein, that Creature would not onely have the knowledge of every -particular, but that Understanding and Knowledge would increase like -Use-money_, my meaning is, that if there were much of those parts of -rational matter joyned, they would make more variety by self-change of -corporeal motions. - -When I name _Humane sense and reason_, I mean such sensitive and -rational perception and knowledge as is proper to the nature of Man; -and when I say _Animal sense and reason_, I mean such as is proper -to the nature of all Animals; for I do not mean that the sensitive -and rational corporeal motions which do make a man, or any Animal, -are bound to such figures eternally, but whilest they work and move -in such or such figures, they make such perceptions as belong to the -nature of those figures; but when those self-moving parts dissolve the -figure of an Animal into a Vegetable or any other Creature, then they -work according to the nature of that same figure, both exteriously and -interiously. - -When I say,[14] _That Place, Space, Measure, Number, Weight, Figures, -&c. are mixed with Substance_, I do not mean they are incorporeal, and -do inhere in substance as so many incorporeal modes or accidents; but -my meaning is, they are all corporeal parts and actions of Nature, -there being no such thing in Nature that may be called incorporeal; for -Place, Figure, Weight, Measure, &c. are nothing without Body, but Place -and Body are but one thing, and so of the rest. Also when I say,[15] -_That sometimes Place, sometimes Time, and sometimes Number gives -advantage_, I mean, that several parts of Matter are getting or losing -advantage. - -When I say,[16] an Animal or any thing else that has exterior local -motion, goeth or moveth to such or such a place, I mean, to such or -such a body; and when such a Creature doth not move out of its place, I -mean, it doth not remove its body from such or such parts adjoyning to -it. - -When I say,[17] _The rational animate matter divides it self into -as many parts, and after as many several manners as their place or -quantity will give way to_, I mean their own place and quantity: also, -as other parts will give way to those parts, for some parts will assist -others, and some do obstruct others. - -When I say,[18] _That the Nature of extension or dilation strives or -endeavours to get space, ground, or compass_, I mean those corporeal -motions endeavour to make place and space by their extensions, that -is, to spread their parts of matter into a larger compass or body. And -when I say, _That Contractions endeavour to cast or thrust out space, -place, ground, or compass_, My meaning is, That those corporeal motions -endeavour to draw their parts of matter into a more close and solid -body, for there is no place nor space without body. - -Also when I name[19] several _tempered substances and matters_, I mean -several changes and mixtures of corporeal motions. - -Also when I speak of _Increase_ and _Decrease_, I mean onely an -alteration of corporeal figurative motions, as uniting parts with -parts, and dissolving or separating parts from parts. - -When I say,[20] That the motions of cold, and the motions of moisture, -when they meet, make cold and moist effects, and when the motions of -heat and moisture meet, make hot and moist effects; and so for the -motions of cold and dryness: I mean, that when several parts do joyn -in such several corporeal motions, they cause such effects; and when -I say cold and heat presses into every particular Creature, I mean, -that every Creatures natural and inherent perceptive motions make such -patterns as their exterior objects are, _viz._ hot or cold, if they do -but move regularly, for if they be irregular, then they do not: as for -example; those in an Ague will shake for cold in a hot Summers day, and -those that are in a Fever will burn with heat, although they were at -the Poles. - -When I say,[21] that hot motions, and burning motions, and hot figures, -and burning figures do not associate or joyn together in all Creatures: -I mean, that the corporeal motions in some figures or creatures, do act -in a hot, but not in a burning manner; and when I say, some creatures -have both hot and burning motions and figures, I mean, the corporeal -motions act both in a hot and burning manner; for though heat is in a -degree to burning, yet it is not always burning, for burning is the -highest degree of heat, as wetness is the highest degree of moisture. - -When I say,[22] _Warmth feeds other Creatures after a spiritual manner, -not a corporeal_, My meaning is, not as if heat were not corporeal, but -that those corporeal motions which make heat work invisibly, and not -visibly like as fire feeds on fuel, or man on meat. - -Also when I say, _Excercise amongst animals gets strength_, I mean, -that by excercise the inherent natural motions of an animal body are -more active, as being more industrious. - -When I say,[23] _That the passage whence cold and sharp winds do -issue out, is narrow_, I mean, when as such or such parts disjoyn or -separate from other parts; as for example, when dilating parts disjoyn -from contracting parts; and oftentimes the disjoyning parts do move -according to the nature of those parts they disjoyn from. - -Concerning the actions of Nature, my meaning is, that there is not any -action whatsoever, but was always in Nature, and remains in Nature so -long as it pleases God that Nature shall last, and of all her actions -Perception and self-love are her prime and chief actions; wherefore it -is impossible but that all her particular creatures or parts must be -knowing as well as self-moving, there being not one part or particle -of Nature that has not its share of animate or self-moving matter, and -consequently of knowledg and self-love, each according to its own kind -and nature; but by reason all the parts are of one matter, and belong -to one body, each is unalterable so far, that although it can change -its figure, yet it cannot change or alter from being matter, or a part -of Infinite Nature; and this is the cause there cannot be a confusion -amongst those parts of Nature, but there must be a constant union and -harmony betwixt them; for cross and opposite actions make no confusion, -but onely a variety, and such actions which are different, cross and -opposite, not moving always after their usual and accustomed way, I -name Irregular, for want of a better expression; but properly there is -no such thing as Irregularity in Nature, nor no weariness, rest, sleep, -sickness, death or destruction, no more then there is place, space, -time, modes, accidents, and the like, any thing besides body or matter. - -When I speak of _unnatural Motions_,[24] I mean such as are not -proper to the nature of such or such a Creature, as being opposite or -destructive to it, that is, moving or acting towards its dissolution. -Also when I call Violence supernatural, I mean that Violence is beyond -the particular nature of such a particular Creature, that is, beyond -its natural motions; but not supernatural, that is beyond Infinite -Nature or natural Matter. - -When I say, _A thing is forced_, I do not mean that the forced body -receives strength without Matter; but that some Corporeal Motions joyn -with other Corporeal Motions, and so double the strength by joyning -their parts, or are at least an occasion to make other parts more -industrious. - -By _Prints_ I understand the figures of the objects which are patterned -or copied out by the sensitive and rational corporeal figurative -Motions; as for example, when the sensitive corporeal motions pattern -out the figure of an exteriour object, and the rational motions again -pattern out a figure made by the sensitive motions, those figures of -the objects that are patterned out, I name Prints; as for example, _The -sense of Seeing is not capable to receive the Print_,[25] that is, the -figure or pattern _of the object of the whole Earth_. And again, _The -rational Motions are not alwayes exactly after the sensitive Prints_, -that is, after the figures made by the sensitive motions. Thus by -Prints I understand Patterns, and by printing patterning; not that the -exteriour object prints its figure upon the exteriour sensitive organs, -but that the sensitive motions in the organs pattern out the figure of -the object: but though all printing is done by the way of patterning, -yet all patterning is not printing. Therefore when I say,[26] that -_solid bodies print their figures in that which is more porous and -soft, and that those solid bodies make new prints perpetually; and as -they remove, the prints melt out, like verbal or vocal sounds, which -print words and set notes in the Air_; I mean, the soft body by its own -self-motion patterns out the figure of the solid body, and not that -the solid body makes its own print, and so leaves the place of its own -substance with the print in the soft body; for place remains always -with its own body, and cannot be separated from it, they being but -one thing: for example; when a Seal is printed in Wax, the Seal gives -not any thing to the Wax, but is onely an object patterned out by the -figurative motions of the Wax in the action of printing or sealing. - -When I make mention[27] _of what the Senses bring in_, I mean what the -sensitive Motions pattern out of forreign objects: And when I say,[28] -_that the pores being shut, touch cannot enter_, I mean, the sensitive -corporeal motions cannot make patterns of outward objects. - -Also when I say, _our Ears may be as knowing as our Eyes_, and so of -the rest of the sensitive organs; I mean the sensitive motions in those -parts or organs. - -When I say,[29] _The more the Body is at rest, the more active or busie -is the Mind_, I mean when the sensitive Motions are not taken up with -the action of patterning out forreign objects. - -When I say,[30] the Air is fill'd with sound, and that words are -received into the ears, as figures of exterior objects are received -into the eyes, I mean, the sensitive motions of the Air pattern out -sound, and the sensitive motions of the Ears pattern out words, as the -sensitive figurative motions of the Eyes pattern out the figures of -external objects. - -Also when I speak of _Thunder_ and _Lightning_, to wit, _That Thunder -makes a great noise by the breaking of lines_: My meaning is, That the -Air patterns out this sound or noise of the lines; and by reason there -are so many patterns made in the air by its sensitive motions, the Ear -cannot take so exact a copy thereof, but somewhat confusedly; and this -is the reason why Thunder is represented, or rather pattern'd out with -some terrour; for Thunder is a confused noise, because the patterns are -made confusedly. - -But concerning Sound and Light, I am forced to acquaint you, _Madam_, -that my meaning thereof is not so well expressed in my Book of -Philosophy, by reason I was not of the same opinion at that time when I -did write that Book which I am now of; for upon better consideration, -and a more diligent search into the causes of natural effects, I have -found it more probable, that all sensitive perception is made by the -way of Patterning, and so consequently the perception of Sound and of -Light; wherefore, I beseech you, when you find in my mentioned Book -any thing thereof otherwise expressed, do not judg of it as if I did -contradict my self, but that I have alter'd my opinion since upon more -probable reasons. - -Thus, _Madam_, you have a true declaration of my sence and meaning -concerning those places, which in my _Philosophical Opinions_ you did -note, as being obscure; but I am resolved to bestow so much time and -labour as to have all other places in that Book rectified and cleared, -which seem not perspicuous, lest its obscurity may be the cause of its -being neglected: And I pray God of his mercy to assist me with his -Grace, and grant that my Works may find a favourable acceptance. In -the mean time, I confess my self infinitely bound to your Ladyship, -that you would be pleased to regard so much the Honour of your Friend, -and be the chief occasion of it; for which I pray Heaven may bless, -prosper, and preserve you, and lend me some means and ways to express -my self, - -Madam, - -_Your thankfull Friend,_ - -_and humble Servant._ - - -[1] _Part._ 3. _c._ 13. - -[2] _Ibid._ - -[3] _Part._ 1. _c._ 11. - -[4] _Part._ 1. _c._ 13, 14. - -[5] _P._ 1. _c._ 8. - -[6] _P._ 6. _c._ 3. - -[7] _P._ 3. _c._ 10. - -[8] _P._ 1. _Ch._ 3. - -[9] _P._ 4. _c._ 3, 32. - -[10] _P._ 1. _c._ 22. - -[11] _P._ 3. _c._ 15. - -[12] _Ibid._ - -[13] _P._ 6. _c._ 11. - -[14] _P._ 3. _c._ 21. - -[15] _c._ 14. - -[16] _P._ 5. _c._ 51. - -[17] _P._ 6. _c._ 8. - -[18] _P._ 4. _c._ 34. - -[19] _Ibid._ - -[20] _P._ 5. _c._ 4. - -[21] _P._ 5. _c._ 13. - -[22] _P._ 5. _c._ 27. - -[23] _P._ 5. _c._ 45. - -[24] _P._ 7. _c._ 11. - -[25] _P._ 3. _c._ 2. - -[26] _P._ 5. _c._ 23. - -[27] _P._ 6. _c._ 13. - -[28] _P._ 7. _c._ 12. - -[29] _P._ 6. _c._ 13. - -[30] _P._ 6. _c._ 29. - - - - - _Eternal God, Infinite Deity, - Thy Servant_, NATURE, _humbly prays to Thee, - That thou wilt please to favour Her, and give - Her parts, which are Her Creatures, leave to live, - That in their shapes and forms, what e're they be, - And all their actions they may worship thee; - For 'tis not onely Man that doth implore, - But all Her parts, Great God, do thee adore; - A finite Worship cannot be to thee, - Thou art above all finites in degree: - Then let thy Servant Nature mediate - Between thy Justice, Mercy, and our state, - That thou may'st bless all Parts, and ever be - Our Gracious God to all Eternity._ - - -FINIS. - - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Philosophical Letters: or, modest -Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy, by Margaret Cavendish - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PHILOSOPHICAL LETTERS: OR *** - -***** This file should be named 53679-8.txt or 53679-8.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/6/7/53679/ - -Produced by Clare Graham and Marc D'Hooghe at Free -Literature (online soon in an extended version, also linking -to free sources for education worldwide ... MOOC's, -educational materials,...) Images generously made available -by the Internet Archive. - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/53679-8.zip b/old/53679-8.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 815749e..0000000 --- a/old/53679-8.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53679-h.zip b/old/53679-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 63aa4fd..0000000 --- a/old/53679-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53679-h/53679-h.htm b/old/53679-h/53679-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 3fd8f78..0000000 --- a/old/53679-h/53679-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,19725 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of Philosophical Letters:, by Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle. - </title> - <style type="text/css"> - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; -} - -.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} -.p4 {margin-top: 4em;} -.p6 {margin-top: 6em;} - -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb {width: 45%;} -hr.chap {width: 65%} -hr.full {width: 95%;} - -hr.r5 {width: 5%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;} -hr.r65 {width: 65%; margin-top: 3em; margin-bottom: 3em;} - - - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - visibility: hidden; - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; -} /* page numbers */ - - -a:link {color: #000099; text-decoration: none; } - -v:link {color: #000099; text-decoration: none; } - - - - -.gesperrt -{ - letter-spacing: 0.2em; - margin-right: -0.2em; -} - -em.gesperrt -{ - font-style: normal; -} - - -/* Images */ -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - - -/* Footnotes */ -.footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} - -.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} - -.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - - </style> - </head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Philosophical Letters: or, modest -Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy, by Margaret Cavendish - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Philosophical Letters: or, modest Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy - -Author: Margaret Cavendish - -Release Date: December 6, 2016 [EBook #53679] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PHILOSOPHICAL LETTERS: OR *** - - - - -Produced by Clare Graham and Marc D'Hooghe at Free -Literature (online soon in an extended version, also linking -to free sources for education worldwide ... MOOC's, -educational materials,...) Images generously made available -by the Internet Archive. - - - - - - -</pre> - - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;"> -<img src="images/cover.jpg" width="500" alt="titlepage" /> -</div> - -<h1>Philosophical Letters:</h1> - -<h2>OR,</h2> - -<h2>MODEST REFLECTIONS</h2> -<h2>Upon some Opinions in</h2> -<h2><i>NATURAL PHILOSOPHY</i>,</h2> -<h2>MAINTAINED</h2> -<h2>By several Famous and Learned Authors of this Age,</h2> -<h2>Expressed by way of LETTERS:<br /> -<br /> -<br /></h2> - -<h3>By the Thrice Noble, Illustrious, and Excellent Princess,</h3> -<h2>The Lady MARCHIONESS of <i>NEWCASTLE</i>.</h2> - -<h3><i>LONDON</i>, Printed in the Year, 1664.</h3> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<h3>TABLE OF CONTENTS</h3> - -<h4><a href="#TO_HER_EXCELLENCY">TO HER EXCELLENCY The Lady Marchioness of NEWCASTLE</a></h4> - -<h4><a href="#TO_HIS_EXCELLENCY">TO HIS EXCELLENCY The Lord Marquis of NEWCASTLE</a></h4> - -<h4><a href="#TO_THE">TO THE MOST FAMOUS UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE</a></h4> - -<h4><a href="#A_PREFACE">A PREFACE TO THE READER</a></h4> - -<h4><a href="#Philosophical_Letters">SECTION I</a><br /></h4> -<p><a href="#Philosophical_Letters">Letters: I</a>; -<a href="#I_II">II</a>; -<a href="#I_III">III</a>; -<a href="#I_IV">IV</a>; -<a href="#I_V">V</a>; -<a href="#I_VI">VI</a>; -<a href="#I_VII">VII</a>; -<a href="#I_VIII">VIII</a>; -<a href="#I_IX">IX</a>; -<a href="#I_X">X</a>; -<a href="#I_XI">XI</a>; -<a href="#I_XII">XII</a>; -<a href="#I_XIII">XIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XIV">XIV</a>; -<a href="#I_XV">XV</a>; -<a href="#I_XVI">XVI</a>; -<a href="#I_XVII">XVII</a>; -<a href="#I_XVIII">XVIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XIX">XIX</a>; -<a href="#I_XX">XX</a>; -<a href="#I_XXI">XXI</a>; -<a href="#I_XXII">XXII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXIII">XXIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXIV">XXIV</a>; -<a href="#I_XXV">XXV</a>; -<a href="#I_XXVI">XXVI</a>; -<a href="#I_XXVII">XXVII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXVIII">XXVIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXIX">XXIX</a>; -<a href="#I_XXX">XXX</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXI">XXXI</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXII">XXXII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXIII">XXXIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXIV">XXXIV</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXV">XXXV</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXVI">XXXVI</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXVII">XXXVII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXVIII">XXXVIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XXXIX">XXXIX</a>; -<a href="#I_XL">XL</a>; -<a href="#I_XLI">XLI</a>; -<a href="#I_XLII">XLII</a>; -<a href="#I_XLIII">XLIII</a>; -<a href="#I_XLIV">XLIV</a>; -<a href="#I_XLV">XLV</a></p> - -<h4><a href="#Sect_II">SECTION II</a></h4> -<p><a href="#Sect_II">Letters: I</a>; -<a href="#II_II">II</a>; -<a href="#II_III">III</a>; -<a href="#II_IV">IV</a>; -<a href="#II_V">V</a>; -<a href="#II_VI">VI</a>; -<a href="#II_VII">VII</a>; -<a href="#II_VIII">VIII</a>; -<a href="#II_IX">IX</a>; -<a href="#II_X">X</a>; -<a href="#II_XI">XI</a>; -<a href="#II_XII">XII</a>; -<a href="#II_XIII">XIII</a>; -<a href="#II_XIV">XIV</a>; -<a href="#II_XV">XV</a>; -<a href="#II_XVI">XVI</a>; -<a href="#II_XVII">XVII</a>; -<a href="#II_XVIII">XVIII</a>; -<a href="#II_XIX">XIX</a>; -<a href="#II_XX">XX</a>; -<a href="#II_XXI">XXI</a>; -<a href="#II_XXII">XXII</a>; -<a href="#II_XXIII">XXIII</a>; -<a href="#II_XXIV">XXIV</a>; -<a href="#II_XXV">XXV</a>; -<a href="#II_XXVI">XXVI</a>; -<a href="#II_XXVII">XXVII</a>; -<a href="#II_XXVIII">XXVIII</a>; -<a href="#II_XXIX">XXIX</a>; -<a href="#II_XXX">XXX</a>; -<a href="#II_XXXI">XXXI</a>; -<a href="#II_XXXII">XXXII</a>; -<a href="#II_XXXIII">XXXIII</a>; -<a href="#II_XXXIV">XXXIV</a>;</p> - -<h4><a href="#SECT_III">SECTION III</a></h4> -<p><a href="#SECT_III">Letters: I</a>; -<a href="#III_II">II</a>; -<a href="#III_III">III</a>; -<a href="#III_IV">IV</a>; -<a href="#III_V">V</a>; -<a href="#III_VI">VI</a>; -<a href="#III_VII">VII</a>; -<a href="#III_VIII">VIII</a>; -<a href="#III_IX">IX</a>; -<a href="#III_X">X</a>; -<a href="#III_XI">XI</a>; -<a href="#III_XII">XII</a>; -<a href="#III_XIII">XIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XIV">XIV</a>; -<a href="#III_XV">XV</a>; -<a href="#III_XVI">XVI</a>; -<a href="#III_XVII">XVII</a>; -<a href="#III_XVIII">XVIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XIX">XIX</a>; -<a href="#III_XX">XX</a>; -<a href="#III_XXI">XXI</a>; -<a href="#III_XXII">XXII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXIII">XXIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXIV">XXIV</a>; -<a href="#III_XXV">XXV</a>; -<a href="#III_XXVI">XXVI</a>; -<a href="#III_XXVII">XXVII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXVIII">XXVIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXIX">XXIX</a>; -<a href="#III_XXX">XXX</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXI">XXXI</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXII">XXXII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXIII">XXXIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXIV">XXXIV</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXV">XXXV</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXVI">XXXVI</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXVII">XXXVII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXVIII">XXXVIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XXXIX">XXXIX</a>; -<a href="#III_XL">XL</a>; -<a href="#III_XLI">XLI</a>; -<a href="#III_XLII">XLII</a>; -<a href="#III_XLIII">XLIII</a>; -<a href="#III_XLIV">XLIV</a>; -<a href="#III_XLV">XLV</a></p> - -<h4><a href="#SECT_IV">SECTION IV</a></h4> -<p><a href="#SECT_IV">Letters: I</a> -<a href="#IV_II">II</a>; -<a href="#IV_III">III</a>; -<a href="#IV_IV">IV</a>; -<a href="#IV_V">V</a>; -<a href="#IV_VI">VI</a>; -<a href="#IV_VII">VII</a>; -<a href="#IV_VIII">VIII</a>; -<a href="#IV_IX">IX</a>; -<a href="#IV_X">X</a>; -<a href="#IV_XI">XI</a>; -<a href="#IV_XII">XII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XIII">XIII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XIV">XIV</a>; -<a href="#IV_XV">XV</a>; -<a href="#IV_XVI">XVI</a>; -<a href="#IV_XVII">XVII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XVIII">XVIII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XIX">XIX</a>; -<a href="#IV_XX">XX</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXI">XXI</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXII">XXII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXIII">XXIII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXIV">XXIV</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXV">XXV</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXVI">XXVI</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXVII">XXVII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXVIII">XXVIII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXIX">XXIX</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXX">XXX</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXXI">XXXI</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXXII">XXXII</a>; -<a href="#IV_XXXIII">XXXIII</a></p> - -<h4><a href="#Eternal_God_Infinite_Deity">ENVOI</a></h4> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<h3><a name="TO_HER_EXCELLENCY" id="TO_HER_EXCELLENCY">TO -HER EXCELLENCY<br /> -The Lady Marchioness of NEWCASTLE<br /> -On her Book of Philosophical Letters.</a></h3> - - -<p> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>'Tis Supernatural, nay 'tis Divine,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>To write whole Volumes ere I can a line.</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>I 'mplor'd the Lady Muses, those fine things,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>But they have broken all their Fidle-strings</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>And cannot help me; Nay, then I did try</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Their</i> Helicon, <i>but that is grown all dry:</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Then on</i> Parnassus <i>I did make a sallie,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>But that's laid level, like a Bowling-alley;</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Invok'd my Muse, found it a Pond, a Dream,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>To your eternal Spring, and running Stream;</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>So clear and fresh, with Wit and Phansie store,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>As then despair did bid me write no more.</i></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 15em;">W. Newcastle.</span><br /> -</p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="TO_HIS_EXCELLENCY" id="TO_HIS_EXCELLENCY">TO HIS EXCELLENCY<br /> -The Lord Marquis of NEWCASTLE.</a></h3> - - -<p>My Noble Lord,</p> - -<p>Although you have, always encouraged me -in my harmless pastime of Writing, yet -was I afraid that your Lordship would be -angry with me for Writing and Publishing -this Book, by reason it is a Book of -Controversies, of which I have heard your Lordship -say, That Controversies and Disputations make Enemies -of Friends, and that such Disputations and Controversies -as these, are a pedantical kind of quarrelling, -not becoming Noble Persons. But your Lordship will -be pleased to consider in my behalf, that it is impossible -for one Person to be of every one's Opinion, if their -opinions be different, and that my Opinions in Philosophy, -being new, and never thought of, at least not -divulged by any, but my self, are quite different from -others: For the Ground of my Opinions is, that there -is not onely a Sensitive, but also a Rational Life and -Knowledge, and so a double Perception in all Creatures: -And thus my opinions being new, are not so easily understood -as those, that take up several pieces of old opinions, -of which they patch up a new Philosophy, (if -new may be made of old things,) like a Suit made up -of old Stuff bought at the Brokers: Wherefore to find -out a Truth, at least a Probability in Natural Philosophy -by a new and different way from other Writers, -and to make this way more known, easie and intelligible, -I was in a manner forced to write this Book; for I have -not contradicted those Authors in any thing, but what -concerns and is opposite to my opinions; neither do I -anything, but what they have done themselves, as being -common amongst them to contradict each other: -which may as well be allowable, as for Lawyers to plead -at the Barr in opposite Causes. For as Lawyers are not -Enemies to each other, but great Friends, all agreeing -from the Barr, although not at the Barr: so it is with -Philosophers, who make their Opinions as their Clients, -not for Wealth, but for Fame, and therefore have no -reason to become Enemies to each other, by being Industrious -in their Profession. All which considered, was -the cause of Publishing this Book; wherein although I -dissent from their opinions, yet doth not this take off -the least of the respect and esteem I have of their Merits -and Works. But if your Lordship do but pardon -me, I care not if I be condemned by others; for -your Favour is more then the World to me, for which -all the actions of my Life shall be devoted and ready to -serve you, as becomes,</p> - -<p>My Lord,</p> - -<p><i>Your Lordships</i></p> - -<p><i>honest Wife, and humble Servant</i>,</p> - -<p>M. N.</p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="TO_THE" id="TO_THE">TO THE MOST FAMOUS UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.</a></h3> - - -<p>Most Noble, Ingenious, Learned, and Industrious Students.</p> - -<p><i>Be not offended, that I dedicate to you this weak and -infirm work of mine; for though it be not an offering -worthy your acceptance, yet it is as much as I can present -for this time; and I wish from my Soul, I might be -so happy as to have some means or ways to express my -Gratitude for your Magnificent favours to me, having done -me more honour then ever I could expect, or give sufficient -thanks for: But your Generosity is above all Gratitude, -and your Favours above all Merit, like as your Learning -is above Contradiction: And I pray God your University -may flourish to the end of the World, for the Service of -the Church, the Truth of Religion, the Salvation of -Souls, the instruction of Youth, the preservation of Health, -and prolonging of Life, and for the increase of profitable -Arts and Sciences: so as your several studies may be, like -several Magistrates, united for the good and benefit of the -whole Common-wealth, nay, the whole World. May -Heaven prosper you, the World magnifie you, and Eternity -record your same; Which are the hearty wishes and -prayers of,</i></p> - -<p>Your most obliged Servant</p> - -<p><i>M. NEWCASTLE.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="A_PREFACE" id="A_PREFACE">A PREFACE TO THE READER.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>Worthy Readers</i>,</p> - -<p>I did not write this Book out of delight, -love or humour to contradiction; for -I would rather praise, then contradict any -Person or Persons that are ingenious; -but by reason Opinion is free, and may -pass without a pass-port, I took the liberty to declare -my own opinions as other Philosophers do, and to that -purpose I have here set down several famous and learned -Authors opinions, and my answers to them in the form -of Letters, which was the easiest way for me to write; -and by so doing, I have done that, which I would have -done unto me; for I am as willing to have my opinions -contradicted, as I do contradict others: for I love Reason -so well, that whosoever can bring most rational and -probable arguments, shall have my vote, although -against my own opinion. But you may say, If contradictions -were frequent, there would be no agreement -amongst Mankind. I answer; it is very true: -Wherefore Contradictions are better in general -Books, then in particular Families, and in Schools -better then in Publick States, and better in Philosophy -then in Divinity. All which considered, I shun, -as much as I can, not to discourse or write of either -Church or State. But I desire so much favour, or -rather Justice of you, <i>Worthy Readers</i>, as not to interpret -my objections or answers any other ways then -against several opinions in Philosophy; for I am confident -there is not any body, that doth esteem, respect -and honour learned and ingenious Persons more then -I do: Wherefore judg me neither to be of a contradicting -humor, nor of a vain-glorious mind for differing -from other mens opinions, but rather that it -is done out of love to Truth, and to make my own opinions -the more intelligible, which cannot better be -done then by arguing and comparing other mens opinions -with them. The Authors whose opinions I -mention, I have read, as I found them printed, in my -native Language, except <i>Des Cartes</i>, who being in -Latine, I had some few places translated to me out -of his works; and I must confess, that since I have -read the works of these learned men, I understand the -names and terms of Art a little better then I did before; -but it is not so much as to make me a Scholar, nor yet -so little, but that, had I read more before I did begin -to write my other Book called <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, -they would have been more intelligible; for my error -was, I began to write so early, that I had not liv'd -so long as to be able to read many Authors; I cannot -say, I divulged my opinions as soon as I had conceiv'd -them, but yet I divulged them too soon to have them -artificial and methodical. But since what is past, cannot -be recalled, I must desire you to excuse those faults, -which were committed for want of experience and -learning. As for School-learning, had I applied my -self to it, yet I am confident I should never have arrived -to any; for I am so uncapable of Learning, that I -could never attain to the knowledge of any other Language -but my native, especially by the Rules of Art: -wherefore I do not repent that I spent not my time in -Learning, for I consider, it is better to write wittily then -learnedly; nevertheless, I love and esteem Learning, although -I am not capable of it. But you may say, I have -expressed neither Wit nor Learning in my Writings: -Truly, if not, I am the more sorry for it; but self-conceit, -which is natural to mankind, especially to -our Sex, did flatter and secretly perswade me that my -Writings had Sense and Reason, Wit and Variety; but -Judgment being not called to Counsel, I yielded to Self-conceits -flattery, and so put out my Writings to be -Printed as fast as I could, without being reviewed or -Corrected: Neither did I fear any censure, for Self-conceit -had perswaded me, I should be highly applauded; -wherefore I made such haste, that I had three or -four Books printed presently after each other.</p> - -<p>But to return to this present Work, I must desire you, -<i>worthy Readers</i>, to read first my Book called <i>Philosophical -and Physical Opinions</i>, before you censure this, -for this Book is but an explanation of the former, wherein -is contained the Ground of my Opinions, and those -that will judge well of a Building, must first consider -the Foundation; to which purpose I will repeat some -few Heads and Principles of my Opinions, which are -these following: First, That Nature is Infinite, and -the Eternal Servant of God: Next, That she is Corporeal, -and partly self-moving, dividable and composable; -that all and every particular Creature, as also all -perception and variety in Nature, is made by corporeal -self-motion, which I name sensitive and rational -matter, which is life and knowledg, sense and reason. -Again, That these sensitive and rational parts of matter -are the purest and subtilest parts of Nature, as the active -parts, the knowing, understanding and prudent parts, -the designing, architectonical and working parts, nay, -the Life and Soul of Nature, and that there is not any -Creature or part of nature without this Life and Soul; -and that not onely Animals, but also Vegetables, Minerals -and Elements, and what more is in Nature, are endued -with this Life and Soul, Sense and Reason: and because -this Life and Soul is a corporeal Substance, it is -both dividable and composable; for it divides and removes -parts from parts, as also composes and joyns -parts to parts, and works in a perpetual motion without -rest; by which actions not any Creature can -challenge a particular Life and Soul to it self, but every -Creature may have by the dividing and composing nature -of this self-moving matter more or fewer natural -souls and lives.</p> - -<p>These and the like actions of corporeal Nature or natural -Matter you may find more at large described in -my afore-mentioned Book of <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, -and more clearly repeated and explained in this present. -'Tis true, the way of arguing I use, is common, but -the Principles, Heads and Grounds of my Opinions are -my own, not borrowed or stolen in the least from any; -and the first time I divulged them, was in the year 1653: -since which time I have reviewed, reformed and reprinted -them twice; for at first, as my Conceptions were -new and my own, so my Judgment was young, and my -Experience little, so that I had not so much knowledge -as to declare them artificially and methodically; for as I -mentioned before, I was always unapt to learn by -the Rules of Art. But although they may be defective -for want of Terms of Art, and artificial expressions, -yet I am sure they are not defective for want of Sense -and Reason: And if any one can bring more Sense and -Reason to disprove these my opinions, I shall not repine -or grieve, but either acknowledge my errour, if I find -my self in any, or defend them as rationally as I can, if -it be but done justly and honestly, without deceit, spight, -or malice; for I cannot chuse but acquaint you, <i>Noble -Readers</i>, I have been informed, that if I should be -answered in my Writings, it would be done rather under -the name and cover of a Woman, then of a Man, -the reason is, because no man dare or will set his -name to the contradiction of a Lady; and to confirm -you the better herein, there has one Chapter of my -Book called <i>The Worlds Olio</i>, treating of a Monastical -Life, been answer'd already in a little Pamphlet, under -the name of a woman, although she did little towards it; -wherefore it being a Hermaphroditical Book, I judged -it not worthy taking notice of. The like shall I do -to any other that will answer this present work of mine, -or contradict my opinions indirectly with fraud and deceit. -But I cannot conceive why it should be a disgrace -to any man to maintain his own or others opinions -against a woman, so it be done with respect and civility; -but to become a cheat by dissembling, and quit -the Breeches for a Petticoat, meerly out of spight and -malice, is base, and not fit for the honour of a man, or the -masculine sex. Besides, it will easily be known; for -a Philosopher or Philosopheress is not produced on a -sudden. Wherefore, although I do not care, nor fear -contradiction, yet I desire it may be done without fraud -or deceit, spight and malice; and then I shall be ready to -defend my opinions the best I can, whilest I live, and after -I am dead, I hope those that are just and honorable will -also defend me from all sophistry, malice, spight and -envy, for which Heaven will bless them. In the mean -time, <i>Worthy Readers</i>, I should rejoyce to see that my -Works are acceptable to you, for if you be not partial, -you will easily pardon those faults you find, when you -do consider both my sex and breeding; for which favour -and justice, I shall always remain,</p> - -<p><i>Your most obliged Servant,</i></p> - -<p>M. N.</p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h2><a name="Philosophical_Letters" id="Philosophical_Letters">Philosophical Letters.</a></h2> - -<h2>SECT. I.</h2> - -<h3>I.</h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>You have been pleased to send me the -Works of four Famous and Learned -Authors, to wit, of two most Famous -Philosophers of our Age, <i>Des Cartes</i>, -and <i>Hobbs</i>, and of that Learned -Philosopher and Divine Dr. <i>More</i>, -as also of that Famous Physician and -Chymist <i>Van Helmont</i>. Which Works you have sent -me not onely to peruse, but also to give my judgment -of them, and to send you word by the usual way of our -Correspondence, which is by Letters, how far, and -wherein I do dissent from these Famous Authors, their -Opinions in <i>Natural Philosophy</i>. To tell you truly, -<i>Madam</i>, your Commands did at first much affright -me, for it did appear, as if you had commanded me to -get upon a high Rock, and fling my self into the Sea, -where neither a Ship, nor a Plank, nor any kind of help -was near to rescue me, and save my life; but that I was -forced to sink, by reason I cannot swim: So I having no -Learning nor Art to assist me in this dangerous undertaking, -thought, I must of necessity perish under the -rough censures of my Readers, and be not onely -accounted a fool for my labour, but a vain and presumptuous -person, to undertake things surpassing the ability of -my performance; but on the other side I considered -first, that those Worthy Authors, were they my censurers, -would not deny me the same liberty they take -themselves; which is, that I may dissent from their Opinions, -as well as they dissent from others, and from amongst -themselves: And if I should express more Vanity -then Wit, more Ignorance then Knowledg, more -Folly then Discretion, it being according to the Nature -of our Sex, I hoped that my Masculine Readers would -civilly excuse me, and my Female Readers could not -justly condemn me. Next I considered with my self, -that it would be a great advantage for my Book called -<i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, as to make it more perspicuous -and intelligible by the opposition of other Opinions, -since two opposite things placed near each other, are the -better discerned; for I must confess, that when I did -put forth my Philosophical Work at first, I was not so -well skilled in the Terms or Expressions usual in -<i>Natural Philosophy</i>; and therefore for want of their knowledg, -I could not declare my meaning so plainly and -clearly as I ought to have done, which may be a sufficient -argument to my Readers, that I have not read -heretofore any <i>Natural Philosophers</i>, and taken some -Light from them; but that my Opinions did meerly -issue from the Fountain of my own Brain, without any -other help or assistance. Wherefore since for want of -proper Expressions, my named Book of <i>Philosophy</i> was -accused of obscurity and intricacy, I thought your Commands -would be a means to explain and clear it the better, -although not by an Artificial way, as by Logical Arguments -or Mathematical Demonstrations, yet by expressing -my Sense and Meaning more properly and clearly -then I have done heretofore: But the chief reason of all -was, the Authority of your Command, which did work -so powerfully with me, that I could not resist, although -it were to the disgrace of my own judgment and wit; -and therefore I am fully resolved now to go on as far, and -as well as the Natural strength of my Reason will reach: -But since neither the strength of my Body, nor of my -understanding, or wit, is able to mark every line, -or every word of their works, and to argue upon -them, I shall onely pick out the ground Opinions of the -aforementioned Authors, and those which do directly -dissent from mine, upon which I intend to make some -few Reflections, according to the ability of my Reason; -and I shall meerly go upon the bare Ground of <i>Natural -Philosophy</i>, and not mix Divinity with it, as many Philosophers -use to do, except it be in those places, where I -am forced by the Authors Arguments to reflect upon it, -which yet shall be rather with an expression of my ignorance, -then a positive declaration of my opinion or judgment -thereof; for I think it not onely an absurdity, but -an injury to the holy Profession of Divinity to draw her -to the Proofs in <i>Natural Philosophy</i>; wherefore I shall -strictly follow the Guidance of <i>Natural Reason</i>, and -keep to my own ground and Principles as much as I can; -which that I may perform the better, I humbly desire -the help and assistance of your Favour, that according -to that real and intire Affection you bear to me, you -would be pleased to tell me unfeignedly, if I should -chance to err or contradict but the least probability of -truth in any thing; for I honor Truth so much, as I -bow down to its shadow with the greatest respect and -reverence; and I esteem those persons most, that love -and honor Truth with the same zeal and fervor, whether -they be Ancient or Modern Writers.</p> - -<p>Thus, <i>Madam</i>, although I am destitute of the help of -Arts, yet being supported by your Favour and wise Directions, -I shall not fear any smiles of scorn, or words of -reproach; for I am confident you will defend me against -all the mischievous and poisonous Teeth of malicious -detractors. I shall besides, implore the assistance of the -Sacred Church, and the Learned Schools, to take me -into their Protection, and shelter my weak endeavours: -For though I am but an ignorant and simple Woman, -yet I am their devoted and honest Servant, who shall -never quit the respect and honor due to them, but live -and die theirs, as also,</p> - -<p>MADAM,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<p>M. N.</p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_II" id="I_II">II.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Before I begin my Reflections upon the Opinions -of those Authors you sent me, I will answer -first your Objection concerning the Ground -of my Philosophy, which is Infinite Matter: For -you were pleased to mention, That you could not well -apprehend, how it was possible, that many Infinites -could be contained in one Infinite, since one Infinite -takes up all Place Imaginary, leaving no room for any -other; Also, if one Infinite should be contained in an -other Infinite, that which contains, must of necessity be -bigger then that which is contained, whereby the Nater -of Infinite would be lost; as having no bigger nor -less, but being of an Infinite quantity.</p> - -<p>First of all, <i>Madam</i>, there is no such thing as All in -Infinite, nor any such thing as All the Place, for Infinite is -not circumscribed nor limited: Next, as for that one -Infinite cannot be in an other Infinite, I answer, as well as -one Finite can be in another Finite; for one Creature is -not onely composed of Parts, but one Part lies within -another, and one Figure within another, and one Motion -within another. As for example, Animal Kind, have -they not Internal and External Parts, and so Internal and -External Motions? And are not Animals, Vegetables -and Minerals inclosed in the Elements? But as for Infinites, -you must know, <i>Madam</i>, that there are several -kindes of Infinites. For there is first Infinite in quantity -or bulk, that is such a big and great Corporeal substance, -which exceeds all bounds and limits of measure, and may -be called Infinite in Magnitude. Next there is Infinite -in Number, which exceeds all numeration and account, -and may be termed Infinite in Multitude; Again there -is Infinite in Quality; as for example, Infinite degrees -of softness, hardness, thickness, thinness, heat and cold, &c. -also Infinite degrees of Motion, and so Infinite Creations, -Infinite Compositions, Dissolutions, Contractions, -Dilations, Digestions, Expulsions; also Infinite degrees -of Strength, Knowledg, Power, &c. Besides -there is Infinite in Time, which is properly named Eternal. -Now, when I say, that there is but one Infinite, -and that Infinite is the Onely Matter, I mean infinite in -bulk and quantity. And this Onely matter, because it -is Infinite in bulk, must of necessity be divisible into infinite -Parts, that is, infinite in number, not in bulk or -quantity; for though Infinite Parts in number make -up one infinite in quantity, yet they considered in themselves, -cannot be said Infinite, because every Part is of -a certain linked and circumscribed Figure, Quantity and -Proportion, whereas Infinite hath no limits nor bounds: -besides it is against the nature of a single Part to be Infinite, -or else there would be no difference between the -Part and the whole, the nature of a Part requiring that -it must be less then its whole, but all what is less hath a -determined quantity, and so becomes finite. Therefore -it is no absurdity to say, that an Infinite may have -both Finite and Infinite Parts, Finite in Quantity, Infinite -in Number. But those that say, if there were an -Infinite Body, that each of its Parts must of necessity be -Infinite too, are much mistaken; for it is a contradiction -in the same Terms to say One Infinite Part, for -the very Name of a Part includes a Finiteness, but take -all parts of an Infinite Body together, then you may -rightly say they are infinite. Nay Reason will inform -you plainly, for example: Imagine an Infinite number -of grains of Corn in one heap, surely if the number of -Grains be Infinite, you must grant of necessity the -bulk or body, which contains this infinite number of -grains, to be Infinite too; to wit, Infinite in quantity, -and yet you will find each Grain in it self to be Finite. -But you will say, an Infinite Body cannot have parts, -for if it be Infinite, it must be Infinite in Quantity, and -therefore of one bulk, and one continued quantity, but -Infinite parts in number make a discrete quantity. I answer -it is all one; for a Body of a continued quantity -may be divided and severed into so many Parts either -actually, or mentally in our Conceptions or thoughts; -besides nature is one continued Body, for there is no -such <i>Vacuum</i> in Nature, as if her Parts did hang together -like a linked Chain; nor can any of her Parts subsist -single and by it self, but all the Parts of Infinite -Nature, although they are in one continued Piece, yet -are they several and discerned from each other by their -several Figures. And by this, I hope, you will understand -my meaning, when I say, that several Infinites may be -included or comprehended in one Infinite; for by the one -Infinite, I understand Infinite in Quantity, which includes -Infinite in Number, that is Infinite Parts; then -Infinite in Quality, as Infinite degrees of Rarity, Density, -Swiftness, Slowness, Hardness, Softness, &c. Infinite -degrees of Motions, Infinite Creations, Dissolutions, -Contractions, Dilations, Alterations, &c. Infinite -degrees of Wisdom, Strength, Power, &c., and -lastly Infinite in Time or Duration, which is Eternity, -for Infinite and Eternal are inseparable; All which Infinites -are contained in the Onely Matter as many Letters -are contained in one Word, many Words in one Line, -many Lines in one Book. But you will say perhaps, -if I attribute an Infinite Wisdom, Strength, -Power, Knowledg, &c. to Nature; then Nature is in -all coequal with God, for God has the same Attributes: -I answer, Not at all; for I desire you to understand me -rightly, when I speak of Infinite Nature, and when I -speak of the Infinite Deity, for there is great difference -between them, for it is one thing a Deitical or Divine Infinite, -and another a Natural Infinite; You know, that -God is a Spirit, and not a bodily substance, again that -Nature is a Body, and not a Spirit, and therefore none of -these Infinites can obstruct or hinder each other, as being -different in their kinds, for a Spirit being no Body, requires -no place, Place being an attribute which onely -belongs to a Body, and therefore when I call Nature -Infinite, I mean an Infinite extension of Body, containing -an Infinite number of Parts; but what doth an Infinite -extension of Body hinder the Infiniteness of God, -as an Immaterial Spiritual being? Next, when I do -attribute an Infinite Power, Wisdom, Knowledg, &c. -to Nature, I do not understand a Divine, but a Natural -Infinite Wisdom and Power, that is, such as properly -belongs to Nature, and not a supernatural, as is in -God; For Nature having Infinite parts of Infinite degrees, -must also have an Infinite natural wisdom to order -her natural Infinite parts and actions, and consequently -an Infinite natural power to put her wisdom -into act; and so of the rest of her attributes, which are -all natural: But Gods Attributes being supernatural, -transcend much these natural infinite attributes; for God, -being the God of Nature, has not onely Natures Infinite -Wisdom and Power, but besides, a Supernatural -and Incomprehensible Infinite Wisdom and Power; which -in no wayes do hinder each other, but may very -well subsist together. Neither doth Gods Infinite Justice -and his Infinite Mercy hinder each other; for Gods -Attributes, though they be all several Infinites, yet they -make but one Infinite.</p> - -<p>But you will say, If Nature's Wisdom and Power extends -no further then to natural things, it is not Infinite, -but limited and restrained. I answer, That doth not -take away the Infiniteness of Nature; for there may be -several kinds of Infinites, as I related before, and -one may be as perfect an Infinite as the other in its kind. -For example: Suppose a Line to be extended infinitely -in length, you will call this Line Infinite, although it -have not an Infinite breadth; Also, if an infinite length -and breadth joyn together, you will call it, an infinite -Superficies, although it wants an infinite depth; and -yet every Infinite, in its kinde, is a Perfect Infinite, if -I may call it so: Why then shall not Nature also be said -to have an Infinite Natural Wisdom and Power, although -she has not a Divine Wisdom and Power? Can -we say, Man hath not a free Will, because he hath not -an absolute free Will, as God hath? Wherefore, a -Natural Infinite, and the Infinite God, may well stand -together, without any opposition or hinderance, or without -any detracting or derogating from the Omnipotency -and Glory of God; for God remains still the God of -Nature, and is an Infinite Immaterial Purity, when as -Nature is an Infinite Corporeal Substance; and Immaterial -and Material cannot obstruct each other. And -though an Infinite Corporeal cannot make an Infinite -Immaterial, yet an Infinite Immaterial can make an -Infinite Corporeal, by reason there is as much difference -in the Power as in the Purity: And the disparity -between the Natural and Divine Infinite is such, as -they cannot joyn, mix, and work together, unless -you do believe that Divine Actions can have allay.</p> - -<p>But you may say, Purity belongs onely to natural -things, and none but natural bodies can be said purified, -but God exceeds all Purity. 'Tis true: But if -there were infinite degrees of Purity in Matter, Matter -might at last become Immaterial, and so from an Infinite -Material turn to an Infinite Immaterial, and from Nature -to be God: A great, but an impossible Change. -For I do verily believe, that there can be but one Omnipotent -God, and he cannot admit of addition, or diminution; -and that which is Material cannot be Immaterial, -and what is Immaterial cannot become Material, I -mean, so, as to change their natures; for Nature -is what God was pleased she should be; and will be -what she was, until God be pleased to make her otherwise. -Wherefore there can be no new Creation of -matter, motion, or figure; nor any annihilation of any -matter, motion, or figure in Nature, unless God do create -a new Nature: For the changing of Matter into several -particular Figures, doth not prove an annihilation -of particular Figures; nor the cessation of particular Motions -an annihilation of them: Neither doth the variation -of the Onely Matter produce an annihilation of any -part of Matter, nor the variation of figures and motions -of Matter cause an alteration in the nature of Onely -Matter: Wherefore there cannot be new Lives, Souls -or Bodies in Nature; for, could there be any thing -new in Nature, or any thing annihilated, there would -not be any stability in Nature, as a continuance of every -kind and sort of Creatures, but there would be a -confusion between the new and old matter, motions, -and figures, as between old and new Nature; In -truth, it would be like new Wine in old Vessels, by -which all would break into disorder. Neither can -supernatural and natural effects be mixt together, no -more then material and immaterial things or beings: -Therefore it is probable, God has ordained Nature to -work in her self by his Leave, Will, and Free Gift. But -there have been, and are still strange and erroneous -Opinions, and great differences amongst Natural Philosophers, -concerning the Principles of Natural things; some -will have them <i>Atoms</i>, others will have the first Principles -to be <i>Salt, Sulphur</i> and <i>Mercury</i>; some will have -them to be the four Elements, as <i>Fire, Air, Water,</i> and -<i>Earth</i>; and others will have but one of these Elements -also some will have <i>Gas</i> and <i>Blas, Ferments, Ideas</i> and -the like; but what they believe to be Principles and -Causes of natural things, are onely Effects; for in all -Probability it appears to humane sense and reason, that -the cause of every particular material Creature is the -onely and Infinite Matter, which has Motions and Figures -inseparably united; for Matter, Motion and Figure, -are but one thing, individable in its Nature. And -as for Immaterial Spirits, there is surely no such thing -in Infinite Nature, to wit, so as to be Parts of Nature; for -Nature is altogether Material, but this opinion proceeds -from the separation or abstraction of Motion from Matter, -<i>viz.</i> that man thinks matter and motion to be dividable -from each other, and believes motion to be a thing -by its self, naming it an Immaterial thing, which has a -being, but not a bodily substance: But various and different -effects do not prove a different Matter or Cause, -neither do they prove an unsetled Cause, onely the variety -of Effects hath obscured the Cause from the several -parts, which makes Particular Creatures partly Ignorant, and -partly knowing. But in my opinion, Nature -is material, and not any thing in Nature, what belongs -to her, is immaterial; but whatsoever is Immaterial, is -Supernatural, Therefore Motions, Forms, Thoughts, -Ideas, Conceptions, Sympathies, Antipathies, Accidents, -Qualities, as also Natural Life, and Soul, are -all Material: And as for Colours, Sents, Light, Sound, -Heat, Cold, and the like, those that believe them not -to be substances or material things, surely their brain or -heart (take what place you will for the forming of Conceptions) -moves very Irregularly, and they might as -well say, Our sensitive Organs are not material; for what -Objects soever, that are subject to our senses, cannot in -sense be denied to be Corporeal, when as those things -that are not subject to our senses, can be conceived -in reason to be Immaterial? But some Philosophers -striving to express their wit, obstruct reason; and -drawing Divinity to prove Sense and Reason, weaken -Faith so, as their mixed Divine Philosophy becomes -meer Poetical Fictions, and Romancical expressions, making -material Bodies immaterial Spirits, and immaterial -Spirits material Bodies; and some have conceived some -things neither to be Material nor Immaterial but between -both. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I wish their Wits had -been less, and their Judgments more, as not to jumble -Natural and Supernatural things together, but to distinguish -either clearly, for such Mixtures are neither -Natural nor Divine; But as I said, the Confusion comes -from their too nice abstractions, and from the separation -of Figure and Motion from Matter, as not conceiving -them individable; but if God, and his servant -Nature were as Intricate and Confuse in their Works, -as Men in their Understandings and Words, the Universe -and Production of all Creatures would soon be -without Order and Government, so as there would be -a horrid and Eternal War both in Heaven, and in the -World, and so pittying their troubled Brains, and -wishing them the Light of Reason, that they may clearly -perceive the Truth, I rest</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your real Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_III" id="I_III">III.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>It seems you are offended at my Opinion, that <i>Nature</i> -is Eternal without beginning, which, you say, -is to make her God, or at least coequal with God; -But, if you apprehend my meaning rightly, you will -say, I do not: For first, God is an Immaterial and Spiritual -Infinite Being, which Propriety God cannot give away -to any Creature, nor make another God in Essence like -to him, for Gods Attributes are not communicable to any -Creature; Yet this doth not hinder, that God should not -make Infinite and Eternal Matter, for that is as easie to -him, as to make a Finite Creature, Infinite Matter being -quite of another Nature then God is, to wit, Corporeal, -when God is Incorporeal, the difference whereof -I have declared in my former Letter. But as for -<i>Nature</i>, that it cannot be Eternal without beginning, -because God is the Creator and Cause of it, and that the -Creator must be before the Creature, as the Cause before -the Effect, so, that it is impossible for <i>Nature</i> to be -without a beginning; if you will speak naturally, as human -reason guides you, and bring an Argument concluding -from the Priority of the <i>Cause</i> before the -<i>Effect</i>, give me leave to tell you, that God is not tied to -Natural Rules, but that he can do beyond our Understanding, -and therefore he is neither bound up to time, -as to be before, for if we will do this, we must not allow, -that the Eternal Son of God is Coeternal with the Father, -because nature requires a Father to exist before -the Son, but in God is no time, but all Eternity; and -if you allow, that God hath made some Creatures, as -Supernatural Spirits, to live Eternally, why should he -not as well have made a Creature from all Eternity? for -Gods making is not our making, he needs no Priority of -Time. But you may say, the Comparison of the Eternal -Generation of the Son of God is Mystical and Divine, -and not to be applied to natural things: I answer, -The action by which God created the World or made -Nature, was it natural or supernatural? surely you will -say it was a Supernatural and God-like action, why then -will you apply Natural Rules to a God-like and Supernatural -Action? for what Man knows, how and -when God created Nature? You will say, the Scripture -doth teach us that, for it is not Six thousand years, -when God created this World, I answer, the holy -Scripture informs us onely of the Creation of this -Visible World, but not of Nature and natural Matter; -for I firmly believe according to the Word of -God, that this World has been Created, as is described -by <i>Moses</i>, but what is that to natural Matter? -There may have been worlds before, as many are of -the opinion that there have been men before <i>Adam</i>, and -many amongst Divines do believe, that after the destruction -of this World God will Create a new World again, -as a new Heaven, and a new Earth; and if this be -probable, or at least may be believed without any prejudice -to the holy Scripture, why may it not be probably -believed that there have been other worlds before this visible -World? for nothing is impossible with God; and -all this doth derogate nothing from the Honour and -Glory of God, but rather increases his Divine Power. But -as for the Creation of this present World, it is related, -that there was first a rude and indigested Heap, or Chaos, -without form, void and dark; and God said, <i>Let it be -light; Let there be a Firmament in the midst of the Waters, -and let the Waters under the Heaven be gathered -together, and let the dry Land appear; Let the Earth -bring forth Grass, the Herb yielding seed, and the -Fruit-tree yielding Fruit after its own kind; and let there -be Lights in the Firmament, the one to rule the Day, and -the other the Night; and let the Waters bring forth -abundantly the moving Creature that hath life; and let -the Earth bring forth living Creatures after its kinde; and -at last God said, Let us make Man, and all what was -made, God saw it was good.</i> Thus all was made by -Gods Command, and who executed his Command -but the Material servant of God, Nature? which ordered -her self-moving matter into such several Figures as -God commanded, and God approved of them. And -thus, <i>Madam</i>, I verily believe the Creation of the -World, and that God is the Sole and omnipotent Creator -of Heaven and Earth, and of all Creatures therein; -nay, although I believe Nature to have been from -Eternity, yet I believe also that God is the God and -Author of Nature, and has made Nature and natural -Matter in a way and manner proper to his Omnipotency -and Incomprehensible by us: I will pass by natural -Arguments and Proofs, as not belonging to such -an Omnipotent Action; as for example, how the nature -of relative terms requires, that they must both exist -at one point of Time, <i>viz.</i> a Master and his Servant, -and a King and his Subjects; for one bearing relation -to the other, can in no ways be considered as different -from one another in formiliness or laterness of Time; -but as I said, these being meerly natural things, I will -nor cannot apply them to Supernatural and Divine Actions; -But if you ask me, how it is possible that <i>Nature</i>, the -Effect and Creature of God, can be Eternal without beginning? -I will desire you to answer me first, how a -Creature can be Eternal without end, as, for example. -Supernatural Spirits are, and then I will answer you, -how a Creature can be Eternal without beginning; -For Eternity consists herein, that it has neither beginning -nor end; and if it be easie for God to make a Being -without end, it is not difficult for Him to make a Being -without beginning. One thing more I will add, which is, -That if <i>Nature</i> has not been made by God from all -Eternity, then the Title of God, as being a Creator, -which is a Title and action, upon which our Faith is -grounded, (for it is the first Article in our Creed) has -been accessory to God, as I said, not full Six thousand -years ago; but there is not any thing accessory to God; -he being the Perfection himself. But, <i>Madam</i>, all what -I speak, is under the liberty of Natural Philosophy, and -by the Light of Reason onely, not of Revelation; and -my Reason being not infallible; I will not declare my -Opinions for an infallible Truth: Neither do I think, -that they are offensive either to Church or State, for I -submit to the Laws of One, and believe the Doctrine -of the Other, so much, that if it were for the advantage -of either, I should be willing to sacrifice my Life, especially -for the Church; yea, had I millions of Lives, and -every Life was either to suffer torment or to live in ease, -I would prefer torment for the benefit of the Church; -and therefore, if I knew that my Opinions should give -any offence to the Church, I should be ready every minute -to alter them: And as much as I am bound in all -duty to the obedience of the Church, as much am I particularly -bound to your Ladiship, for your entire love -and sincere affection towards me, for which I shall live -and die,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your most faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_IV" id="I_IV">IV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I have chosen, in the first place, the Work of that -famous Philosopher <i>Hobbs</i> called <i>Leviathan</i>, wherein -I find he sayes,<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That the cause of sense or sensitive -perception is the external body or Object, which presses the -Organ proper to each Sense</i>. To which I answer, according -to the ground of my own <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, That all -things, and therefore outward objects as well as sensitive -organs, have both Sense and Reason, yet neither the -objects nor the organs are the cause of them; for Perception -is but the effect of the Sensitive and rational -Motions, and not the Motions of the Perception; neither -doth the pressure of parts upon parts make Perception; -for although Matter by the power of self-motion is -as much composeable as divideable, and parts do joyn to -parts, yet that doth not make perception; nay, the several -parts, betwixt which the Perception is made, may -be at such a distance, as not capable to press: As for example, -Two men may see or hear each other at a distance, -and yet there may be other bodies between them, that -do not move to those perceptions, so that no pressure can -be made, for all pressures are by some constraint and -force; wherefore, according to my Opinion, the Sensitive -and Rational free Motions, do pattern out each -others object, as Figure and Voice in each others Eye -and Ear; for Life and Knowledge, which I name Rational -and Sensitive Matter, are in every Creature, and -in all parts of every Creature, and make all perceptions -in Nature, because they are the self-moving parts of -Nature, and according as those Corporeal, Rational, -and Sensitive Motions move, such or such perceptions are -made: But these self-moving parts being of different degrees -(for the Rational matter is purer then the Sensitive) -it causes a double perception in all Creatures, whereof one -is made by the Rational corporeal motions, and the -other by the Sensitive; and though both perceptions are -in all the body, and in every part of the body of a Creature, -yet the sensitive corporeal motions having their proper -organs, as Work-houses, in which they work some -sorts of perceptions, those perceptions are most commonly -made in those organs, and are double again; for the -sensitive motions work either on the inside or on the out-side -of those organs, on the inside in Dreams, on the -out-side awake; and although both the Rational and the -Sensitive matter are inseparably joyned and mixed together, -yet do they not always work together, for oftentimes -the Rational works without any sensitive paterns, -and the sensitive again without any rational paterns. -But mistake me not, <i>Madam</i>, for I do not absolutely -confine the sensitive perception to the Organs, nor the -rational to the Brain, but as they are both in the whole -body, so they may work in the whole body according -to their own motions. Neither do I say, that there is no -other perception in the Eye but sight, in the Ear but -hearing, and so forth, but the sensitive organs have -other perceptions besides these; and if the sensitive and -rational motions be irregular in those parts, between -which the perception is made, as for example, in the -two fore-mentioned men, that see and hear each other, -then they both neither see nor hear each other perfectly; -and if one's motions be perfect, but the -other's irregular and erroneous, then one sees and -hears better then the other; or if the Sensitive and -Rational motions move more regularly and make perfecter -paterns in the Eye then in the Ear, then they -see better then they hear; and if more regularly and -perfectly in the Ear then in the Eye, they hear better then -they see: And so it may be said of each man singly, for -one man may see the other better and more perfectly, -then the other may see him; and this man may hear the -other better and more perfectly, then the other may hear -him; whereas, if perception were made by pressure, -there would not be any such mistakes; besides the hard -pressure of objects, in my opinion, would rather annoy -and obscure, then inform. But as soon as the object is removed, -the Perception of it, made by the sensitive motions -in the Organs, ceaseth, by reason the sensitive Motions -cease from paterning, but yet the Rational Motions -do not always cease so suddenly, because the sensitive -corporeal Motions work with the Inanimate Matter, -and therefore cannot retain particular figures long, -whereas the Rational Matter doth onely move in its own -substance and parts of matter, and upon none other, as -my Book of Philosophical Opinions will inform you -better. And thus Perception, in my opinion, is not -made by Pressure, nor by Species, nor by matter going -either from the Organ to the Object, or from the -Object into the Organ. By this it is also manifest, that -Understanding comes not from Exterior Objects, or -from the Exterior sensitive Organs; for as Exterior Objects -do not make Perception, so they do neither make -Understanding, but it is the rational matter that doth it, -for Understanding may be without exterior objects and -sensitive organs; And this in short is the opinion of</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 1. <i>ch.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_V" id="I_V">V.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>Madam</i>,</p> - -<p>Your Authours opinion is,<a name="FNanchor_1_2" id="FNanchor_1_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_2" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> that <i>when a thing lies -still, unless somewhat else stir it, it will lie still for -ever; but when a thing is in motion, it will eternally -be in motion, unless somewhat else stay it; the reason -is,</i> saith he, <i>because nothing can change it self</i>; To tell -you truly, <i>Madam</i>, I am not of his opinion, for if -Matter moveth it self, as certainly it doth, then the -least part of Matter, were it so small as to seem Individable, -will move it self; 'Tis true, it could not desist -from motion, as being its nature to move, and no -thing can change its Nature; for God himself, who -hath more power then self-moving Matter, cannot -change himself from being God; but that Motion -should proceed from another exterior Body, joyning -with, or touching that body which it moves, is in my -opinion not probable; for though Nature is all Corporeal, -and her actions are Corporeal Motions, yet -that doth not prove, that the Motion of particular -Creatures or Parts is caused by the joining, touching or -pressing of parts upon parts; for it is not the several -parts that make motion, but motion makes them; and -yet Motion is not the cause of Matter, but Matter is -the cause of Motion, for Matter might subsist without -Motion, but not Motion without Matter, onely there -could be no perception without Motion, nor no Variety, -if Matter were not self-moving; but Matter, if it -were all Inanimate and void of Motion, would lie as a -dull, dead and senseless heap; But that all Motion -comes by joining or pressing of other parts, I deny, for -if sensitive and rational perceptions, which are sensitive -and rational motions, in the body, and in the mind, -were made by the pressure of outward objects, pressing -the sensitive organs, and so the brain or interior parts -of the Body, they would cause such dents and holes -therein, as to make them sore and patched in a short time; -Besides, what was represented in this manner, would -always remain, or at least not so soon be dissolved, and -then those pressures would make a strange and horrid -confusion of Figures, for not any figure would be distinct; -Wherefore my opinion is, that the sensitive and -rational Matter doth make or pattern out the figures of -several Objects, and doth dissolve them in a moment of -time; as for example, when the eye seeth the object -first of a Man, then of a Horse, then of another Creature, -the sensitive motions in the eye move first into -the figure of the Man, then straight into the figure of -the Horse, so that the Mans figure is dissolved and altered -into the figure of the Horse, and so forth; but if -the eye sees many figures at once, then so many several -figures are made by the sensitive Corporeal Motions, -and as many by the Rational Motions, which are Sight -and Memory, at once: But in sleep both the sensitive -and rational Motions make the figures without patterns, -that is, exterior objects, which is the cause that -they are often erroneous, whereas, if it were the former -Impression of the Objects, there could not possibly be -imperfect Dreams or Remembrances, for fading of Figures -requires as much motion, as impression, and impression -and fading are very different and opposite motions; -nay, if Perception was made by Impression, -there could not possibly be a fading or decay of the figures -printed either in the Mind or Body, whereas yet, -as there is alteration of Motions in self-moving Matter, -so there is also an alteration of figures made by these motions. -But you will say, it doth not follow, if Perception -be made by Impression, that it must needs continue -and not decay; for if you touch and move a string, the -motion doth not continue for ever, but ceaseth by degrees; -I answer, There is great difference between -Prime self-motion, and forced or Artificial Motions; -for Artificial Motions are onely an Imitation of Natural -Motions, and not the same, but caused by Natural -Motions; for although there is no Art that is not made -by Nature, yet Nature is not made by Art; Wherefore -we cannot rationally judg of Perception by comparing -it to the motion of a string, and its alteration to -the ceasing of that motion, for Nature moveth not by -force, but freely. 'Tis true, 'tis the freedom in Nature -for one man to give another a box on the Ear, or -to trip up his heels, or for one or more men to fight with -each other; yet these actions are not like the actions of -loving Imbraces and Kissing each other; neither are the -actions one and the same, when a man strikes himself, -and when he strikes another; and so is likewise the action -of impression, and the action of self-figuring not one -and the same, but different; for the action of impression -is forced, and the action of self-figuring is free; -Wherefore the comparison of the forced motions of a -string, rope, watch, or the like, can have no place here; -for though the rope, made of flax or hemp, may have -the perception of a Vegetable, yet not of the hand, or -the like, that touched or struck it; and although the -hand doth occasion the rope to move in such a manner, -yet it is not the motion of the hand, by which it moveth, -and when it ceases, its natural and inherent power to -move is not lessened; like as a man, that hath left off carving -or painting, hath no less skill then he had before, -neither is that skill lost when he plays upon the Lute or -Virginals, or plows, plants, and the like, but he hath -onely altered his action, as from carving to painting, or -from painting to playing, and so to plowing and planting, -which is not through disability but choice. But -you will say, it is nevertheless a cessation of such a motion. -I grant it: but the ceasing of such a motion is not -the ceasing of self-moving matter from all motions, neither -is cessation as much as annihilation, for the motion -lies in the power of the matter to repeat it, as oft it will, if -it be not overpowred, for more parts, or more strength, -or more motions may over-power the less; Wherefore -forced, or artificial and free Natural motions are different -in their effects, although they have but one Cause, -which is the self-moving matter, and though Matter is -but active and passive, yet there is great Variety, and -so great difference in force and liberty, objects and perceptions, -sense and reason, and the like. But to conclude, -perception is not made by the pressure of objects, -no more then hemp is made by the Rope-maker, or metal -by the Bell-founder or Ringer, and yet neither -the rope nor the metal is without sense and reason, -but the natural motions of the metal, and the artificial -motions of the Ringer are different; wherefore a natural -effect in truth cannot be produced from an artificial -cause, neither can the ceasing of particular forced -or artificial motions be a proof for the ceasing of general, -natural, free motions, as that matter it self should -cease to move; for there is no such thing as rest in Nature, -but there is an alteration of motions and figures in -self-moving matter, which alteration causeth variety as -well in opinions, as in every thing else; Wherefore in -my opinion, though sense alters, yet it doth not decay, -for the rational and sensitive part of matter is as lasting as -matter it self, but that which is named decay of sense, is -onely the alteration of motions, and not an obscurity of -motions, like, as the motions of memory and forgetfulness, -and the repetition of the same motions is called -remembrance. And thus much of this subject for the -present, to which I add no more but rest</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_2" id="Footnote_1_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_2"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_VI" id="I_VI">VI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your Authour discoursing of Imagination, saith,<a name="FNanchor_1_3" id="FNanchor_1_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_3" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -<i>That as soon as any object is removed from our -Eyes, though the Impression that is made in us remain, -yet other objects more present succeeding and working -on us, the Imagination of the past is obscured and made -weak</i>. To which I answer, first, that he conceives Sense -and Imagination to be all one, for he says, <i>Imagination -is nothing else, but a fading or decaying sense</i>; whereas in -my opinion they are different, not onely their matter, -but their motions also being distinct and different; -for Imagination is a rational perception, and Sense a sensitive -perception; wherefore as much as the rational matter -differs from the sensitive, as much doth Imagination -differ from Sense. Next I say, that Impressions do not -remain in the body of sensitive matter, but it is in its power -to make or repeat the like figures; Neither is Imagination -less, when the object is absent, then when present, -but the figure patterned out in the sensitive organs, -being altered, and remaining onely in the Rational part -of matter, is not so perspicuous and clear, as when it was -both in the Sense and in the Mind: And to prove that -Imagination of things past doth not grow weaker by distance -of time, as your Authour says, many a man in his -old age, will have as perfect an Imagination of what is past -in his younger years, as if he saw it present. And as -for your Authours opinion, that <i>Imagination and Memory -are one and the same</i>, I grant, that they are made -of one kind of Matter; but although the Matter is -one and the same, yet several motions in the several parts -make Imagination and Memory several things: As for -Example, a Man may Imagine that which never came -into his Senses, wherefore Imagination is not one and -the same thing with Memory. But your Authour -seems to make all Sense, as it were, one Motion, but -not all Motion Sense, whereas surely there is no Motion, -but is either Sensitive or Rational; for Reason is -but a pure and refined Sense, and Sense a grosser Reason. -Yet all sensitive and rational Motions are not one -and the same; for forced or Artificial Motions, though -they proceed from sensitive matter, yet are they so different -from the free and Prime Natural Motions, that -they seem, as it were, quite of another nature: And -this distinction neglected is the Cause, that many make -Appetites and Passions, Perceptions and Objects, and -the like, as one, without any or but little difference. -But having discoursed of the difference of these Motions -in my former Letter, I will not be tedious to you -with repeating it again, but remain,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_3" id="Footnote_1_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_3"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_VII" id="I_VII">VII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your Authours opinion, concerning Dreams,<a name="FNanchor_1_4" id="FNanchor_1_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_4" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -seemeth to me in some part very rational and probable, -in some part not; For when he sayes, that -<i>Dreams are onely Imaginations of them that sleep, which -imaginations have been before either totally or by parcels -in the Sense; and that the organs of Sense, as the Brain -and the Nerves, being benumb'd in sleep, as not easily to -be moved by external objects, those Imaginations proceed -onely from the agitation of the inward parts of mans body, -which for the connexion they have with the Brain, and -other organs, when they be distemper'd, do keep the same -in motion, whereby the Imaginations there formerly made, -appear as if a man were waking</i>; This seems to my Reason -not very probable: For, first, Dreams are not absolutely -Imaginations, except we do call all Motions and -Actions of the Sensitive and Rational Matter, Imaginations. -Neither is it necessary, that all Imaginations -must have been before either totally or by parcels in the -Sense; neither is there any benumbing of the organs of -Sense in sleep. But Dreams, according to my opinion, -are made by the Sensitive and Rational Corporeal Motions, -by figuring several objects, as awake; onely the -difference is, that the Sensitive motions in Dreams work -by rote and on the inside of the Sensitive organs, when -as awake they work according to the patterns of outward -objects, and exteriously or on the outside of the -sensitive Organs, so that sleep or dreams are nothing -else but an alteration of motions, from moving exteriously -to move interiously, and from working after a -Pattern to work by rote: I do not say that the body -is without all exterior motions, when asleep, as breathing -and beating of the Pulse (although these motions -are rather interior then exterior,) but that onely the -sensitive organs are outwardly shut, so as not to receive -the patterns of outward Objects, nevertheless the sensitive -Motions do not cease from moving inwardly; or -on the inside of the sensitive Organs; But the rational -matter doth often, as awake, so asleep or in dreams, -make such figures, as the sensitive did never make either -from outward objects, or of its own accord; for -the sensitive hath sometimes liberty to work without -Objects, but the Rational much more, which is not -bound either to the patterns of Exterior objects, or -of the sensitive voluntary Figures. Wherefore it is -not divers distempers, as your Authour sayes, that -cause different Dreams, or Gold, or Heat; neither -are Dreams the reverse of our waking Imaginations, -nor all the Figures in Dreams are not made with their -heels up, and their heads downwards, though some -are; but this error or irregularity proceeds from want -of exterior Objects or Patterns, and by reason the -sensitive Motions work by rote; neither are the Motions -reverse, because they work inwardly asleep, and -outwardly awake, for Mad-men awake see several Figures -without Objects. In short, sleeping and waking, -is somewhat after that manner, when men are -called either out of their doors, or stay within their -houses; or like a Ship, where the Mariners work -all under hatches, whereof you will find more in -my Philosophical Opinions; and so taking my leave, -I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_4" id="Footnote_1_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_4"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_VIII" id="I_VIII">VIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your Authour going on in his discourse of Imagination, -says,<a name="FNanchor_1_5" id="FNanchor_1_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_5" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That, as we have no Imagination, -whereof we have not formerly had sense, in whole or in -parts; so we have not Transition from one Imagination to -another, whereof we never had the like before in our senses</i>. -To which my answer is in short, that the Rational -part of Matter in One composed figure, as in Man, or -the like Creature, may make such figures, as the senses -did never make in that composed Figure or Creature; -And though your Authour reproves those that say,<a name="FNanchor_2_6" id="FNanchor_2_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_6" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -<i>Imaginations rise of themselves</i>; yet, if the self-moving -part of Matter, which I call Rational, makes Imaginations, -they must needs rise of themselves; for the Rational -part of matter being free and self-moving, depends -upon nothing, neither Sense nor Object, I mean, so, as -not to be able to work without them. Next, when -your Author, defining <i>Understanding</i>, says that it is -nothing else, but<a name="FNanchor_3_7" id="FNanchor_3_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_7" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>an Imagination raised by words or -other voluntary signs</i>, My Answer is, that Understanding, -and so Words and Signs are made by self-moving -Matter, that is, Sense and Reason, and not Sense and -Reason by Words and Signs; wherefore Thoughts -are not like<a name="FNanchor_4_8" id="FNanchor_4_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_8" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <i>Water upon a plain Table, which is drawn and -guided by the finger this or that way</i>, for every Part of -self-moving matter is not alwayes forced, perswaded or -directed, for if all the Parts of Sense and Reason were ruled -by force or perswasion, not any wounded Creature -would fail to be healed, or any disease to be cured by -outward Applications, for outward Applications to -Wounds and Diseases might have more force, then any -Object to the Eye: But though there is great affinity -and sympathy between parts, yet there is also great difference -and antipathy betwixt them, which is the cause -that many objects cannot with all their endeavours -work such effects upon the Interiour parts, although -they are closely press'd, for Impressions of objects do -not always affect those parts they press. Wherefore, -I am not of your Author's opinion, that all Parts of -Matter press one another; It is true, <i>Madam</i>, there -cannot be any part single, but yet this doth not prove, -that parts must needs press each other: And as for his -<i>Train of Thoughts</i>, I must confess, that Thoughts for -the most part are made orderly, but yet they do not -follow each other like Geese, for surely, man has sometimes -very different thoughts; as for Example, a man -sometime is very sad for the death of his Friend, and -thinks of his own death, and immediately thinks of a -wanton Mistress, which later thought, surely, the -thought of Death did not draw in; wherefore, though -some thought may be the Ring-leader of others, yet -many are made without leaders. Again, your Author -in his description of the Mind sayes, that <i>the discourse -of the mind, when it is govern'd by design, is nothing -but seeking, or the Faculty of Invention; a hunting -out of the Causes of some Effects, present or past; or -of the Effects of some present or past Cause. Sometimes a -man seeks what he has lost, and from that Place and Time -wherein he misses it, his mind runs back from place to place, -and time to time, to find where and when he had it, that -is to say, to find some certain and limited Time and Place, -in which to begin a method of Seeking. And from thence -his thoughts run over the same places and times to find -what action or other occasion might make him lose it. This -we call Remembrance or calling to mind. Sometimes a man -knows a place determinate, within the compass whereof -he is to seek, and then his thoughts run over all the Parts -thereof in the same manner as one would sweep a room -to find a Jewel, or as a Spaniel ranges the field till he find -a sent; or as a Man should run over the Alphabet to -start a Rime.</i> Thus far your Author: In which discourse -I do not perceive that he defineth what the Mind -is, but I say, that if, according to his opinion, nothing -moves it self, but one thing moves another, then the -Mind must do nothing, but move backward and forward, -nay, onely forward, and if all actions were -thrusting or pressing of parts, it would be like a crowd -of People, and there would be but little or no motion, -for the crowd would make a stoppage, like water in a -glass, the mouth of the Glass being turned downwards, -no water can pass out, by reason the numerous drops -are so closely press'd, as they cannot move exteriously. -Next, I cannot conceive how the Mind can run back -either to Time or Place, for as for Place, the mind is inclosed -in the body, and the running about in the parts -of the body or brain will not inform it of an Exterior -place or object; besides, objects being the cause of the -minds motion, it must return to its Cause, and so move -until it come to the object, that moved it first, so that -the mind must run out of the body to that object, which -moved it to such a Thought, although that object -were removed out of the World (as the phrase is:) But -for the mind to move backward, to Time past, is more -then it can do; Wherefore in my opinion, Remembrance, -or the like, is onely a repetition of such Figures -as were like to the Objects; and for Thoughts -in Particular, they are several figures, made by the -mind, which is the Rational Part of matter, in its own -substance, either voluntarily, or by imitation, whereof -you may see more in my Book of Philosophical Opinions. -Hence I conclude, that Prudence is nothing -else, but a comparing of Figures to Figures, and of the -several actions of those Figures; as repeating former -Figures, and comparing them to others of the like nature, -qualities, proprieties, as also chances, fortunes, &c. -Which figuring and repeating is done actually, in and -by the Rational Matter, so that all the observation of -the mind on outward Objects is onely an actual repetition -of the mind, as moving in such or such figures and -actions; and when the mind makes voluntary Figures -with those repeated Figures, and compares them together, -this comparing is Examination; and when several -Figures agree and joyn, it is Conclusion or Judgment: -likewise doth Experience proceed from repeating -and comparing of several Figures in the Mind, and -the more several Figures are repeated and compared, the -greater the experience is. One thing more there is in -the same Chapter, which I cannot let pass without examination; -Your Authour says, That <i>things Present -onely have a being in Nature, things Past onely a being -in the Memory, but things to come have no being at all</i>; -Which how it possibly can be, I am not able to conceive; -for certainly, if nothing in nature is lost or annihilated, -what is past, and what is to come, hath as well -a being, as what is present; and, if that which is now, had -its being before, why may it not also have its being hereafter? -It might as well be said, that what is once forgot, -cannot be remembred; for whatsoever is in Nature, -has as much a being as the Mind, and there is -not any action, or motion, or figure, in Nature, but -may be repeated, that is, may return to its former Figure, -When it is altered and dissolved; But by reason -Nature delights in variety, repetitions are not so frequently -made, especially of those things or creatures, -which are composed by the sensitive corporeal motions -in the inanimate part of Matter, because they are not so -easily wrought, as the Rational matter can work upon its -own parts, being more pliant in its self, then the Inanimate -matter is; And this is the reason, that there are -so many repetitions of one and the same Figure in the -Rational matter, which is the Mind, but seldom any in -the Gross and inanimate part of Matter, for Nature -loves ease and freedom: But to conclude, <i>Madam</i>, I -perceive your Author confines Sense onely to Animal-kind, -and Reason onely to Man-kind: Truly, it is -out of self-love, when one Creature prefers his own Excellency -before another, for nature being endued with -self-love, all Creatures have self-love too, because they -are all Parts of Nature; and when Parts agree or disagree, -it is out of Interest and Self-love; but Man herein -exceeds all the rest, as having a supernatural Soul, whose -actions also are supernatural; To which I leave him, -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_5" id="Footnote_1_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_5"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_6" id="Footnote_2_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_6"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_7" id="Footnote_3_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_7"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>ibid. c.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_8" id="Footnote_4_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_8"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>ibid.</i></p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_IX" id="I_IX">IX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>When your Author discourseth of the use of -<i>Speech or Words and Names</i>, he is pleas'd to -say,<a name="FNanchor_1_9" id="FNanchor_1_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_9" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That their use is to serve for marks and -notes of Remembrance</i>; Whereof to give you my opinion, -I say, That Speech is natural to the shape of -Man; and though sometimes it serves for marks or notes -of remembrance, yet it doth not always, for all other -Animals have Memory without the help of Speech, and -so have deaf and dumb men, nay more then those that -hear and speak: Wherefore, though Words are useful -to the mind, and so to the memory, yet both can be -without them, whereas Words cannot be without Memory; -for take a Bird, and teach him to speak, if he had -not Memory, before he heard the words, he could never -learn them. You will ask me, <i>Madam</i>, What then, -is Memory the Cause of Speech? I answer, Life and -Knowledg, which is Sense and Reason, as it creates and -makes all sorts of Creatures, so also amongst the rest it -makes Words: And as I said before, that Memory -may be without the help of Speech or Words, so I say -also, that there is a possibility of reckoning of numbers, -as also of magnitudes, of swiftness, of force, and other -things without words, although your Author denies it: -But some men are so much for Art, as they endeavour -to make Art, which is onely a Drudgery-maid of Nature, -the chief Mistress, and Nature her Servant, which -is as much as to prefer Effects before the Cause, Nature -before God, Discord before Unity and Concord.</p> - -<p>Again, your <i>Author</i>, in his Chapter of Reason,<a name="FNanchor_2_10" id="FNanchor_2_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_10" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -defines <i>Reason</i> to be nothing else but <i>Reckoning</i>: I answer, -That in my opinion Reckoning is not Reason it -self, but onely an effect or action of Reason; for Reason, -as it is the chiefest and purest degree of animate -matter, works variously and in divers motions, by -which it produces various and divers effects, which are -several Perceptions, as Conception, Imagination, Fancy, -Memory, Remembrance, Understanding, Judgment, -Knowledg, and all the Passions, with many more: -Wherefore this Reason is not in one undivided part, -nor bound to one motion, for it is in every Creature -more or less, and moves in its own parts variously; and -in some Creatures, as for example, in some men, it moves -more variously then in others, which is the cause that -some men are more dull and stupid, then others; neither -doth Reason always move in one Creature regularly, -which is the cause, that some men are mad or foolish: -And though all men are made by the direction of -Reason, and endued with Reason, from the first time -of their birth, yet all have not the like Capacities, Understandings, -Imaginations, Wits, Fancies, Passions, &c. -but some more, some less, and some regular, some irregular, -according to the motions of Reason or Rational -part of animate matter; and though some rational parts -may make use of other rational Parts, as one man of another -mans Conceptions, yet all these parts cannot associate -together; as for example, all the Material parts -of several objects, no not their species, cannot enter or -touch the eye without danger of hurting or loosing it, -nevertheless the eye makes use of the objects by patterning -them out, and so doth the rational matter, by taking -patterns from the sensitive; And thus knowledg or perception -of objects, both sensitive and rational, is taken -without the pressure of any other parts; for though -parts joyn to parts, (for no part can be single) yet this -joining doth not necessarily infer the pressure of objects -upon the sensitive organs; Whereof I have already -discoursed sufficiently heretofore, to which I refer you, -and rest</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_9" id="Footnote_1_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_9"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_10" id="Footnote_2_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_10"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 5.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_X" id="I_X">X.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p><i>Understanding</i> says your Author,<a name="FNanchor_1_11" id="FNanchor_1_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_11" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>is nothing -else but Conception caused by speech, and therefore, -if speech be peculiar to man, (as, for ought I know, it -is) then is understanding peculiar to him also.</i> Where he -confineth Understanding onely to speech and to Mankind; -But, by his leave, <i>Madam</i>, I surely believe, -that there is more understanding in Nature, then that, -which is in speech, for if there were not, I cannot conceive, -how all the exact forms in Generations could be -produced, or how there could be such distinct degrees -of several sorts and kinds of Creatures, or distinctions -of times and seasons, and so many exact motions and -figures in Nature: Considering all this, my reason -perswadeth me, that all Understanding, which is a part -of Knowledg, is not caused by speech, for all the motions -of the Celestial Orbs are not made by speech, neither -is the knowledg or understanding which a man -hath, when sick, as to know or understand he is sick, -made by speech, nor by outward objects, especially in -a disease he never heard, nor saw, nor smelt, nor tasted, -nor touched; Wherefore all Perception, Sensation, -Memory, Imagination, Appetite, Understanding, -and the like, are not made nor caused by outward -objects, nor by speech. And as for names of things, -they are but different postures of the figures in our -mind or thoughts, made by the Rational matter; But -Reasoning is a comparing of the several figures with -their several postures and actions in the Mind, which -joyned with the several words, made by the sensitive motions, -inform another distinct and separate part, as an -other man, of their minds conceptions, understanding, -opinions, and the like.</p> - -<p>Concerning Addition and Subtraction, wherein -your <i>Author</i> sayes Reasoning consists, I grant, that it -is an act of Reasoning, yet it doth not make Sense or -Reason, which is Life and Knowledge, but Sense and -Reason which is self-motion, makes addition and subtraction -of several Parts of matter; for had matter not -self-motion, it could not divide nor compose, nor make -such varieties, without great and lingring retardments, -if not confusion. Wherefore all, what is made in -Nature, is made by self-moving matter, which self-moving -matter doth not at all times move regularly, but -often irregularly, which causes false Logick, false Arithmetick, -and the like; and if there be not a certainty -in these self-motions or actions of Nature, much less in -Art, which is but a secundary action; and therefore, -neither speech, words, nor exterior objects cause Understanding -or Reason. And although many parts of -the Rational and Sensitive Matter joyned into one, may -be stronger by their association, and over-power other -parts that are not so well knit and united, yet these are -not the less pure; onely these Parts and Motions being -not equal in several Creatures, make their Knowledge -and Reason more or less: For, when a man hath more -Rational Matter well regulated, and so more Wisdom -then an other, that same man may chance to over-power -the other, whose Rational Matter is more irregular, -but yet not so much by strength of the united -Parts, as by their subtilty; for the Rational Matter -moving regularly, is more strong with subtilty, then -the sensitive with force; so that Wisdom is stronger -then Life, being more pure, and so more active; for in -my opinion, there is a degree of difference between -Life and Knowledge, as my Book of <i>Philosophical Opinions</i> -will inform you.</p> - -<p>Again, your <i>Author</i> sayes, <i>That Man doth excel all -other Animals in this faculty, that when he conceives any -thing whatsoever, he is apt to enquire the Consequences of -it, and what effects he can do with it: Besides this</i> (sayes -he) <i>Man hath an other degree of Excellence, that he -can by Words reduce the Consequences he finds to General -Rules called Theoremes or Aphorisms, that is, he can -reason or reckon not onely in Number, but in all other -things, whereof one may be added unto, or substracted -from an other.</i> To which I answer, That according to -my Reason I cannot perceive, but that all Creatures -may do as much; but by reason they do it not after the -same manner or way as Man, Man denies, they can do -it at all; which is very hard; for what man knows, -whether Fish do not Know more of the nature of Water, -and ebbing and flowing, and the saltness of the -Sea? or whether Birds do not know more of the nature -and degrees of Air, or the cause of Tempests? -or whether Worms do not know more of the nature of -Earth, and how Plants are produced? or Bees of the -several sorts of juices of Flowers, then Men? And -whether they do not make there Aphorismes and Theoremes -by their manner of Intelligence? For, though -they have not the speech of Man, yet thence doth not -follow, that they have no Intelligence at all. But the -Ignorance of Men concerning other Creatures is the -cause of despising other Creatures, imagining themselves -as petty Gods in Nature, when as <i>Nature</i> is not capable -to make one God, much less so many as Mankind; -and were it not for Mans supernatural Soul, Man would -not be more Supreme, then other Creatures in Nature, -<i>But</i> (says your <i>Author</i>) <i>this Priviledge in Man is allay'd -by another, which is, No living Creature is subject -to absurdity, but onely Man.</i> Certainly, <i>Madam</i>, I -believe the contrary, to wit, that all other Creatures do -as often commit mistakes and absurdities as Man, and if -it were not to avoid tediousness, I could present sufficient -proofs to you: Wherefore I think, not onely -Man but also other Creatures may be Philosophers and -subject to absurdities as aptly as Men; for Man doth, -nor cannot truly know the Faculties, and Abilities or -Actions of all other Creatures, no not of his own -Kind as Man-Kind, for if he do measure all men by -himself he will be very much mistaken, for what he -conceives to be true or wise, an other may conceive to -be false and foolish. But Man may have one way of -Knowledge in Philosophy and other Arts, and other -Creatures another way, and yet other Creatures manner -or way may be as Intelligible and Instructive to -each other as Man's, I mean, in those things which -are Natural. Wherefore I cannot consent to what -your <i>Author</i> says, <i>That Children are not endued with -Reason at all, till they have attained to the use of Speech</i>; -for Reason is in those Creatures which have not Speech, -witness Horses, especially those which are taught in -the manage, and many other Animals. And as for the -weak understanding in Children, I have discoursed -thereof in my Book of Philosophy; The rest of this -discourse, lest I tire you too much at once, I shall reserve -for the next, resting in the mean time,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_11" id="Footnote_1_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_11"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XI" id="I_XI">XI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>Madam,</i></p> - -<p>I sent you word in my last, that your <i>Author's</i> opinion -is, <i>That Children are not endued with Reason at -all, until they have attained to the use of Speech,</i> in -the same Chapter<a name="FNanchor_1_12" id="FNanchor_1_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_12" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> he speaks to the same purpose thus: -<i>Reason is not as Sense and Memory born with us, nor gotten -by experience onely, as Prudence is, but attained by -industry.</i> To which I reply onely this, That it might -as well be said, a Child when new born hath not flesh -and blood, because by taking in nourishment or food, -the Child grows to have more flesh and blood; or, that -a Child is not born with two legs, because he cannot go, -or with two arms and hands, because he cannot help -himself; or that he is not born with a tongue, because -he cannot speak: For although Reason doth not move -in a Child as in a Man, in Infancy as in Youth, in -Youth as in Age, yet that doth not prove that Children -are without Reason, because they cannot run and prate: -I grant, some other Creatures appear to have more -Knowledg when new born then others; as for example, -a young Foal has more knowledg than a young Child, -because a Child cannot run and play; besides a Foal -knows his own Dam, and can tell where to take his food, -as to run and suck his Dam, when as an Infant cannot -do so, nor all beasts, though most of them can, but -yet this doth not prove, that a Child hath no reason at -all; Neither can I perceive that man is a Monopoler of -all Reason, or Animals of all Sense, but that Sense and -Reason are in other Creatures as well as in Man and Animals; -for example, Drugs, as Vegetables and Minerals, -although they cannot slice, pound or infuse, as -man can, yet they can work upon man more subtilly, -wisely, and as sensibly either by purging, vomiting, -spitting, or any other way, as man by mincing, pounding -and infusing them, and Vegetables will as wisely -nourish Men, as Men can nourish Vegetables; Also -some Vegetables are as malicious and mischievous to -Man, as Man is to one another, witness Hemlock, -Nightshade, and many more; and a little Poppy will -as soon, nay sooner cause a Man to sleep, though silently, -then a Nurse a Child with singing and rocking; But -because they do not act in such manner or way as Man, -Man judgeth them to be without sense and reason; and -because they do not prate and talk as Man, Man believes -they have not so much wit as he hath; and because -they cannot run and go, Man thinks they are not -industrious; the like for Infants concerning Reason. But -certainly, it is not local motion or speech that makes -sense and reason, but sense and reason makes them; neither -is sense and reason bound onely to the actions of -Man, but it is free to the actions, forms, figures and -proprieties of all Creatures; for if none but Man had -reason, and none but Animals sense, the World could -not be so exact, and so well in order as it is: but Nature -is wiser then Man with all his Arts, for these are -onely produced through the variety of Natures actions, -and disputes through the superfluous varieties of Mans -follies or ignorances, not knowing Natures powerful -life and knowledg: But I wonder, <i>Madam</i>, your <i>Author</i> -says in this place, <i>That Reason is not born with -Man</i>, when as in another place,<a name="FNanchor_2_13" id="FNanchor_2_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_13" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> he says, <i>That every -man brought Philosophy, that is Natural reason with him -into the World</i>; Which how it agree, I will leave to others -to judg, and to him to reconcile it, remaining in the -meantime,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Constant Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_12" id="Footnote_1_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_12"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 4.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_13" id="Footnote_2_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_13"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> In his <i>Elements of Philosophy, part.</i> 1. -<i>c.</i> 1. <i>art.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XII" id="I_XII">XII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>Madam,</i></p> - -<p>Two sorts of motions, I find your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_1_14" id="FNanchor_1_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_14" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> doth -attribute to Animals, <i>viz. Vital and Animal, the -Vital motions</i>, says he, <i>are begun in Generation, -and continued without Interruption through their whole life, -and those are the Course of the Blood, the Pulse, the -Breathing, Conviction, Nutrition, Excretion, &c. to -which motions there needs no help of Imaginations; But -the animal Motions, otherwise called voluntary Motions, -are to go, to speak, to move any of our limbs, in such -manner as is first fancied in our minds: And because going, -speaking, and the like voluntary motions, depend always -upon a precedent thought of whither, which way, and what, -it is evident, that the Imagination is the first Internal beginning -of all voluntary Motion</i>. Thus far your <i>Author</i>. -Whereof in short I give you my opinion, first concerning -Vital Motions, that it appears improbable if -not impossible to me, that Generation should be the -cause and beginning of Life, because Life must of necessity -be the cause of Generation, life being the Generator -of all things, for without life motion could not be, -and without motion not any thing could be begun, increased, -perfected, or dissolved. Next, that Imagination -is not necessary to Vital Motions, it is probable -it may not, but yet there is required Knowledg, which -I name Reason; for if there were not Knowledg in all -Generations or Productions, there could not any distinct -Creature be made or produced, for then all Generations -would be confusedly mixt, neither would there be any -distinct kinds or sorts of Creatures, nor no different Faculties, -Proprieties, and the like. Thirdly, concerning -<i>Animal Motions</i>, which your <i>Author</i> names <i>Voluntary -Motions, as to go, to speak, to move any of our limbs, -in such manner as is first fancied in our minds, and that they -depend upon a precedent thought of whither, which way, and -what, and that Imagination is the first Internal beginning -of them</i>; I think, by your <i>Authors</i> leave, it doth -imply a contradiction, to call them Voluntary Motions, -and yet to say they are caused and depend upon our -Imagination; for if the Imagination draws them this -way, or that way, how can they be voluntary motions, -being in a manner forced and necessitated to move according -to Fancy or Imagination? But when he goes -on in the same place and treats of Endeavour, Appetite, -Desire, Hunger, Thirst, Aversion, Love, Hate, and the -like, he derives one from the other, and treats well as a -Moral Philosopher; but whether it be according to the -truth or probability of Natural Philosophy, I will leave -to others to judge, for in my opinion Passions and Appetites -are very different, Appetites being made by the -motions of the sensitive Life, and Passions, as also Imagination, -Memory, &c. by the motions of the rational -Life, which is the cause that Appetites belong more to -the actions of the Body then the Mind: 'Tis true, the -Sensitive and Rational self-moving matter doth so much -resemble each other in their actions, as it is difficult to distinguish -them. But having treated hereof at large in -my other Philosophical Work, to cut off repetitions, I -will refer you to that, and desire you to compare our -opinions together: But certainly there is so much variety -in one and the same sort of Passions, and so of Appetites, -as it cannot be easily express'd. To conclude, I do not -perceive that your <i>Author</i> tells or expresses what the -cause is of such or such actions, onely he mentions their -dependance, which is, as if a man should converse with -a Nobleman's Friend or Servant, and not know the -Lord himself. But leaving him for this time, it is sufficient -to me, that I know your Ladyship, and your Ladyship -knows me, that I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend, and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_14" id="Footnote_1_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_14"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Leviathan, part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 6.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XIII" id="I_XIII">XIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>Madam,</i></p> - -<p>Having obey'd your Commands in giving you -my opinion of the First Part of the Book of -that famous and learned <i>Author</i> you sent me, I -would go on; but seeing he treats in his following Parts -of the Politicks, I was forced to stay my Pen, because of -these following Reasons. First, That a Woman is not -imployed in State Affairs, unless an absolute Queen. -Next, That to study the Politicks, is but loss of Time, -unless a man were sure to be a Favourite to an absolute -Prince. Thirdly, That it is but a deceiving Profession, -and requires more Craft then Wisdom. All which -considered, I did not read that part of your <i>Author</i>: But -as for his <i>Natural Philosophy</i>, I will send you my opinion -so far as I understand it: For what belongs to Art, -as to Geometry, being no Scholar, I shall not trouble my -self withal. And so I'l take my leave of you, when I -have in two or three words answered the Question you -sent me last, which was, Whether Nature be the Art -of God, Man the Art of Nature, and a Politick Government -the Art of Man? To which I answer, 'Tis -probable it may be so; onely I add this, That Nature -doth not rule God, nor Man Nature, nor Politick Government -Man; for the Effect cannot rule the Cause, -but the Cause doth rule the Effect: Wherefore if men -do not naturally agree, Art cannot make unity amongst -them, or associate them into one Politick Body and so -rule them; But man thinks he governs, when as it is Nature -that doth it, for as nature doth unite or divide parts -regularly or irregularly, and moves the several minds of -men and the several parts of mens bodies, so war is -made or peace kept: Thus it is not the artificial form -that governs men in a Politick Government, but a natural -power, for though natural motion can make artificial -things, yet artificial things cannot make natural power; -and we might as well say, nature is governed by -the art of nature, as to say man is ruled by the art and invention -of men. The truth is, Man rules an artificial -Government, and not the Government Man, just -like as a Watch-maker rules his Watch, and not the -Watch the Watch-maker. And thus I conclude and -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XIV" id="I_XIV">XIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning the other Book of that learned Author -<i>Hobbs</i> you sent me, called <i>Elements of Philosophy</i>, -I shall likewise according to your desire, -give you my judgment and opinion of it as I have done -of the former, not that I intend to prejudice him any -ways thereby, but onely to mark those places wherein -I seem to dissent from his opinions, which liberty, I -hope, he will not deny me; And in order to this, I have -read over the first Chapter of the mentioned Book, -treating of Philosophy in General, wherein amongst the -rest, discoursing of the Utility of Natural Philosophy, -and relating the commodities and benefits which proceed -from so many arts and sciences, he is pleased to say,<a name="FNanchor_1_15" id="FNanchor_1_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_15" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -that they are <i>injoyed almost by all people of</i> Europe, Asia, -<i>and some of</i> Africa, <i>onely the Americans, and those -that live neer the Poles do want them: But why</i>, says he, -<i>have they sharper wits then these? Have not all men one -kind of soul, and the same faculties of mind?</i> To which, -give me leave, <i>Madam</i>, to add, That my opinion is, that -there is a difference between the Divine and the Natural -soul of man, and though the natural mind or soul -is of one kind, yet being made of rational matter, it is -divideable and composeable, by which division and -composition, men may have more or less wit, or quicker -and slower wit; the like for Judgments, Imaginations, -Fancies, Opinions, &c. For were the natural rational -mind individeable, all men would have the like degree -of wit or understanding, all men would be Philosophers -or fools, which by reason they are not, it proves the -natural rational mind is divideable and composeable, making -variations of its own several parts by self-motion; -for it is not the several outward objects, or forreign instructions, -that make the variety of the mind; neither -is wit or ingenuity alike in all men; for some are natural -Poets, Philosophers, and the like, without learning, -and some are far more ingenious then others, although -their breeding is obscure and mean, Neither will learning -make all men Scholars, for some will continue Dunces -all their life time; Neither doth much experience make -all men wise, for some are not any ways advanced in -their wisdom by much and long experiences; And as -for Poetry, it is according to the common Proverb; a -<i>Poet is born, not made</i>; Indeed learning doth rather hurt -Fancy, for great Scholars are not always good Poets, -nor all States-men Natural Philosophers, nor all Experienced -Men Wise Men, nor all Judges Just, nor all -Divines Pious, nor all Pleaders or Preachers Eloquent, -nor all Moral Philosophers Vertuous; But all this is -occasioned by the various Motions of the rational self-moving -matter, which is the Natural Mind. And -thus much for the present of the difference of wits and -faculties of the mind; I add no more, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_15" id="Footnote_1_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_15"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 7.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XV" id="I_XV">XV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>My Discourse for the present shall be of <i>Infinite</i>, -and the question shall be first <i>Whether several -Finite parts, how many soever there be, can make an -Infinite.</i> Your Author says,<a name="FNanchor_1_16" id="FNanchor_1_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_16" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>that several Finite parts -when they are all put together make a whole Finite</i>; which, -if his meaning be of a certain determinate number, how -big soever, of finite parts, I do willingly grant, for all -what is determinate and limited, is not Infinite but Finite; -neither is there any such thing, as Whole or All in -Infinite; but if his meaning be, that no Infinite can be -made of finite parts, though infinite in number, I deny it; -Next he says <i>there can be no such thing as One in Infinite, -because No thing can be said One, except there be another -to compare it withal</i>; which in my opinion doth not -follow, for there is but One God, who is Infinite, and -hath none other to be compared withal, and so there -may be but one Onely Infinite in Nature, which is -Matter. But when he says, <i>there cannot be an Infinite -and Eternal Division</i>, is very true, <i>viz.</i>, in this sense, -that one single part cannot be actually infinitely divided, -for the Compositions hinder the Divisions in Nature, -and the Divisions the Compositions, so that Nature, -being Matter, cannot be composed so, as not to have -parts, nor divided so, as that her parts should not be -composed, but there are nevertheless infinite divided -parts in Nature, and in this sense there may also be infinite -divisions, as I have declared in my Book of Philosophy<a name="FNanchor_2_17" id="FNanchor_2_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_17" class="fnanchor">[2]</a>. -And thus there are Infinite divisions of Infinite -parts in Nature, but not Infinite actual divisions of -one single part; But though Infinite is without end, yet -my discourse of it shall be but short and end here, though -not my affection, which shall last and continue with the -life of</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_16" id="Footnote_1_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_16"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Elem. of Philos. c.</i> 7. <i>a.</i> 1 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_17" id="Footnote_2_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_17"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 8.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XVI" id="I_XVI">XVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>An <i>Accident</i>, says your <i>Author</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_18" id="FNanchor_1_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_18" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>is nothing else, but -the manner of our Conception of body, or that Faculty -of any body, by which it works in us a Conception -of it self</i>; To which I willingly consent; but yet -I say, that these qualities cannot be separated from the -body, for as impossible it is that the essence of Nature -should be separable from Nature, as impossible is it that -the various modes or alterations, either of Figures or -Motions, should be separable from matter or body; -Wherefore when he goes on, and says,<a name="FNanchor_2_19" id="FNanchor_2_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_19" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>An accident is -not a body, but in a body, yet not so, as if any thing were -contained therein, as if for example, redness were in blood -in the same manner as blood is in a bloody cloth; but as -magnitude is in that which is great, rest in that which resteth, -motion in that which is moved</i>; I answer, that in -my opinion, not any thing in Nature can be without a -body, and that redness is as well in blood, as blood is in -a bloody cloth, or any other colour in any thing else; for -there is no colour without a body, but every colour hath -as well a body as any thing else, and if Colour be a separable -accident, I would fain know, how it can be separated -from a subject, being bodiless, for that which is no -body is nothing, and nothing cannot be taken away -from any thing; Wherefore as for natural Colour it -cannot be taken away from any creature, without the -parts of its substance or body; and as for artificial Colours, -when they are taken away, it is a separation of -two bodies, which joyned together; and if Colour, or -Hardness, or Softness do change, it is nothing else but -an alteration of motions and not an annihilation, for all -changes and alterations remain in the power of Corporeal -motions, as I have said in other places; for we might -as well say, life doth not remain in nature, when a body -turns from an animal to some other figure, as believe that -those, they name accidents, do not remain in Corporeal -Motions; Wherefore I am not of your <i>Authors</i> mind, -when he says,<a name="FNanchor_3_20" id="FNanchor_3_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_20" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> that <i>when a White thing is made black, -the whiteness perishes</i>; for it cannot perish, although it -is altered from white to black, being in the power of the -same matter, to turn it again from black to white, so as -it may make infinite Repetitions of the same thing; but -by reason nature takes delight in variety, she seldom uses -such repetitions; nevertheless that doth not take away -the Power of self-moving matter, for it doth not, -and it cannot, are two several things, and the latter -doth not necessarily follow upon the former; Wherefore -not any, the least thing, can perish in Nature, for -if this were possible, the whole body of nature might -perish also, for if so many Figures and Creatures should -be annihilated and perish without any supply or new -Creation, Nature would grow less, and at last become -nothing; besides it is as difficult for Nature to turn something -into nothing, as to Create something out of nothing; -Wherefore as there is no annihilation or perishing -in Nature, so there is neither any new Creation in -Nature. But your <i>Author</i> makes a difference between -bodies and accidents, saying, <i>that bodies are things and -not generated, but accidents are Generated and not things.</i> -Truly, <i>Madam</i>, these accidents seem to me -to be like <i>Van Helmont's</i> Lights, Gases, Blazes and -Ideas; and Dr <i>More's</i> Immaterial Substances or Dæmons, -onely in this Dr <i>More</i> hath the better, that his -Immaterial Substances, are beings, which subsist of -themselves, whereas accidents do not, but their existence -is in other bodies; But what they call Accidents, -are in my opinion nothing else but Corporeal Motions, -and if these accidents be generated, they must needs be -bodies, for how nothing can be Generated in nature, is -not conceivable, and yet your <i>Author</i> denies,<a name="FNanchor_4_21" id="FNanchor_4_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_21" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> that -<i>Accidents are something, namely some part of a natural -thing</i>; But as for Generations, they are onely various -actions of self-moving matter, or a variety of Corporeal -Motions, and so are all Accidents whatsoever, so that -there is not any thing in nature, that can be made new, -or destroyed, for whatsoever was and shall be, is in -nature, though not always in act, yet in power, as in the -nature and power of Corporeal motions, which is self-moving -matter, And as there is no new Generation of -Accidents, so there is neither a new Generation of Motions; -wherefore when your <i>Author</i> says,<a name="FNanchor_5_22" id="FNanchor_5_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_22" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> <i>That, when -the hand, being moved, moveth the pen, the motion doth -not go out of the hand into the pen, for so the writing might -be continued, though the hand stood still, but a new motion -is generated in the pen, and is the pens motion</i>: I am of his -opinion, that the motion doth not go out of the hand -into the pen, and that the motion of the pen, is the pens -own motion; but I deny, that after holding the hand a -little while still, and beginning to write again, a new -motion of the pen is generated; for it is onely a repetition, -and not a new generation, for the Hand, Pen -and Ink, repeat but the same motion or action of -writing: Besides, Generation is made by Connexion -or Conjunction of parts, moving by consent to such -or such Figures, but the motion of the Hand or the -Pen is always one and the same; wherefore it is but -the variation and repetition in and of the same motion -of the Hand, or Pen, which may be continued -in that manner infinitely, just as the same Corporeal -Motions can make infinite variations and repetitions -of one and the same Figure, repeating it as -oft as they please, as also making Copy of Copy; -And although I do not deny, but there are Generations -in Nature, yet not annihilations or perishings, -for if any one motion or figure should perish, the -matter must perish also; and if any one part of matter -can perish, all the matter in nature may perish -also; and if there can any new thing be made or -created in nature, which hath not been before, there -may also be a new Nature, and so by perishings and new -Creations, this World would not have continued an -age; But surely whatsoever is in Nature, hath been existent -always. Wherefore to conclude, it is not the -generation and perishing of an Accident that makes -its subject to be changed, but the production and alteration -of the Form, makes it said to be generated -or destroyed, for matter will change its motions -and figures without perishing or annihilating; -and whether there were words or not, there would -be such causes and effects; But having not the -art of Logick to dispute with artificial words, nor -the art of Geometry to demonstrate my opinions by -Mathematical Figures, I fear they will not be so -well received by the Learned; However, I leave -them to any mans unprejudiced Reason and Judgment, -and devote my self to your service, as becomes,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_18" id="Footnote_1_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_18"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Elem. of Philos. c.</i> 8. <i>art.</i> 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_19" id="Footnote_2_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_19"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_20" id="Footnote_3_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_20"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 20.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_21" id="Footnote_4_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_21"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_22" id="Footnote_5_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_22"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 21.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XVII" id="I_XVII">XVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> concerning Place and Magnitude -says,<a name="FNanchor_1_23" id="FNanchor_1_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_23" class="fnanchor">[1]</a>, that <i>Place is nothing out of the mind, nor -Magnitude any thing within it; for Place is a meer -Phantasme of a body of such quantity and figure, and -Magnitude a peculiar accident of the body</i>; but this doth -not well agree with my reason, for I believe that Place, -Magnitude and Body are but one thing, and that -Place is as true an extension as Magnitude, and not a -feigned one; Neither am I of his opinion, <i>that Place -is Immoveable</i>, but that place moves, according as the -body moveth, for not any body wants place, because -place and body is but one thing, and wheresoever is -body, there is also place, and wheresoever is place, there -is body, as being one and the same; Wherefore <i>Motion -cannot be a relinquishing of one place and acquiring another</i>,<a name="FNanchor_2_24" id="FNanchor_2_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_24" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -for there is no such thing as place different from -body, but what is called change of place, is nothing -but change of corporeal motions; for, say an house -stands in such a place, if the house be gone, the place is -gone also, as being impossible that the place of the house -should remain, when the house is taken away; like as -a man when he is gone out of his chamber, his place is -gone too; 'Tis true, if the ground or foundation do -yet remain, one may say, there stood such an house heretofore, -but yet the place of the house is not there really -at that present, unless the same house be built up again -as it was before, and then it hath its place as before; Nevertheless -the house being not there, it cannot be said -that either place or house are annihilated, <i>viz.</i>, when -the materials are dissolved, no not when transformed into -millions of several other figures, for the house remains -still in the power of all those several parts of matter; -and as for <i>space</i>, it is onely a distance betwixt some -parts or bodies; But an <i>Empty place</i> signifies to my opinion -Nothing, for if place and body are one and the -same, and empty is as much as nothing; then certainly -these two words cannot consist together, but are destructive -to one another. Concerning, that your <i>Author</i> -says,<a name="FNanchor_3_25" id="FNanchor_3_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_25" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>Two bodies cannot be together in the same place, nor -one body in two places at the same time</i>, is very true, for -there are no more places then bodies, nor more bodies -then places, and this is to be understood as well of -the grosser, as the purest parts of nature, of the mind -as well as of the body, of the rational and sensitive animate -matter as well as of the inanimate, for there is no -matter, how pure and subtil soever, but is imbodied, -and all that hath body hath place. Likewise I am of -his opinion,<a name="FNanchor_4_26" id="FNanchor_4_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_26" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <i>That one body hath always one and the same -magnitude</i>; for, in my opinion, magnitude, place and -body do not differ, and as place, so magnitude can never -be separated from body. But when he speaks of -<i>Rest</i>, I cannot believe there is any such thing truly in -Nature, for it is impossible to prove, that any thing is -without Motion, either consistent, or composing, or -dissolving, or transforming motions, or the like, although -not altogether perceptible by our senses, for all the -Matter is either moving or moved, and although the -moved parts are not capable to receive the nature of self-motion -from the self-moving parts, yet these self-moving -parts, being joyned and mixt with all other parts of the -moved matter, do always move the same; for the -Moved or Inanimate part of Matter, although it is a -Part of it self, yet it is so intermixt with the self-moving -Animate Matter, as they make but one Body; and -though some parts of the Inanimate may be as pure as -the Sensitive Animate Matter, yet they are never so subtil -as to be self-moving; Wherefore the Sensitive moves -in the Inanimate, and the Rational in the Sensitive, but -often the Rational moves in it self. And, although -there is no rest in nature, nevertheless Matter could -have been without Motion, when as it is impossible that -Matter could be without place or magnitude, no more -then Variety can be without motion; And thus much -at this present: I conclude, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_23" id="Footnote_1_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_23"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 8. <i>a.</i> 5.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_24" id="Footnote_2_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_24"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 10.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_25" id="Footnote_3_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_25"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 8.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_26" id="Footnote_4_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_26"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 5.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XVIII" id="I_XVIII">XVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Passing by those Chapters of your <i>Authors</i>, that -treat of <i>Power and Act, Identy and Difference, Analogisme, -Angle and Figure, Figures deficient, -dimension of Circles</i>, and several others, most of which -belong to art, as to Geometry, and the like; I am come -to that wherein he discourses of <i>Sense</i> and <i>Animal Motion</i>, -saying,<a name="FNanchor_1_27" id="FNanchor_1_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_27" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That some Natural bodies have in themselves -the patterns almost of all things, and others of none -at all</i>; Whereof my opinion is, that the sensitive and -rational parts of Matter are the living and knowing parts -of Nature, and no part of nature can challenge them -onely to it self, nor no creature can be sure, that sense is -onely in Animal-kind, and reason in Man-kind; for -can any one think or believe that Nature is ignorant and -dead in all her other parts besides Animals? Truly -this is a very unreasonable opinion; for no man, as wise -as he thinks himself, nay were all Man-kind joyned into -one body, yet they are not able to know it, unless -there were no variety of parts in nature, but onely one -whole and individeable body, for other Creatures may -know and perceive as much as Animals, although they -have not the same Sensitive Organs, nor the same manner -or way of Perception. Next your <i>Author</i> says,<a name="FNanchor_2_28" id="FNanchor_2_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_28" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -<i>The cause of Sense or Perception consists herein, that the -first organ of sense is touched and pressed; For when the -uttermost part of the organ is pressed, it no sooner yields, -but the part next within it is pressed also, and in this manner -the pressure or motion is propagated through all the -parts of the organ to the innermost. And thus also the -pressure of the uttermost part proceeds from the pressure of -some more remote body, and so continually, till we come to -that, from which, as from its fountain, we derive the -Phantasme or Idea, that is made in us by our sense: And -this, whatsoever it be, is that we commonly call the object; -Sense therefore is some Internal motion in the Sentient, -generated by some Internal motion of the Parts of the object, -and propagated through all the media to the innermost -part of the organ. Moreover there being a resistance or -reaction in the organ, by reason of its internal motion against -the motion propagated from the object, there is also -an endeavour in the organ opposite to the endeavour proceeding -from the object, and when that endeavour inwards -is the last action in the act of sense, then from the -reaction a Phantasme or Idea has its being.</i> This is your -<i>Authors</i> opinion, which if it were so, perception could -not be effected so suddenly, nay I think the sentient by so -many pressures in so many perceptions, would at last -be pressed to death, besides the organs would take a -great deal of hurt, nay totally be removed out of their -places, so as the eye would in time be prest into the centre -of the brain; And if there were any Resistance, Reaction -or Indeavour in the organ, opposite to the Endeavour -of the object, there would, in my opinion, be always -a war between the animal senses and the objects, -the endeavour of the objects pressing one way, and the -senses pressing the other way, and if equal in their -strengths, they would make a stop, and the sensitive organs -would be very much pained. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, in -my opinion, it would be like that Custom which formerly -hath been used at <i>Newcastle</i>, when a man was -married, the guests divided themselves, behind and -before the Bridegroom, the one party driving him back, -the other forwards, so that one time a Bridegroom was -killed in this fashion; But certainly Nature hath a -more quick and easie way of giving intelligence and -knowledg to her Creatures, and doth not use such constraint -and force in her actions; Neither is sense or sensitive -perception a meer Phantasme or Idea, but a Corporeal -action of the sensitive and rational matter, and -according to the variation of the objects or patterns, and -the sensitive and rational motions, the perception also is -various, produced not by external pressure, but by internal -self-motion, as I have declared heretofore; and -to prove, that the sensitive and rational corporeal motions -are the onely cause of perception; I say, if those -motions in an animal move in another way, and -not to such perceptions, then that animal can neither -hear, see, taste, smell nor touch, although all his sensitive -organs be perfect, as is evident in a man falling into -a swoon, where all the time he is in a swoon, the pressure -of the objects is made without any effect; Wherefore, -as the sensitive and rational corporeal motions -make all that is in nature; so likewise they make perception, -as being perception it self, for all self-motion is -perception, but all perception is not animal perception; -or after an animal way; and therefore sense cannot decay -nor die, but what is called a decay or death, is nothing -else but a change or alteration of those Motions. -But you will say, <i>Madam</i>, it may be, that one body, -as an object, leaves the print of its figure, in the next -adjoyning body, until it comes to the organ of sense, I -answer that then soft bodies onely must be pressed, and -the object must be so hard as to make a print, and as for -rare parts of matter, they are not able to retain a print -without self-motion; Wherefore it is not probable that -the parts of air should receive a print, and print the same -again upon the adjoyning part, until the last part of the -air print it upon the eye; and that the exterior parts of -the organ should print upon the interior, till it come to -the centre of the Brain, without self-motion. Wherefore -in my opinion, Perception is not caused either by -the printing of objects, nor by pressures, for pressures -would make a general stop of all natural motions, especially -if there were any reaction or resistence of sense; -but according to my reason, the sensitive and rational -corporeal motions in one body, pattern out the Figure -of another body, as of an exterior object, which may be -done easily without any pressure or reaction; I will not -say, that there is no pressure or reaction in Nature, but -pressure and reaction doth not make perception, for the -sensitive and rational parts of matter make all perception -and variety of motion, being the most subtil parts of Nature, -as self-moving, as also divideable, and composeable, -and alterable in their figurative motions, for this -Perceptive matter can change its substance into any figure -whatsoever in nature, as being not bound to one -constant figure. But having treated hereof before, and -being to say more of it hereafter, this shall suffice for -the present, remaining always,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_27" id="Footnote_1_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_27"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>C.</i> 25. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_28" id="Footnote_2_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_28"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XIX" id="I_XIX">XIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>To discourse of the World and Stars, is more then -I am able to do, wanting the art of Astronomy -and Geometry; wherefore passing by that Chapter -of your Author, I am come to that<a name="FNanchor_1_29" id="FNanchor_1_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_29" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> wherein he -treats of Light, Heat and Colours; and to give you my -opinion of Light, I say, it is not the light of the Sun, -that makes an Animal see, for we can see inwardly in -Dreams without the Suns light, but it is the sensitive -and rational Motions in the Eye and Brain that make -such a figure as Light; For if Light did press upon the -Eye, according to your <i>Authors</i> opinion, it might put -the Eye into as much pain as Fire doth, when it sticks -its points into our skin or flesh. The same may be said of -Colours, for the sensitive motions make such a figure, -which is such a Colour, and such a Figure, which is -such a Colour; Wherefore Light, Heat and Colour, -are not bare and bodiless qualities, but such figures -made by corporeal self-motions, and are as well real -and corporeal objects as other figures are; and when -these figures change or alter, it is onely that their motions -alter, which may alter and change heat into cold, -and light into darkness, and black colour into white. But -by reason the motions of the Sun are so constant, as the -motions of any other kind of Creatures, it is no more -subject to be altered then all the World, unless Nature -did it by the command of God; for though the Parts -of self-moving Matter be alterable, yet all are not altered; -and this is the reason, that the figure of Light in our eye -and brain is altered, as well as it is alterable, but not the real -figure of the Sun, neither doth the Sun enter our eyes; -and as the Light of the Sun is made or patterned in the -eye, so is the light of Glow-worms-tails, and Cats-eyes, -that shine in the dark, made not by the Sun's, but their -own motions in their own parts; The like when we -dream of Light, the sensitive corporeal motions working -inwardly, make the figure of light on the inside of -the eye, as they did pattern out the figure of light on the -outside of the eye when awake, and the objects before -them; for the sensitive motions of the eye pattern out the -figure of the object in the eye, and the rational motions -make the same figure in their own substance. But there -is some difference between those figures that perceive -light, and those that are light themselves; for when we -sleep, there is made the figure of light, but not from a -copy; but when the eye seeth light, that figure is made -from a copy of the real figure of the Sun; but those -lights which are inherent, as in Glow-worms-tails, are -original lights, in which is as much difference as between -a Man and his Picture; and as for the swiftness of -the Motions of light, and the violence of the Motions -of fire, it is very probable they are so, but they are a certain -particular kind or sort of swift and violent motions; -neither will all sorts of swift and violent motions make -fire or light, as for example the swift and violent Circular -motion of a Whirlewind neither makes light nor fire; -Neither is all fire light, nor all light fire, for there is a -sort of dead fire, as in Spices, Spirits, Oyles, and the -like; and several sorts of lights, which are not hot, as -the light which is made in Dreams, as also the inherent -lights in Glow-worms, Cats-eyes, Fish-bones, and the -like; all which several fires and lights are made by the -self-moving matter and motions distinguishable by their -figures, for those Motions make such a figure for the -Suns light, such a figure for Glow-worms light, such a -figure for Cats-eyes light, and so some alteration in every -sort of light; The same for Fire, onely Fire-light -is a mixt figure, as partly of the figure of Fire, and partly -of the figure of Light: Also Colours are made after -the like manner, <i>viz.</i> so many several Colours, so many -several Figures; and as these Figures are less or more -different, so are the Colours.</p> - -<p>Thus, <i>Madam</i>, whosoever will study Nature, must -consider the Figures of every Creature, as well as their -Motions, and must not make abstractions of Motion -and Figure from Matter, nor of Matter from Motion -and Figure, for they are inseparable, as being but one -thing, <i>viz.</i> Corporeal Figurative Motions; and whosoever -conceives any of them as abstract, will, in my opinion, -very much erre; but men are apt to make more -difficulties and enforcements in nature then nature ever -knew. But to return to Light: There is no better argument -to prove that all objects of sight are figured in the -Eye, by the sensitive, voluntary or self-motions, without -the pressure of objects, but that not onely the pressure -of light would hurt the tender Eye, but that the -eye doth not see all objects according to their Magnitude, -but sometimes bigger, sometimes less: as for example, when -the eye looks through a small passage, as a Perspective-glass, -by reason of the difficulty of seeing a body -through a small hole, and the double figure of the glass -being convex and concave, the corporeal motions use -more force, by which the object is enlarged, like as a -spark of fire by force is dilated into a great fire, and a -drop of water by blowing into a bubble; so the corporeal -motions do double and treble their strength, making -the Image of the object exceeding large in the eye; for -though the eye be contracted, yet the Image in the eye -is enlarged to a great extension; for the sensitive and rational -matter is extremely subtil, by reason it is extreamly pure, -by which it hath more means and ways of magnifying -then the Perspective-glass. But I intend to write -more of this subject in my next, and so I break off here, -resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_29" id="Footnote_1_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_29"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 27.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XX" id="I_XX">XX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Some perhaps will question the truth or probability -of my saying, that Light is a Body, objecting that -if light were a body, when the Sun is absent or retires -under our Horizon, its light would leave an empty -place, or if there were no empty place but all full, the -light of the Sun at its return would not have room to display -it self, especially in so great a compass as it doth, for -two bodies cannot be in one place at one time. I <i>answer</i>, -all bodies carry their places along with them, for body -and place go together and are inseparable, and when the -light of the Sun is gone, darkness succeeds, and when -darkness is gone, light succeeds, so that it is with light and -darkness as with all Creatures else; For you cannot believe, -that if the whole World were removed, there -would be a place of the world left, for there cannot be -an empty nothing, no more then there can be an empty -something; but if the world were annihilated, the place -would be annihilated too, place and body being one and -the same thing; and therefore in my opinion, there be -no more places then there are bodies, nor no more bodies -then there are places.</p> - -<p>Secondly, They will think it absurd that I say, the -eye can see without light; but in my opinion it seems -not absurd, but very rational, for we may see in dreams, -and some do see in the dark, not in their fancy or imagination, -but really; and as for dreams, the sensitive -corporeal motions make a light on the inside of the organ -of sight really, as I have declared in my former Letter. -But that we do not see ordinarily without exterior -Light, the reason is, that the sensitive Motions cannot -find the outward objects to pattern out without exterior -light, but all perception doth not proceed from light, -for all other perception besides animal sight requires not -light. Neither in my opinion, doth the Perception of sight -in all Creatures but Animals, but yet Animals do often -see in the dark, and in sleep: I will not say but that the -animate matter which by self-motion doth make the -Perception of light with other perceptive Figures, and so -animal perceptive light may be the presenter or ground -perceptive figure of sight; yet the sensitive corporeal -motions can make other figures without the help of -light, and such as light did never present: But when -the eye patterns out an exterior object presented by light, -it patterns also out the object of light; for the sensitive -motions can make many figures by one act, not onely -in several organs, but in one organ; as for example, -there is presented to sight a piece of Imbroydery, wherein -is silk, silver and gold upon Sattin in several forms or -figures, as several flowers, the sensitive motions streight -by one and the same act, pattern out all those several figures -of flowers, as also the figures of Silk, Silver, Gold -and Sattin, without any pressure of these objects, or -motions in the medium, for if they all should press, the -eye would no more see the exterior objects, then the -nose, being stopt, could smell a presented perfume.</p> - -<p><i>Thirdly</i>, They may ask me, if sight be made in -the eye, and proceeds not from the outward object, what -is the reason that we do not see inwardly, but outwardly -as from us? I answer, when we see objects outwardly, -as from us, then the sensitive motions work on the outside -of the organ, which organ being outwardly convex, -causes us to see outwardly, as from us, but in -dreams we see inwardly; also the sensitive motions do -pattern out the distance together with the object: But -you will say, the body of the distance, as the air, cannot -be perceived, and yet we can perceive the distance; I -answer, you could not perceive the distance, but by -such or such an object as is subject to your sight; for you -do not see the distance more then the air, or the like rare -body, that is between grosser objects; for if there -were no stars, nor planets, nor clouds, nor earth, nor -water, but onely air, you would not see any space or -distance; but light being a more visible body then air, -you might figure the body of air by light, but so, as -in an extensive or dilating way; for when the mind or -the rational matter conceives any thing that hath not -such an exact figure, or is not so perceptible by our senses; -then the mind uses art, and makes such figures, -which stand like to that; as for example, to express infinite -to it self, it dilates it parts without alteration, and -without limitation or circumference; Likewise, when -it will conceive a constant succession of Time, it draws -out its parts into the figure of a line; and if eternity, it -figures a line without beginning, and end. But as for -Immaterial, no mind can conceive that, for it cannot put it -self into nothing, although it can dilate and rarifie it self -to an higher degree, but must stay within the circle of -natural bodies, as I within the circle of your Commands, -to express my self</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and obedient Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXI" id="I_XXI">XXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Heat and Cold, according to your <i>Authors</i> opinion, -are made by Dilation and Contraction: for -says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_30" id="FNanchor_1_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_30" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>When the Motion of the ambient æthereal -substance makes the spirits and fluid parts of our bodies tend -outwards, we acknowledg heat, but by the indeavour inwards -of the same spirits and humors we feel cold: so that -to cool is to make the exterior parts of the body endeavour -inwards, by a motion contrary to that of calefaction, by which -the internal parts are called outwards. He therefore that -would know the cause of Cold, must find by what motion -the exterior parts of any body endeavour to retire inwards.</i> -But I desire you to consider, <i>Madam</i>, that there be moist -Colds, and dry Heats, as well as dry Colds, and moist -Heats; wherefore all sorts of Cold are not made by the -retyring of parts inwards, which is contraction or attraction; -neither are all sorts of Heat made by parts -tending outwards, which is dilation or rarefaction; for a -moist cold is made by dilation, and a dry heat by contraction, -as well as a moist heat is made by dilation, and -a dry cold by contraction: But your <i>Author</i> makes not -this difference, but onely a difference between a dilated -heat, and a contracted cold; but because a cold wind is -made by breath blown thorow pinched or contracted -lips, and an hot wind by breath through opened and -extended lips, should we judg that all heat and cold -must be made after one manner or way? The contracted -mouth makes Wind as well as the dilated, but yet -Wind is not made that way, as heat and cold; for it may -be, that onely the air pressed together makes wind, or it -may be that the corporeal motions in the air may change -air into wind, as they change water into vapour, and vapour -into air; or it may be something else that is invisible -and rare, as air; and there may be several sorts of -wind, air, heat, cold, as of all other Creatures, more -then man is capable to know. As for your <i>Authors</i> -opinion concerning the congealing of Water, and how -Ice is made, I will not contradict it, onely I think nature -hath an easier way to effect it, then he describes; -Wherefore my opinion is, that it is done by altering -motions; as for example, the corporeal motions making -the figure of water by dilation in a Circle figure, -onely alter from such a dilating circular figure into a -contracted square, which is Ice, or into such a contracted -triangle, as is snow: And thus water and vapour -may be changed with ease, without any forcing, pressing, -raking, or the like. The same may be said of -hard and bent bodies; and of restitution, as also of air, -thunder and lightning, which are all done by an easie -change of motion, and changing into such or such a figure -is not the motion of Generation, which is to build -a new house with old materials, but onely a Transformation; -I say a new house with old materials; not that -I mean there is any new Creation in nature, of any -thing that was not before in nature; for nature is not -God, to make new beings out of nothing, but any thing -may be called new, when it is altered from one figure -into another. I add no more at this time, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_30" id="Footnote_1_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_30"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>C.</i> 28. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXII" id="I_XXII">XXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>The Generation of sound, according to your worthy -<i>Authors</i> opinion, is as follows: <i>As Vision,</i> -says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_31" id="FNanchor_1_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_31" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>so hearing is Generated by the medium, but -not in the same manner; for sight is from pressure, that -is, from an endeavour, in which there is no perceptible progression -of any of the parts of the medium, but one part urging -or thrusting on another, propagateth that action successively -to any distance whatsoever; whereas the motion of -the medium, by which sound is made, is a stroke; for when -we hear, the drum of the Ear, which is the first organ of -hearing, is strucken, and the drum being stricken, the</i> Pia -Mater <i>is also shaken, and with it the arteries inserted into -it, by which the action propagated to the heart it self, by -the reaction of the heart a Phantasme is made which we call -Sound.</i> Thus far your <i>Author</i>: To which give me -leave to reply, that I fear, if the Ear was bound to hear -any loud Musick, or another sound a good while, it -would soundly be beaten, and grow sore and bruised -with so many strokes; but since a pleasant sound would -be rendred very unpleasant in this manner, my opinion -is, that like as in the Eye, so in the Ear the corporeal -sensitive motions do pattern out as many several figures, -as sounds are presented to them; but if these motions be -irregular, then the figure of the sound in the ear is not -perfect according to the original; for if it be, that the -motions are tyred with figuring, or the object of sound -be too far distant from the sensitive organ, then they -move slowly and weakly, not that they are tyred or weak -in strength, but with working and repeating one and the -same object, and so through love to variety, change -from working regularly to move irregularly, so as not -to pattern outward objects as they ought, and then there -are no such patterns made at all, which we call to be -deaf; and sometimes the sensitive motions do not so readily -perceive a soft sound near, as a stronger farther off. -But to prove it is not the outward object of sound with -its striking or pressing motion, nor the medium, that -causes this perception of sense, if there be a great solid body, -as a wall, or any other partition betwixt two rooms, -parting the object and the sensitive organ, so, as the -sound is not able to press it, nevertheless the perception -will be made; And as for pipes to convey sounds, the -perception is more fixt and perfecter in united then in -dilated or extended bodies, and then the sensitive motions -can make perfecter patterns; for the stronger the -objects are, the more perfect are the figures and patterns -of the objects, and the more perfect is the perception. -But when the sound is quite out of the ear, then the -sensitive motions have altered the patterning of such figures -to some other action; and when the sound fadeth -by degrees, then the figure or pattern alters by degrees; -but for the most part the sensitive corporeal motions alter -according as the objects are presented, or the perception -patterns out. Neither do they usually make figures -of outward objects, if not perceived by the senses, -unless through Irregularities as in Mad men, which see -such and such things, when as these things are not neer, -and then the sensitive motions work by rote, or after -their own voluntary invention. As for Reflexion, it is -a double perception, and so a double figure of one object; -like as many pictures of one man, where some are -more perfect then others, for a copy of a copy is not so -perfect as a copy of an original. But the recoyling of -sound is, that the sensitive motions in the ear begin a new -pattern, before they dissolved the former, so as there is -no perfect alteration or change, from making to dissolving, -but pattern is made upon pattern, which causes a -confusion of figures, the one being neither perfectly finished, -nor the other perfectly made. But it is to be -observed, that not always the sensitive motions in the -organs take their pattern from the original, but from copies; -as for example, the sensitive motions in the eye, -pattern out the figure of an eye in a glass, and so do not -take a pattern from the original it self, but by an other pattern, -representing the figure of the eye in a Looking-glass; -The same doth the Ear, by patterning out Ecchoes, -which is but a pattern of a pattern; But when as -a man hears himself speak or make a sound, then the corporeal -sensitive motions in the Ear, pattern out the object -or figure made by the motions of the tongue and the -throat, which is voice; By which we may observe, that -there may be many figures made by several motions -from one original; as for example, the figure of a -word is made in a mans mouth, then the copy of that -figure is made in the ear, then in the brain, and then -in the memory, and all this in one Man: Also a word -being made in a mans mouth, the air takes a copy or -many copies thereof; but the Ear patterns them both -out, first the original coming from the mouth, and -then the copy made in the air, which is called an Eccho, -and yet not any strikes or touches each others parts, onely -perceives and patterns out each others figure. Neither -are their substances the same, although the figures be -alike; for the figure of a man may be carved in wood, -then cut in brass, then in stone, and so forth, where the -figure may be always the same, although the substances -which do pattern out the figure are several, <i>viz.</i> Wood, -Brass, Stone, &c. and so likewise may the figure of a -stone be figured in the fleshy substance of the Eye, or -the figure of light or colour, and yet the substance of the -Eye remains full the same; neither doth the substantial -figure of a stone, or tree, patterned out by the sensitive -corporeal motions, in the flesh of an animal eye, change -from being a vegetable or mineral, to an animal, and if -this cannot be done by nature, much less by art; for if the -figure of an animal be carved in wood or stone, it doth -not give the wood or stone any animal knowledg, nor -an animal substance, as flesh, bones, blood, &c. no -more doth the patterning or figuring of a Tree give a -vegetable knowledg, or the substance of wood to the -eye, for the figure of an outward object doth not alter -the substance that patterns it out or figures it, but the patterning -substance doth pattern out the figure, in it self, -or in its own substance, so as the figure which is pattern'd, -hath the same life and knowledg with the substance -by and in which it is figured or pattern'd, and the -inherent motions of the same substance; and according -as the sensitive and rational self-moving matter moves, -so figures are made; and thus we see, that lives, knowledges, -motions and figures are all material, and all -Creatures are indued with life, knowledg, motion and -figure, but not all alike or after the same manner. But -to conclude this discourse of perception of Sound, the -Ear may take the object of sound afar off, as well as at a -near distance; not onely if many figures of the same -sound be made from that great distance, but if the interposing -parts be not so thick, close, or many as to hinder -or obscure the object from the animal Perception in the -sensitive organ; for if a man lays his Ear near to the -Ground, the Ear may hear at a far distance, as well as -the Eye can see, for it may hear the noise of a troop afar -off, perception being very subtil and active; Also -there may several Copies be made from the Original, -and from the last Copy nearest to the Ear, the Ear may -take a pattern, and so pattern out the noise in the organ, -without any strokes to the Ear, for the subtil matter -in all Creatures doth inform and perceive. But -this is well to be observed, that the figures of objects -are as soon made, as perceived by the sensitive motions -in their work of patterning. And this is my Opinion -concerning the Perception of Sound, which together -with the rest I leave to your Ladyships and others wiser -Judgment, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_31" id="Footnote_1_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_31"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 29. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXIII" id="I_XXIII">XXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I perceive by your last, that you cannot well apprehend -my meaning, when I say that the print or figure -of a Body Printed or Carved, is not made by -the motions of the body Printing or Carving it, but by -the motions of the body or substance Printed or Carved; -for say you, Doth a piece of Wood carve it self, -or a black Patch of a Lady cut its own figure by its own -motions? Before I answer you, <i>Madam</i>, give me -leave to ask you this question, whether it be the motion -of the hand, or the Instrument, or both, that print or -carve such or such a body? Perchance you will say, -that the motion of the hand moves the Instrument, and -the Instrument moves the Wood which is to be carved: -Then I ask, whether the motion that moves the Instrument, -be the Instruments, or the Hands? Perchance you -will say the Hands; but I answer, how can it be the -Hands motion, if it be in the Instrument? You will -say, perhaps, the motion of the hand is transferred out -of the hand into the instrument, and so from the instrument -into the carved figure; but give me leave to ask -you, was this motion of the hand, that was transferred, -Corporeal or Incorporeal? If you say, Corporeal, -then the hand must become less and weak, but if Incorporeal, -I ask you, how a bodiless motion can have force -and strength to carve and cut? But put an Impossible -proposition, as that there is an Immaterial motion, and -that this Incorporeal motion could be transferred out of -one body into another; then I ask you, when the hand -and instrument cease to move, what is become of the -motion? Perhaps you will say, the motion perishes -or is annihilated, and when the hand and the instrument -do move again, to the carving or cutting of the -figure, then a new Incorporeal Motion is created; Truly -then there will be a perpetual creation and annihilation -of Incorporeal motions, that is, of that which naturally -is nothing; for an Incorporeal being is as much as a natural -No-thing, for Natural reason cannot know nor -have naturally any perception or Idea of an Incorporeal -being: besides, if the motion be Incorporeal, then -it must needs be a supernatural Spirit, for there is not -any thing else Immaterial but they, and then it will be -either an Angel or a Devil, or the Immortal Soul of -man; but if you say it is the supernatural Soul, truly I -cannot be perswaded that the supernatural Soul should -not have any other imployment then to carve or cut -prints, or figures, or move in the hands, or heels, or -legs, or arms of a Man; for other animals have the -same kind of Motions, and then they might have a -Supernatural Soul as well as Man, which moves in -them. But if you say, that these transferrable motions -are material, then every action whereby the hand -moves to the making or moving of some other body, -would lessen the number of the motions in the hand, and -weaken it, so that in the writing of one letter, the hand -would not be able to write a second letter, at least not -a third. But I pray, <i>Madam</i>, consider rationally, -that though the Artificer or Workman be the occasion -of the motions of the carved body, yet the motions of -the body that is carved, are they which put themselves -into such or such a figure, or give themselves such or such -a print as the Artificer intended; for a Watch, although -the Artist or Watch-maker be the occasional cause that -the Watch moves in such or such an artificial figure, as -the figure of a Watch, yet it is the Watches own motion -by which it moves; for when you carry the Watch -about you, certainly the Watch-makers hand is not -then with it as to move it; or if the motion of the Watch-makers -hand be transferred into the Watch, then certainly -the Watch-maker cannot make another Watch, -unless there be a new creation of new motions made -in his hands; so that God and Nature would be as much -troubled and concerned in the making of Watches, as in -the making of a new World; for God created this -World in six days, and rested the seventh day, but this -would be a perpetual Creation; Wherefore I say that -some things may be Occasional causes of other things, -but not the Prime or Principal causes; and this distinction -is very well to be considered, for there are no frequenter -mistakes then to confound these two different -causes, which make so many confusions in natural Philosophy; -and this is the Opinion of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXIV" id="I_XXIV">XXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In answer to your question, What makes Eccho, I -say, it is that which makes all the effects of Nature, -<i>viz.</i> self-moving matter; I know, the common opinion -is, that Eccho is made like as the figure of a Face, -or the like, in a Looking-glass, and that the Reverberation -of sound is like the Reflection of sight in a Looking-glass; -But I am not of that opinion, for both Eccho, -and that which is called the Reflection in a Looking-glass, -are made by the self-moving matter, by way of -patterning and copying out. But then you will ask me, -whether the glass takes the copy of the face, or the face -prints its copy on the glass, or whether it be the <i>medium</i> -of light and air that makes it? I answer, although many -Learned men say, that as all perception, so also the -seeing of ones face in a Looking-glass, and Eccho, are -made by impression and reaction; yet I cannot in my -simplicity conceive it, how bodies that come not near, -or touch each other, can make a figure by impression -and reaction: They say it proceeds from the motions of -the <i>Medium</i> of light, or air, or both, <i>viz.</i> that the <i>Medium</i> -is like a long stick with two ends, whereof one -touches the object, the other the organ of sense, and -that one end of it moving, the other moves also at the -same point of Time, by which motions it may make -many several figures; But I cannot conceive, how this -motion of pressing forward and backward should make -so many figures, wherein there is so much variety and -curiosity. But, say light and air are as one figure, -and like as a seal do print another body; I answer, if -any thing could print, yet it is not probable, that so soft -and rare bodies as light and air, could print such solid -bodies as glass, nor could air by reverberation make such a -sound as Eccho. But mistake me not, for, <i>I do not say</i>, -that the Corporeal motions of light or air, cannot, -or do not pencil, copie, or pattern out any figure, -for both light and air are very active in such sorts of -Motions, but I say, they cannot do it on any other bodies -but their own. But to cut off tedious and unnecessary -disputes, I return to the expressing of my own opinion, -and believe, that the glass in its own substance -doth figure out the copy of the face, or the like, and -from that copy the sensitive motions in the eyes take another -copy, and so the rational from the sensitive; and -in this manner is made both rational and sensitive perception, -sight and knowledg. The same with Ecchoes; -for the air patterns out the copy of the sound, and then -the sensitive corporeal motions in the ear pattern again -this copy from the air, and so do make the perception and -sense of hearing. You may ask me, <i>Madam</i>, if it be so, that -the glass and the air copy out the figure of the face and -of sound, whether the Glass may be said to see and the Air -to speak? I answer, I cannot tell that; for though I say, that -the air repeats the words, and the glass represents the face, -yet I cannot guess what their perceptions are, onely this -I may say, that the air hath an elemental, and the glass -a mineral, but not an animal perception. But if these -figures were made by the pressures of several objects or -parts, and by reaction, there could not be such variety -as there is, for they could but act by one sort of motion: -Likewise is it improbable, that sounds, words or voices, -should like a company of Wild-Geese fly in the air, -and so enter into the ears of the hearers, as they into -their nests: Neither can I conceive, how in this manner -a word can enter so many ears, that is, be divided -into every ear, and yet strike every ear with an undivided -vocal sound; You will say, as a small fire doth -heat and warm all those that stand by; for the heat issues -from the fire, as the light from the Sun. I answer, all -what issues and hath motion, hath a Body, and yet -most learned men deny that sound, light and heat have -bodies: But if they grant of light that it has a body, they -say it moves and presses the air, and the air the eye, and -so of heat; which if so, then the air must not move to -any other motion but light, and onely to one sort of -light, as the Suns light; for if it did move in any other -motion, it would disturb the light; for if a Bird did but -fly in the air, it would give all the region of air another -motion, and so put out, or alter the light, or at -least disturb it; and wind would make a great disturbance -in it. Besides, if one body did give another body -motion, it must needs give it also substance, for motion -is either something or nothing, body or no body, -substance or no substance; if nothing, it cannot enter -into another body; if something, it must lessen the bulk -of the body it quits, and increase the bulk of the body it -enters, and so the Sun and Fire with giving light and -heat, would become less, for they cannot both give and -keep at once, for this is as impossible, as for a man to -give to another creature his human Nature, and yet to -keep it still. Wherefore my opinion is for heat, that -when many men stand round about a fire, and are heated -and warmed by it, the fire doth not give them any -thing, nor do they receive something from the fire, but -the sensitive motions in their bodies pattern out the object -of the fires heat, and so they become more or less -hot according as their patterns are numerous or perfect; -And as for air, it patterns out the light of the Sun, and -the sensitive motions in the eyes of animals pattern out -the light in the air. The like for Ecchoes, or any other -sound, and for the figures which are presented in a -Looking-glass. And thus millions of parts or creatures -may make patterns of one or more objects, and the -objects neither give nor loose any thing. And this I -repeat here, that my meaning of Perception may be the -better understood, which is the desire of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXV" id="I_XXV">XXV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM</i></p> - -<p>I perceive you are not fully satisfied with my former -Letter concerning Eccho, and a figure presented in a -Looking-glass; for you say, how is it possible, if -Eccho consists in the ears patterning out of a voice or -sound, but that it will make a confusion in all the parts of -the air? My answer is, that I doe not say that Eccho is -onely made by the patterning out of the voice or sound, -but by repeating the same voice or sound, which repetition -is named an Eccho, for millions of ears in animals may -pattern out a voice or words, and yet never repeat them, -and so may millions of parts of the air; wherefore Eccho -doth not consist in the bare patterning out, but in -the repetition of the same sound or words, which are -pattern'd out; and so some parts of the air may at one -and the same time pattern out a sound and not repeat -it, and some may both pattern out, and repeat it, -but some may neither pattern out, nor repeat it, and therefore -the Repetition, not the bare Patterning out is called -Eccho: Just as when two or more men do answer or mock -each other, and repeat each others words, it is not necessary, -if there were a thousand standers by, that they -should all do the same. And as for the figure presented -in a Looking-glass, I cannot conceive it to be made by -pressure and reaction; for although there is both pressure -and reaction in nature, and those very frequent amongst -natures Parts, yet they do neither make perception -nor production, although both pressure and reaction -are made by corporeal self-motions; Wherefore the -figure presented in a Looking-glass, or any other smooth -glassie body, is, in my opinion, onely made by the motions -of the Looking-glass, which do both pattern out, -and present the figure of an external object in the Glass: -But you will say, why do not the motions of other bodies -pattern out, and present the figures of external objects, -as well as smooth glassie bodies do? I answer, they -may pattern out external objects, for any thing I know; -but the reason that their figures are not presented to our -eyes, lies partly in the presenting subject it self, partly -in our sight; for it is observed, that two things are -chiefly required in a subject that will present the figure of -an external object; first it must be smooth, even and -glassie, next it must not be transparent: the first is manifest -by experience; for the subject being rough and -uneven, will never be able to present such a figure; as -for example, A piece of steel rough and unpolished, although -it may perhaps pattern out the figure of an external -object, yet it will never present its figure, but as soon -as it is polished, and made smooth and glassie, the figure -is presently perceived. But this is to be observed, -that smooth and glassie bodies do not always pattern out -exterior objects exactly, but some better, some worse; -like as Painters have not all the same ingenuity; neither -do all eyes pattern out all objects exactly; which -proves that the perception of sight is not made by pressure -and reaction, otherwise there would be no difference, -but all eyes would see alike. Next I say, it is -observed, that the subject which will present the figure -of an external object, must not be transparent; the reason -is, that the figure of Light being a substance of a -piercing and penetrating quality, hath more force on -transparent, then on other solid dark bodies, and so -disturbs the figure of an external object pattern'd out -in a transparent body, and quite over-masters it. But -you will say, you have found by experience, that if -you hold a burning Candle before a Transparent-glass, -although it be in an open Sun-light, yet the figure -of light and flame of the Candle will clearly be -seen in the Glass. I answer, that it is an other thing with -the figure of Candle-light, then of a duskish or dark -body; for a Candle-light, though it is not of the same -sort as the Suns light, yet it is of the same nature and quality, -and therefore the Candle-light doth resist and oppose -the light of the Sun, so that it cannot have so much -power over it, as over the figures of other bodies patterned -out and presented in Transparent-glass. Lastly, -I say, that the fault oftentimes lies in the perceptive motions -of our sight, which is evident by a plain and Concave-glass; -for in a plain Looking-glass, the further -you go from it, the more your figure presented in the -glass seems to draw backward; and in a Concave-glass, -the nearer you go to it, the more seems your figure to -come forth: which effects are like as an house or tree -appears to a Traveller; for, as the man moves from the -house or tree, so the house or tree seems to move from -the man; or like one that sails upon a Ship, who imagines -that the Ship stands still, and the Land moves; -when as yet it is the Man and the Ship that moves, and -not the House, or Tree, or the Land; so when a Man -turns round in a quick motion, or when his head is dizzie, -he imagines the room or place, where he is, turns round. -Wherefore it is the Inherent Perceptive motions in the -Eye, and not the motions in the Looking-glass, which -cause these effects. And as for several figures that are -presented in one glass, it is absurd to imagine that so -many several figures made by so many several motions -should touch the eye; certainly this would make such a -disturbance, if all figures were to enter or but to touch -the eye, as the eye would not perceive any of them, at -lead not distinctly; Wherefore it is most probable that -the glass patterns out those figures, and the sensitive corporeal -motions in the eye take again a pattern from -those figures patterned out by the glass, and so make -copies of copies; but the reason why several figures -are presented in one glass in several places, is, that -two perfect figures cannot be in one point, nor made -by one motion, but by several corporeal motions. -Concerning a Looking-glass, made in the form or -shape of a Cylinder, why it represents the figure of -an external object in an other shape and posture then -the object is, the cause is the shape and form of the -Glass, and not the patterning motions in the Glass. But -this discourse belongs properly to the Opticks, wherefore -I will leave it to those that are versed in that Art, to -enquire and search more after the rational truth thereof. -In the mean time, my opinion is, that though the object -is the occasion of the figure presented in a Looking-glass, -yet the figure is made by the motions of the glass -or body that presents it, and that the figure of the glass -perhaps may be patterned out as much by the motions -of the object in its own substance, as the figure of the -object is patterned out and presented by the motions of -the glass in its own body or substance. And thus I conclude -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXVI" id="I_XXVI">XXVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since I mentioned in my last that Light did disturb -the figures of External objects presented in Transparent -bodies; you were pleased to ask, Whether -light doth penetrate transparent bodies? I answer, -for anything I know, it may; for when I consider the -subtil, piercing and penetrating nature of light, I believe -it doth; but again, when I consider that light is -presented to our sight by transparent bodies onely, and -not by duskish and dark bodies, and yet that those -duskish bodies are more porous then the transparent bodies, -so that the light hath more passage to pass through -them, then through transparent bodies; but that on the -contrary, those dark bodies, as Wood, and the like, do -quite obscure the light, when as transparent bodies, as -Glass, &c. transmit it, I am half perswaded that the -transparent bodies, as Glass, rather present the Light by -patterning it out, then by giving it passage: Also I -am of a mind, that the air in a room may pattern out the -Light from the Glass, for the Light in a room doth not -appear so clear as in the Glass; also if the Glass be any -way defective, it doth not present the Light so perfectly, -whereas, if it were the penetration of light through -the glass, the light would pass through all sorts of glass -alike, which it doth not, but is more clearly seen through -some, and more obscurely through others, according -to the goodness or purity of the glass. But you may say, -that the light divulges the imperfection or goodness of -the glass; I answer, so it doth of any other objects perceived -by our sight; for light is the presenter of objects -to the sense and perception of sight, and for any thing -I know, the corporeal optick motions make the figure of -light, the ground figure of all other figures patterned out -by the corporeal optick motions, as in dreams, or when -as some do see in the dark, that is, without the help of -exterior light. But you may say, That if the glass and the -air in a room did pattern out the figure of light, those -patterns of light would remain when light is absent: I -answer, That is not usual in nature; for when the object -removes, the Pattern alters; I will not say but that the -corporeal optick motions may work by rote without objects, -but that is irregular, as in some distempers. And -thus, <i>Madam</i>, I have given you my opinion also to -this your question; if you have any more scruples, I -pray let me know of them, and assure your self that I -shall be ready upon all occasions to express my self,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXVII" id="I_XXVII">XXVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your desire is to know, why sound is louder in a -Vault, and in a large Room then in a less? I answer, -A Vault or arched Figure is the freest from -obstruction, as being without corners and points, so as -the sensitive and rational corporeal motions of the Ear -can have a better perception; like as the Eye can see -farthest from a hill then being upon a level ground, -because the prospect is freer from the hill, as without -obstruction, unless it be so cloudy that the clouds do hinder -the perception; And as the eye can have a better -prospect upon a hill, so the ear a stronger perception -in a Vault; And as for sound, that it is better perceived -in a large, then in a little close room or place, it is -somewhat like the perception of sent, for the more the -odorous parts are bruised, the stronger is that perception -of sent, as being repeated double or treble, which makes -the perception stronger, like as a thick body is stronger -then a thin one; So likewise the perception of sound -in the air; for though not all the parts of the air make -repetitions, yet some or many make patterns of the -sound; the truth is, Air is as industrious to divulge -or present a sound, by patterns to the Ear, as light -doth objects to the Eye. But then you may ask -me, Why a long hollow pipe doth convey a voice to -the ear more readily, then any large and open place? -My answer is, That the Parts of the air in a long pipe -are more Composed and not at liberty to wander, so -that upon necessity they must move onely to the patterning -out of the sound, having no choice, which -makes the sound much stronger, and the perception of -the Ear perfecter; But as for Pipes, Vaults, Prospects, -as also figures presented in a room through a little -hole, inverted, and many the like, belongs more to -Artists then to my study, for though Natural Philosophy -gives or points out the Ground, and shews the -reason, yet it is the Artist that Works; Besides it -is more proper for Mathematicians to discourse of, which -study I am not versed in; and so leaving it to them, -I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXVIII" id="I_XXVIII">XXVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>From Sound I am come to Sent, in the discourse -whereof, your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_1_32" id="FNanchor_1_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_32" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> is pleased to set down these -following propositions: 1. <i>That smelling is hindred -by cold and helped by heat</i>: 2. <i>That when the Wind -bloweth from the object, the smell is the stronger, and when it -blows from the sentient towards the object, the weaker, -which by experience is found in dogs, that follow the track -of beasts by the Sent</i>: 3. <i>That such bodies as are last -pervious to the fluid medium, yield less smell then such as -are more pervious</i>: 4. <i>That such bodies as are of their -own nature odorous, become yet more odorous, when they are -bruised</i>: 5. <i>That when the breath is stopped (at least in -man) nothing can be smelt</i>: 6. <i>That the Sense of smelling -is also taken away by the stopping of the nostrils, -though the mouth be left open.</i> To begin from the last, -I say, that the nose is like the other sensitive organs, -which if they be stopt, the corporeal sensitive motions -cannot take copies of the exterior objects, and therefore -must alter their action of patterning to some other, for -when the eye is shut and cannot perceive outward objects -then it works to the Sense of Touch, or on the -inside of the organ to some phantasmes; and so do the -rest of the Senses. As for the stopping of breath, -why it hinders the Sent, the cause is, that the nostrils -and the mouth are the chief organs, to receive air and -to let out breath: but though they be common passages -for air and breath, yet taste is onely made in the mouth -and tongue, and sent in the nose; not by the pressure of -meat, and the odoriferous object, but by patterning -out the several figures or objects of sent and taste, for -the nose and the mouth will smell and taste one, nay several -things at the same time, like as the eye will see light, -colour, and other objects at once, which I think can -hardly be done by pressures; and the reason is, that the -sensitive motions in the sensitive organs make patterns of -several objects at one time, which is the cause, that when -flowers, and such like odoriferous bodies are bruised, -there are as many figures made as there are parts bruised -or divided, and by reason of so many figures the sensitive -knowledg is stronger; but that stones, minerals, and -the like, seem not so strong to our smell, the reason is, -that their parts being close and united, the sensitive motions -in the organ cannot so readily perceive and pattern -them out, as those bodies which are more porous and -divided. But as for the wind blowing the sent either to -or from the sentient, it is like a window or door that by -the motion of opening and shutting, hinders or disturbeth -the sight; for bodies coming between the object -and the organ, make a stop of that perception. And as -for the Dogs smelling out the track of Beasts, the cause -is, that the earth or ground hath taken a copy of that -sent, which copy the sensitive motions in the nose of -the Dog do pattern out, and so long as that figure -or copy lasts, the Dog perceives the sent, but if he -doth not follow or hunt readily, then there is either -no perfect copy made by the ground, or otherwise -he cannot find it, which causes him to seek and smell -about until he hath it; and thus smell is not made -by the motion of the air, but by the figuring motions -in the nose: Where it is also to be observed, -that not onely the motions in one, but in millions of -noses, may pattern out one little object at one time, -and therefore it is not, that the object of sent fills a -room by sending out the sent from its substance, but -that so many figures are made of that object of sent -by so many several sensitive motions, which pattern -the same out; and so the air, or ground, or any other -creature, whose sensitive motions pattern out -the object of sent, may perceive the same, although -their sensitive organs are not like to those of animal -Creatures; for if there be but such sensitive motions -and perceptions, it is no matter for such organs. -Lastly, it is to be observed, That all Creatures have -not the same strength of smelling, but some smell -stronger, some weaker, according to the disposition -of their sensitive motions: Also there be other parts -in the body, which pattern out the object of sent, -besides the nose, but those are interior parts, and -take their patterns from the nose as the organ properly -designed for it; neither is their resentment the -same, because their motions are not alike, for the -stomack may perceive and pattern out a sent with aversion, -when the nose may pattern it out with pleasure. -And thus much also of Sent; I conclude and -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_32" id="Footnote_1_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_32"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 29. <i>art.</i> 12.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXIX" id="I_XXIX">XXIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning your Learned Authors discourse of -Density and Rarity, he defines<a name="FNanchor_1_33" id="FNanchor_1_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_33" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>Thick to be that, -which takes up more parts of a space given; and -thin, which containes fewer parts of the same magnitude: -not that there is more matter in one place then in an other -equal place, but a greater quantity of some named body; -wherefore the multitude and paucity of the parts contained -within the same space do constitute density and rarity.</i> -Whereof my opinion is, That there is no more nor less -space or place then body according to its dilation or -contraction, and that space and place are dilated and -contracted with the body, according to the magnitude -of the body, for body, place and magnitude are -the same thing, only place is in regard of the several -parts of the body, and there is as well space betwixt -things distant a hairs breadth from one another, as betwixt -things distant a million of miles, but yet this space is -nothing from the body; but it makes, that that body -has not the same place with this body, that is, that this -body is not that body, and that this bodies place is not -that bodies place. Next your <i>Author</i> sayes,<a name="FNanchor_2_34" id="FNanchor_2_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_34" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>He -hath already clearly enough demonstrated, that there -can be no beginning of motion, but from an external and -moved body, and that heavy bodies being once cast upwards -cannot be cast down again, but by external motion.</i> -Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I will not speak of your <i>Authors</i> demonstrations, -for it is done most by art, which I have -no knowledg in, but I think I have probably declared, -that all the actions of nature are not forced by one -part, driving, pressing, or shoving another, as a man -doth a wheel-barrow, or a whip a horse; nor by reactions, -as if men were at foot-ball or cuffs, or as men -with carts meeting each other in a narrow lane. But -to prove there is no self-motion in nature, he goes on -and says; <i>To attribute to created bodies the power to -move themselves, what is it else, then to say that there be -creatures which have no dependance upon the Creator?</i> -To which I answer, That if man (who is but a single -part of nature) hath given him by God the power and -a free will of moving himself, why should not God -give it to Nature? Neither can I see, how it can take -off the dependance upon God, more then Eternity; for, -if there be an Eternal Creator, there is also an Eternal -Creature, and if an Eternal Master, an Eternal Servant, -which is Nature; and yet Nature is subject to -Gods Command, and depends upon him; and if all -Gods Attributes be Infinite, then his Bounty is Infinite -also, which cannot be exercised but by an Infinite Gift, -but a Gift doth not cause a less dependance. I do not -say, That man hath an absolute Free-will, or power -to move, according to his desire; for it is not conceived, -that a part can have an absolute power: nevertheless -his motion both of body and mind is a free and self-motion, -and such a self-motion hath every thing in -Nature according to its figure or shape; for motion and -figure, being inherent in matter, matter moves figuratively. -Yet do I not say, That there is no hindrance, -obstruction and opposition in nature; but as there is -no particular Creature, that hath an absolute power of -self-moving; so that Creature which hath the advantage -of strength, subtilty, or policy, shape, or figure, -and the like, may oppose and over-power another -which is inferior to it, in all this; yet this hinderance -and opposition doth not take away self-motion. But I -perceive your <i>Author</i> is much for necessitation, and against -free-will, which I leave to Moral Philosophers -and Divines. And as for the ascending of light, and -descending of heavy bodies, there may be many causes, -but these four are perceiveable by our senses, as bulk, -or quantity of body, grossness of substance, density, -and shape or figure, which make heavy bodies descend: -But little quantity, purity of substance, rarity, and figure -or shape make light bodies ascend. Wherefore I -cannot believe, that there are<a name="FNanchor_3_35" id="FNanchor_3_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_35" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>certain little bodies as atoms, -and by reason of their smallness, invisible, differing -from one another in consistence, figure, motion and magnitude, -intermingled with the air</i>, which should be the -cause of the descending of heavy bodies. And concerning -air,<a name="FNanchor_4_36" id="FNanchor_4_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_36" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <i>whether it be subject to our senses or not</i>, I say, -that if air be neither hot, nor cold, it is not subject; but -if it be, the sensitive motions will soon pattern it out, and -declare it. I'le conclude with your <i>Authors</i> question,<a name="FNanchor_5_37" id="FNanchor_5_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_37" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> -<i>What the cause is, that a man doth not feel the weight of Water -in Water?</i> and answer, it is the dilating nature of Water. -But of this question and of Water I shall treat -more fully hereafter, and so I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_33" id="Footnote_1_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_33"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>C.</i> 30. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_34" id="Footnote_2_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_34"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_35" id="Footnote_3_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_35"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_36" id="Footnote_4_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_36"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 14.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_37" id="Footnote_5_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_37"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 6.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXX" id="I_XXX">XXX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am reading now the works of that Famous and -most Renowned <i>Author, Des Cartes,</i> out of which -I intend to pick out onely those discourses which I -like best, and not to examine his opinions, as they go -along from the beginning to the end of his books; And -in order to this, I have chosen in the first place, his discourse -of motion, and do not assent to his opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_38" id="FNanchor_1_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_38" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -when he defines <i>Motion to be onely a Mode of a thing, -and not the thing or body it selfe</i>; for, in my opinion, -there can be no abstraction made of motion from body, -neither really, nor in the manner of our conception, for -how can I conceive that which is not, nor cannot be -in nature, that is, to conceive motion without body? -Wherefore Motion is but one thing with body, without -any separation or abstraction soever. Neither doth -it agree with my reason, that<a name="FNanchor_2_39" id="FNanchor_2_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_39" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>one body can give or transferr -motion into another body; and as much motion it gives -or transferrs into that body, as much loses it: As for example, -in two hard bodies thrown against one another, -where one, that is thrown with greater force, takes the -other along with it, and loses as much motion as it gives it.</i> -For how can motion, being no substance, but onely a -mode, quit one body, and pass into another? One -body may either occasion, or imitate anothers motion, -but it can neither give nor take away what belongs to its -own or another bodies substance, no more then matter -can quit its nature from being matter; and therefore -my opinion is, that if motion doth go out of one body -into another, then substance goes too; for motion, and -substance or body, as afore-mentioned, are all one -thing, and then all bodies that receive motion from other -bodies, must needs increase in their substance and -quantity, and those bodies which impart or transferr motion, -must decrease as much as they increase: Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, that neither Motion nor Figure should subsist -by themselves, and yet be transferable into other -bodies, is very strange, and as much as to prove them -to be nothing, and yet to say they are something. The -like may be said of all others, which they call accidents, -as skill, learning, knowledge, &c. saying, they are -no bodies, because they have no extension, but inherent -in bodies or substances as in their subjects; for although -the body may subsist without them, yet they being always -with the body, body and they are all one thing: -And so is power and body, for body cannot quit power, -nor power the body, being all one thing. But to return -to Motion, my opinion is, That all matter is partly -animate, and partly inanimate, and all matter is moving -and moved, and that there is no part of Nature -that hath not life and knowledg, for there is no Part that -has not a comixture of animate and inanimate matter; -and though the inanimate matter has no motion, nor -life and knowledg of it self, as the animate has, nevertheless -being both so closely joyned and commixed as in -one body, the inanimate moves as well as the animate, -although not in the same manner; for the animate -moves of it self, and the inanimate moves by the help of -the animate, and thus the animate is moving and the -inanimate moved; not that the animate matter transfers, -infuses, or communicates its own motion to the -inanimate; for this is impossible, by reason it cannot -part with its own nature, nor alter the nature of inanimate -matter, but each retains its own nature; for the -inanimate matter remains inanimate, that is, without -self-motion, and the animate loses nothing of its self-motion, -which otherwise it would, if it should impart -or transferr its motion into the inanimate matter; but -onely as I said heretofore, the inanimate works or moves -with the animate, because of their close union and commixture; -for the animate forces or causes the inanimate -matter to work with her; and thus one is moving, the -other moved, and consequently there is life and knowledg -in all parts of nature, by reason in all parts of nature -there is a commixture of animate and inanimate -matter: and this Life and Knowledg is sense and reason, -or sensitive and rational corporeal motions, which are all -one thing with animate matter without any distinction -or abstraction, and can no more quit matter, then matter -can quit motion. Wherefore every creature being -composed of this commixture of animate and inanimate -matter, has also selfe-motion, that is life and knowledg, -sense and reason, so that no part hath need to give or -receive motion to or from another part; although it -may be an occasion of such a manner of motion to another -part, and cause it to move thus or thus: as for -example, A Watch-maker doth not give the watch its -motion, but he is onely the occasion, that the watch -moves after that manner, for the motion of the watch -is the watches own motion, inherent in those parts ever -since that matter was, and if the watch ceases to move -after such a manner or way, that manner or way of motion -is never the less in those parts of matter, the watch -is made of, and if several other figures should be made -of that matter, the power of moving in the said manner -or mode, would yet still remain in all those parts of -matter as long as they are body, and have motion in -them. Wherefore one body may occasion another -body to move so or so, but not give it any motion, but -every body (though occasioned by another, to move -in such a way) moves by its own natural motion; for -self-motion is the very nature of animate matter, and is -as much in hard, as in fluid bodies, although your -<i>Author</i> denies it, saying,<a name="FNanchor_3_40" id="FNanchor_3_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_40" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>The nature of fluid bodies consists -in the motion of those little insensible parts into which -they are divided, and the nature of hard bodies, when those -little particles joyned closely together, do rest</i>; for there -is no rest in nature; wherefore if there were a World of -Gold, and a World of Air, I do verily believe, that -the World of Gold would be as much interiously active, -as the World of Air exteriously; for Natures motions -are not all external or perceptible by our senses, neither -are they all circular, or onely of one sort, but there is -an infinite change and variety of motions; for though -I say in my Philosophical opinions,<a name="FNanchor_4_41" id="FNanchor_4_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_41" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <i>As there is but one -onely Matter, so there is but one onely Motion</i>; yet I do -not mean, there is but one particular sort of motions, as -either circular, or straight, or the like, but that the nature -of motion is one and the same, simple and intire in -it self, that is, it is meer motion, or nothing else but -corporeal motion; and that as there are infinite divisions -or parts of matter, so there are infinite changes and -varieties of motions, which is the reason that I call motion -as well infinite as matter; first that matter and motion -are but one thing, and if matter be infinite, motion -must be so too; and secondly, that motion is infinite in -its changes and variations, as matter is in its parts. And -thus much of motion for this time; I add no more, but -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_38" id="Footnote_1_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_38"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Philos. p.</i> 2. <i>Art.</i> 25.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_39" id="Footnote_2_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_39"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 40.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_40" id="Footnote_3_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_40"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Philos. part.</i> 2. <i>a.</i> 54.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_41" id="Footnote_4_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_41"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 5.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXI" id="I_XXXI">XXXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I observe your <i>Author</i> in his discourse of Place -makes a difference<a name="FNanchor_1_42" id="FNanchor_1_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_42" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> betwixt an <i>Interior and Exterior -place</i>, and that according to this distinction, <i>one -body may be said to change, and not to change its place at -the same time, and that one body may succeed into anothers -place</i>. But I am not of this opinion, for I believe -not that there is any more place then body; as for example, -Water being mix'd with Earth, the water doth -not take the Earths place, but as their parts intermix, -so do their places, and as their parts change, so do their -places, so that there is no more place, then there is water -and earth; the same may be said of Air and Water, -or Air and Earth, or did they all mix together; for as -their bodies join, so do their places, and as they are -separated from each other, so are their places. Say a -man travels a hundred miles, and so a hundred thousand -paces; but yet this man has not been in a hundred thousand -places, for he never had any other place but his -own, he hath joined and separated himselfe from a -hundred thousand, nay millions of parts, but he has left -no places behind him. You will say, if he travel the -same way back again, then he is said to travel thorow -the same places. I answer, It may be the vulgar way -of expression, or the common phrase; but to speak properly, -after a Philosophical way, and according to the -truth in nature, he cannot be said to go back again -thorow the same places he went, because he left none -behind him, or els all his way would be nothing but -place after place, all the hundred miles along; besides -if place should be taken so, as to express the joyning to -the neerest bodies which compass him about, certainly -he would never find his places again; for the air being -fluid, changes or moves continually, and perchance the -same parts of the air, which compassed him once, will -never come near him again. But you may say, If a -man be hurt, or hath some mischance in his body, so as -to have a piece of flesh cut out, and new flesh growing -there; then we say, because the adjoyning parts do -not change, that a new piece of flesh is grown in the -same place where the former flesh was, and that the -place of the former flesh cut or fallen out, is the -same of this new grown flesh. I answer, In my opinion, -it is not, for the parts being not the same, the places are -not, but every one hath its own place. But if the -wound be not filled or closed up with other new flesh, -you will say, that according to my opinion there is no -place then at all. I say, Yes, for the air or any thing else -may be there, as new parts joyning to the other parts; -nevertheless, the air, or that same body which is there, -hath not taken the fleshes place, which was there before, -but hath its own; but, by reason the adjoyning parts -remain, man thinks the place remains there also which is -no consequence. 'Tis true, a man may return to the -same adjoining bodies, where he was before, but then he -brings his place with him again, and as his body, so his -place returnes also, and if a mans arm be cut off, you -may say, there was an arm heretofore, but you cannot -say properly, this is the place where the arm was. -But to return to my first example of the mixture of Water, -and Earth or Air; Suppose water is not porous, -but onely dividable, and hath no other place but what -is its own bodies, and that other parts of water intermix -with it by dividing and composing; I say, there is no -more place required, then what belongs to their own -parts, for if some contract, others dilate, some divide, -others joyn, the places are the same according to the -magnitude of each part or body. The same may be -said of all kinds or sorts of mixtures, for one body hath -but one place; and so if many parts of the same nature -joyn into one body and increase the bulk of the body, -the place of that same body is accordingly; and if they -be bodies of different natures which intermix and joyne, -each several keeps its place; And so each body and each -particular part of a body hath its place, for you cannot -name body or part of a body, but you must also understand -place to be with them, and if a point should dilate -to a world, or a world contract to a point, the place -would always be the same with the body. And thus -I have declared my opinion of this subject, which I -submit to the correction of your better judgment, and -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Friend and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_42" id="Footnote_1_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_42"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Philos. p.</i> 2. <i>a.</i> 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXII" id="I_XXXII">XXXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In my last, I hope, I have sufficiently declared my -opinion, That to one body belongs but one place, -and that no body can leave a place behind it, but -wheresoever is body, there is place also. Now give -me leave to examine this question: when a bodies -figure is printed on snow, or any other fluid or soft -matter, as air, water, and the like; whether it be the -body, that prints its own figure upon the snow, or -whether it be the snow, that patterns the figure of the -body? My answer is, That it is not the body, which -prints its figure upon the snow, but the snow that -patterns out the figure of the body; for if a seal be -printed upon wax, 'tis true, it is the figure of the seal, -which is printed on the wax, but yet the seal doth not -give the wax the print of its own figure, but it is the wax -that takes the print or pattern from the seal, and patterns -or copies it out in its own substance, just as the sensitive -motions in the eye do pattern out the figure of an -object, as I have declared heretofore. But you will say, -perhaps, A body being printed upon snow, as it leaves -its print, so it leaves also its place with the print in the -snow. I answer, That doth not follow; For the place -remains still the bodies place, and when the body removes -out of the snow, it takes its place along with it: -Just like a man, whose picture is drawn by a Painter, -when he goes away, he leaves not his place with his -picture, but his place goes with his body; and as the -place of the picture is the place of the colour or paint, -and the place of the copie of an exterior object patterned -out by the sensitive corporeal motions is the place of -the sensitive organ, so the place of the print in snow, is -the snows place; or else, if the print were the bodies place -that is printed, and not the snow's, it might as well be -said, that the motion and shape of a watch were not the -motion and shape of the watch, but of the hand of him -that made it. And as it is with snow, so it is with air, -for a mans figure is patterned out by the parts and -motions of the air, wheresoever he moveth; the difference -is onely, that air being a fluid body doth not retain -the print so long, as snow or a harder body doth, -but when the body removes, the print is presently dissolved. -But I wonder much, your <i>Author</i> denies, -that there can be two bodies in one place, and yet makes -two places for one body, when all is but the motions of -one body: Wherefore a man sailing in a Ship, cannot -be said to keep place, and to change his place; for -it is not place he changes, but onely the adjoyning -parts, as leaving some, and joyning to others; and it is -very improper, to attribute that to place which belongs -to parts, and to make a change of place out of -change of parts. I conclude, repeating once again, -that figure and place are still remaining the same with -body; For example; let a stone be beat to dust, and -this dust be severally dispersed, nay, changed into numerous -figures; I say, as long as the substance of the -stone remains in the power of those dispersed and -changed parts, and their corporeal motions, the place -of it continues also; and as the corporeal motions -change and vary, so doth place, magnitude and -figure, together with their parts or bodies, for they are -but one thing. And so I conclude, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXIII" id="I_XXXIII">XXXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am absolutely of your <i>Authors</i> opinion, when he -sayes,<a name="FNanchor_1_43" id="FNanchor_1_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_43" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That all bodies of this Universe are of one and -the same matter, really divided into many parts, and -that these parts are diversly moved</i>: But that these motions -should be circular more then of any other sort, I -cannot believe, although he thinks that this is the most -probable way, to find out the causes of natural effects: -for nature is not bound to one sort of motions more -then to another, and it is but in vain to indeavour to -know how, and by what motions God did make the -World, since Creation is an action of God, and -Gods actions are incomprehensible; Wherefore his -æthereal Whirlpools, and little particles of matter, -which he reduceth to three sorts and calls them the -three elements of the Universe, their circular motions, -several figures, shavings, and many the like, which -you may better read, then I rehearse to you, are to my -thinking, rather Fancies, then rational or probable -conceptions; for how can we imagine that the Universe -was set a moving as a Top by a Whip, or a Wheele -by the hand of a Spinster, and that the vacuities were -fill'd up with shavings? for these violent motions would -rather have disturbed and disordered Nature; and -though Nature uses variety in her motions or actions, -yet these are not extravagant, nor by force or violence, -but orderly, temperate, free, and easie, which causes me -to believe, the Earth turns about rather then the Sun; -and though corporeal motions for variety make -Whirl-winds, yet Whirl-winds are not constant, -Neither can I believe that the swiftness of motion could -make the matter more subtil and pure then it was by -nature, for it is the purity and subtilty of the matter, -that causes motion, and makes it swifter or slower, -and not motion the subtilty and purity of matter; motion -being onely the action of matter; and the self-moving -part of matter is the working part of nature, which is -wise, and knows how to move and form every creature -without instruction; and this self-motion is as much her -own as the other parts of her body, matter and figure, -and is one and the same with her self, as a corporeal, -living, knowing, and inseparable being, and a part of -her self. As for the several parts of matter, I do believe, -that they are not all of one and the same bigness, nor -of one and the same figure, neither do I hold their -figures to be unalterable; for if all parts in nature be -corporeal, they are dividable, composable, and intermixable, -and then they cannot be always of one and -the same sort of figure; besides nature would not have -so much work if there were no change of figures: and -since her onely action is change of motion, change -of motion must needs make change of figures: and thus -natural parts of matter may change from lines to points, -and from points to lines, from squares to circles, and so -forth, infinite ways, according to the change of motions; -but though they change their figures, yet they -cannot change their matter; for matter as it has been, so it -remaines constantly in each degree, as the Rational, Sensitive -and Inanimate, none becomes purer, none grosser -then ever it was, notwithstanding the infinite changes -of motions, which their figures undergo; for Motion -changes onely the figure, not the matter it self, which -continues still the same in its nature, and cannot be altered -without a confusion or destruction of Nature. -And this is the constant opinion of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_43" id="Footnote_1_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_43"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Philos. part.</i> 3. <i>a.</i> 40.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXIV" id="I_XXXIV">XXXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>That <i>Rarefaction</i> is onely a <i>change of figure</i>, according -to your <i>Authors</i> opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_44" id="FNanchor_1_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_44" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> is in my reason -very probable; but when he sayes, that <i>in rarified -bodies are little intervals or pores filled up with some other -subtil matter</i>, if he means that all rarified bodies are -porous, I dissent from him; for it is not necessary that -all rarified bodies should be porous, and all hard bodies -without pores: but if there were a probability of pores, -I am of opinion, it would be more in dense and hard, -than in rare and soft bodies; as for example, rarifying -and dilating motions are plaining, smoothing, spreading -and making all parts even, which could not well be, if -there were holes or pores; Earth is dense and hard, and -yet is porous, and flame is rare and dilating, and yet is not -porous; and certainly Water is not so porous as Earth. -Wherefore pores, in my opinion, are according to the -nature or form of the figure, and not according to the -rarity or thinness, and density or thickness of the substance. -As for his thin and subtil matter filling up the -pores of porous bodies, I assent to your <i>Author</i> so far, -that I meane, thin and thick, or rare and dense substances -are joyned and mixed together. As for plaining, -smoothing and spreading, I do not mean so -much artificial plaining and spreading; as for example, -when a piece of gold is beaten into a thin plate, and a -board is made plain and smooth by a Joyners tool, or a -napkin folded up is spread plain and even, although, -when you observe these arts, you may judge somewhat -of the nature of natural dilations; for a folded cloth is -fuller of creases then when plain, and the beating of a -thin plate is like to the motion of dilation, which is to -spread out, and the forme of rarifying is thinning and -extending. I add onely this, that I am not of your -<i>Authors</i> opinion, that Rest is the Cause or Glue which -keeps the parts of dense or hard bodies together, but it -is retentive motions. And so I conclude, resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_44" id="Footnote_1_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_44"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Philos. part.</i> 2. <i>a.</i> 6, 7.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXV" id="I_XXXV">XXXV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p><i>That the Mind</i>, according to your <i>Authors</i> opinion, -<i>is a substance really distinct from the body, and -may be actually separated from it and subsist without -it</i>: If he mean the natural mind and soul of Man, not -the supernatural or divine, I am far from his opinion; -for though the mind moveth onely in its own parts, and -not upon, or with the parts of inanimate matter, yet it -cannot be separated from these parts of matter, and subsist -by its self as being a part of one and the same matter -the inanimate is of, (for there is but one onely matter, -and one kind of matter, although of several degrees,) -onely it is the self-moving part; but yet this -cannot impower it, to quit the same natural body, whose -part it is. Neither can I apprehend, that the Mind's -or Soul's seat should be in the <i>Glandula</i> or kernel of the -Brain, and there sit like a Spider in a Cobweb, to -whom the least motion of the Cobweb gives intelligence -of a Flye, which he is ready to assault, and that the -Brain should get intelligence by the animal spirits as his -servants, which run to and fro like Ants to inform it; -or that the Mind should, according to others opinions, -be a light, and imbroidered all with Ideas, like a Heraulds -Coat; and that the sensitive organs should have -no knowledg in themselves, but serve onely like peeping-holes -for the mind, or barn-dores to receive bundles of -pressures, like sheaves of Corn; For there being a thorow -mixture of animate, rational and sensitive, and inanimate -matter, we cannot assign a certain seat or place to -the rational, another to the sensitive, and another to -the inanimate, but they are diffused and intermixt -throughout all the body; And this is the reason, that -sense and knowledg cannot be bound onely to the -head or brain; But although they are mixt together, -nevertheless they do not lose their interior nature, by -this mixture, nor their purity and subtilty, nor their -proper motions or actions, but each moves according -to its nature and substance, without confusion; The -actions of the rational part in Man, which is the Mind -or Soul, are called Thoughts, or thoughtful perceptions, -which are numerous, and so are the sensitive perceptions; -for though Man, or any other animal hath -but five exterior sensitive organs, yet there be numerous -perceptions made in these sensitive organs, and in -all the body; nay, every several Pore of the flesh is a -sensitive organ, as well as the Eye, or the Ear. But -both sorts, as well the rational as the sensitive, are different -from each other, although both do resemble another, -as being both parts of animate matter, as I have -mentioned before: Wherefore I'le add no more, onely -let you know, that I constantly remain,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXVI" id="I_XXXVI">XXXVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>That all other animals, besides man, want reason, -your <i>Author</i> endeavours to prove in his <i>discourse -of method</i>, where his chief argument is, -That other animals cannot express their mind, thoughts -or conceptions, either by speech or any other signs, as -man can do: For, sayes he, <i>it is not for want of the organs -belonging to the framing of words, as we may observe -in Parrats and Pies, which are apt enough to express -words they are taught, but understand nothing of them.</i> -My answer is, That one man expressing his mind by -speech or words to an other, doth not declare by it his -excellency and supremacy above all other Creatures, -but for the most part more folly, for a talking man is -not so wise as a contemplating man. But by reason other -Creatures cannot speak or discourse with each other -as men, or make certain signs, whereby to express themselves -as dumb and deaf men do, should we conclude, -they have neither knowledge, sense, reason, or intelligence? -Certainly, this is a very weak argument; -for one part of a mans body, as one hand, is not less -sensible then the other, nor the heel less sensible then -the heart, nor the legg less sensible then the head, but -each part hath its sense and reason, and so consequently -its sensitive and rational knowledg; and although -they cannot talk or give intelligence to each other by -speech, nevertheless each hath its own peculiar and -particular knowledge, just as each particular man has -his own particular knowledge, for one man's knowledge -is not another man's knowledge; and if there -be such a peculiar and particular knowledg in every several -part of one animal creature, as man, well may there -be such in Creatures of different kinds and sorts: But -this particular knowledg belonging to each creature, -doth not prove that there is no intelligence at all betwixt -them, no more then the want of humane Knowledg -doth prove the want of Reason; for Reason is the rational -part of matter, and makes perception, observation, -and intelligence different in every creature, and every -sort of creatures, according to their proper natures, but -perception, observation and intelligence do not make -reason, Reason being the cause, and they the effects. -Wherefore though other Creatures have not the speech, -nor Mathematical rules and demonstrations, with other -Arts and Sciences, as Men; yet may their perceptions -and observations be as wise as Men's, and they -may have as much intelligence and commerce betwixt -each other, after their own manner and way, as men -have after theirs: To which I leave them, and Man to -his conceited prerogative and excellence, resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXVII" id="I_XXXVII">XXXVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning <i>Sense</i> and <i>Perception</i>, your -<i>Authors</i> opinion is,<a name="FNanchor_1_45" id="FNanchor_1_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_45" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That it is made by a <i>motion or -impression from the object upon the sensitive organ, -which impression, by means of the nerves, is brought to -the brain, and so to the mind or soul, which onely perceives -in the brain</i>: Explaining it by the example<a name="FNanchor_2_46" id="FNanchor_2_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_46" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> of a -Man being blind, or walking in dark, who by the help -of his stick can perceive when he touches a Stone, a -Tree, Water, Sand, and the like; which example he -brings to make a comparison with the perception of -Light; <i>For</i>, says he, <i>Light in a shining body, is nothing -else but a quick and lively motion or action, which through -the air and other transparent bodies tends towards the eye, -in the same manner as the motion or resistance of the bodies, -the blind man meets withal, tends thorow the stick towards -the hand; wherefore it is no wonder that the Sun can display -its rays so far in an instant, seeing that the same action, -whereby one end of the stick is moved, goes instantly -also to the other end, and would do the same if the stick -were as long as Heaven is distant from Earth.</i> To which -I answer first, That it is not onely the Mind that perceives -in the kernel of the Brain, but that there is a double -perception, rational and sensitive, and that the mind -perceives by the rational, but the body and the sensitive -organs by the sensitive perception; and as there is a double -perception, so there is also a double knowledg, rational -and sensitive, one belonging to the mind, the other -to the body; for I believe that the Eye, Ear, Nose, -Tongue, and all the Body, have knowledg as well as -the Mind, onely the rational matter, being subtil and -pure, is not incumbred with the grosser part of matter, to -work upon, or with it, but leaves that to the sensitive, -and works or moves onely in its own substance, which -makes a difference between thoughts, and exterior -senses. Next I say, That it is not the Motion or Reaction -of the bodies, the blind man meets withal, which -makes the sensitive perception of these objects, but the -sensitive corporeal motions in the hand do pattern out -the figure of the Stick, Stone, Tree, Sand, and the -like. And as for comparing the perception of the hand, -when by the help of the stick it perceives the objects, -with the perception of light, I confess that the sensitive -perceptions do all resemble each other, because all sensitive -parts of matter are of one degree, as being sensible -parts, onely there is a difference according to the figures -of the objects presented to the senses; and there is -no better proof for perception being made by the sensitive -motions in the body, or sensitive organs, but that -all these sensitive perceptions are alike, and resemble one -another; for if they were not made in the body of the -sentient, but by the impression of exterior objects, there -would be so much difference betwixt them, by reason -of the diversity of objects, as they would have no resemblance -at all. But for a further proof of my own opinion, -did the perception proceed meerly from the motion, -impression and resistance of the objects, the hand -could not perceive those objects, unless they touched -the hand it self, as the stick doth; for it is not probable, -that the motions of the stone, water, sand, &c. should -leave their bodies and enter into the stick, and so into -the hand; for motion must be either something or nothing; -if something, the stick and the hand would -grow bigger, and the objects touched less, or else the -touching and the touched must exchange their motions, -which cannot be done so suddenly, especially between -solid bodies; But if motion has no body, it is nothing, -and how nothing can pass or enter or move some body, -I cannot conceive. 'Tis true there is no part that can -subsist singly by it self, without dependance upon each -other, and so parts do always joyn and touch each other, -which I am not against; but onely I say perception -is not made by the exterior motions of exterior parts -of objects, but by the interior motions of the parts of -the body sentient. But I have discoursed hereof before, -and so I take my leave, resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_45" id="Footnote_1_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_45"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Philos. part.</i> 4. <i>a.</i> 189.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_46" id="Footnote_2_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_46"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Diopt. c.</i> 1. <i>a.</i> 2, 3. & <i>c.</i> 4. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXVIII" id="I_XXXVIII">XXXVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I cannot conceive why your <i>Author</i> is so much for little -and insensible parts, out of which the Elements -and all other bodies are made; for though Nature is -divideable, yet she is also composeable; and I think there -is no need to dissect every creature into such little parts, -to know their nature, but we can do it by another way -as well; for we may dissect or divide them into never so -little parts, and yet gain never the more knowledg by it. -But according to these principles he describing amongst -the rest the nature of Water, says,<a name="FNanchor_1_47" id="FNanchor_1_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_47" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That those little -parts, out of which Water consists, are in figure somewhat -long, light and slippery like little Eeles, which are never -so closely joyned and entangled, but may easily be separated.</i> -To which I answer, That I observe the nature -and figure of water to be flowing, dilating, divideable -and circular; for we may see, in Tides, overflowings, -and breaking into parts, as in rain, it will always move -in a round and circular figure; And I think, if its parts -were long and entangled like a knot of Eeles, it could -never be so easily contracted and denced into snow or -ice. Neither do I think, That <i>Salt-water hath a mixture -of somewhat grosser parts, not so apt to bend</i>;<a name="FNanchor_2_48" id="FNanchor_2_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_48" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> for to -my observation and reason, the nature of salt-water consists -herein, that its circle-lines are pointed, which sharp -and pointed figure makes it so penetrating; yet may -those points be separated from the circle lines of water, -as it is seen in the making of Salt. But I am not of your -<i>Authors</i> opinion, That those little points do stick so fast -in flesh, as little nails, to keep it from putrefaction; for -points do not always fasten; or else fire, which certainly -is composed of sharp-pointed parts, would harden, -and keep other bodies from dissolving, whereas on -the contrary, it separates and divides them, although after -several manners. But Putrefaction is onely a dissolving -and separating of parts, after the manner of dilation; -and the motion of salt is contracting as well as -penetrating, for we may observe, what flesh soever is -dry-salted, doth shrink and contract close together; I -will not say, but the pointed parts of salt may fasten like -nayls in some sorts of bodies, but not in all they work -on. And this is the reason also, that Sea-water is of -more weight then fresh-water, for being composed of -points, those points stick within each other, and so become -more strong; But yet do they not hinder the circular -dilating motion of water, for the circle-lines are -within, and the points without, but onely they make -it more strong from being divided by other exterior bodies -that swim upon it. And this is the cause that Salt-water -is not so easily forced or turned to vapour, as -Fresh, for the points piercing into each other, hold it -more strongly together; but this is to be considered, that -the points of salt are on the outside of the watery Circle, -not on the inside, which causes it to be divideable from -the watery Circles. I will conclude, when I have given -the reason why water is so soon suckt up by sand, -lime, and the like bodies, and say that it is the nature -of all spongy, dry and porous bodies, meeting with liquid -and pliable bodies as water, do draw and suck them -up, like as animal Creatures being thirsty, do drink: -And so I take my leave, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_47" id="Footnote_1_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_47"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of Meteor. c.</i> 1. <i>a.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_48" id="Footnote_2_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_48"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>C.</i> 3. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XXXIX" id="I_XXXIX">XXXIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning Vapour, Clouds, Wind and Rain, -I am of your <i>Authors</i> opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_49" id="FNanchor_1_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_49" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Water is -changed into Vapour, and Vapour into Air, and that -dilated Vapours make Wind, and condensed Vapours, Clouds -and Mists</i>; But I am not for his little particles, <i>whereof</i>, -he says, <i>Vapours are made, by the motion of a rare and subtil -matter in the pores of terrestrial bodies</i>; which certainly -I should conceive to be loose atoms, did he not -make them of several figures and magnitude: for, in -my opinion, there are no such things in nature, which -like little Flyes or Bees do fly up into the air; and although -I grant, that in Nature are several parts, whereof -some are more rare, others more dense, according to -the several degrees of matter, yet they are not single, but -all mixt together in one body, and the change of motions -in those joyned parts, is the cause of all changes of -figures whatever, without the assistance of any forreign -parts: And thus Water of it self is changed to Snow, -Ice, or Hail, by its inherent figurative Motions; that -is, the circular dilation of Water by contraction, changes -into the figure of Snow, Ice, or Hail or by rarifying -motions it turns into the figure of Vapour, and -this Vapour again by contracting motions into the figure -of hoar frost; and when all these motions change -again into the former, then the figure of Ice, Snow, -Hail, Vapour and Frost, turns again into the figure of -Water: And this in all sense and reason is the most -facil and probable way of making Ice, Snow, Hail, &c. -As for rarefaction and condensation, I will not say that -they may be forced by forreign parts, but yet they are -made by change and alteration of the inherent motions -of their own parts, for though the motions of forreign -parts, may be the occasion of them, yet they are not the -immediate cause or actors thereof. And as for <i>Thunder</i>, -that clouds of Ice and Snow, the uppermost being -condensed by heat, and so made heavy, should fall -upon another and produce the noise of thunder, is very -improbable; for the breaking of a little small string, will -make a greater noise then a huge shower of snow with -falling, and as for Ice being hard, it may make a great -noise, one part falling upon another, but then their -weight would be as much as their noise, so that the clouds -or roves of Ice would be as soon upon our heads, if not -sooner, as the noise in our Eares; like as a bullet shot -out of a Canon, we may feel the bullet as soon as we -hear the noise. But to conclude, all densations are not -made by heat, nor all noises by pressures, for sound is -oftener made by division then pressure, and densation -by cold then by heat: And this is all for the present, -from,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_49" id="Footnote_1_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_49"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of Meteor., c.</i> 2, 4, 5, 6.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XL" id="I_XL">XL.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I cannot perceive the Rational Truth of your <i>Authors</i> -opinion, concerning <i>Colours</i>, made <i>by the agitation -of little spherical bodies of an Æthereal matter, -transmitting the action of Light</i>; for if colours were -made after this manner, there would, in my opinion, -not be any fixed or lasting colour, but one colour would -be so various, and change faster then every minute; the -truth is, there would be no certain or perfect colour at -all: wherefore it seems altogether improbable, that -such liquid, rare and disunited bodies should either -keep or make inherent and fixed colours; for liquid -and rare bodies, whose several parts are united -into one considerable bulk of body, their colours are -more apt to change then the colours of those bodies -that are dry, solid and dense; the reason is, that rare -and liquid bodies are more loose, slack, and agil, then -solid and dry bodies, in so much, as in every alteration -of motion their colours are apt to change: And if united -rare and liquid bodies be so apt to alter and change, -how is it probable, that those bodies, which are small -and not united, should either keep or make inherent -fixed colours? I will not say, but that such little bodies -may range into such lines and figures, as make colours, -but then they cannot last, being not united into -a lasting body, that is, into a solid, substantial body, -proper to make such figures as colours. But I desire -you not to mistake me, <i>Madam</i>, for I do not mean, that -the substance of colours is a gross thick substance, for the -substance may be as thin and rare as flame or light, or -in the next degree to it; for certainly the substance of -light, and the substance of colours come in their degrees -very neer each other; But according to the contraction -of the figures, colours are paler or deeper, or more or -less lasting. And as for the reason, why colours will -change and rechange, it is according as the figures alter -or recover their forms; for colours will be as animal -Creatures, which sometimes are faint, pale, and sick, -and yet recover; but when as a particular colour is, as -I may say, quite dead, then there is no recovering of it. -But colours may seem altered sometimes in our eyes, and -yet not be altered in themselves; for our eyes, if perfect, -see things as they are presented; and for proof, if -any animal should be presented in an unusual posture -or shape, we could not judg of it; also if a Picture, -which must be viewed side-wards, should be looked -upon forwards, we could not know what to make of it; -so the figures of colours, if they be not placed rightly -to the sight, but turned topsie-turvie as the Phrase is, or -upside-down, or be moved too quick, and this quick -motion do make a confusion with the lines of Light, we -cannot possibly see the colour perfectly. Also several -lights or shades may make colours appear otherwise -then in themselves they are, for some sorts of -lights and shades may fall upon the substantial figures -of colours in solid bodies, in such lines and figures, as -they may over-power the natural or artificial inherent -colours in solid bodies, and for a time make other -colours, and many times the lines of light or -of shadows will meet and sympathize so with inherent -colours, and place their lines so exactly, as they -will make those inherent colours more splendorous -then in their own nature they are, so that light and -shadows will add or diminish or alter colours very -much. Likewise some sorts of colours will be altered -to our sight, not by all, but onely by some sorts of light, -as for example, blew will seem green, and green blew -by candle light, when as other colours will never appear -changed, but shew constantly as they are; the -reason is, because the lines of candle light fall in such -figures upon the inherent colours, and so make them -appear according to their own figures; Wherefore it -is onely the alteration of the exterior figures of light and -shadows, that make colours appear otherwise, and not a -change of their own natures; And hence we may rationally -conclude, that several lights and shadows by -their spreading and dilating lines may alter the face or -out-side of colours, but not suddenly change them, unless -the power of heat, and continuance of time, or -any other cause, do help and assist them in that work -of metamorphosing or transforming of colours; but -if the lines of light be onely, as the phrase is, Skin-deep; -that is, but lightly spreading and not deeply penetrating, -they may soon wear out or be rubbed off; -for though they hurt, yet they do not kill the natural -colour, but the colour may recover and reassume its -former vigour and lustre: but time and other accidental -causes will not onely alter, but destroy particular -colours as well as other creatures, although not all -after the same manner, for some will last longer -then others. And thus, <i>Madam</i>, there are three -sorts of Colours, Natural, Artificial, and Accidental; -but I have discoursed of this subject more at large -in my Philosophical Opinions, to which I refer you, -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XLI" id="I_XLI">XLI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>My answer to your <i>Authors</i> question, <i>Why flame -ascends in a pointed figure?</i><a name="FNanchor_1_50" id="FNanchor_1_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_50" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> is, That the figure -of fire consists in points, and being dilated into -a flame, it ascends in lines of points slope-wayes from -the fired fuel; like as if you should make two or more -sticks stand upright and put the upper ends close together, -but let the lower ends be asunder, in which -posture they will support each other, which, if both -their ends were close together, they could not do. -The second question is, <i>Why fire doth not alwayes flame?</i><a name="FNanchor_2_51" id="FNanchor_2_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_51" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -I answer, Because all fuel is not flameable, some being -so moist, as it doth oppose the fires dryness, and -some so hard and retentive, as fire cannot so soon dissolve -it; and in this contest, where one dissipates, and the -other retains, a third figure is produced, <i>viz.</i> smoak, -between the heat of one, and the moisture of the other; -and this smoak is forced by the fire out of the fuel, and -is nothing else but certain parts of fuel, raised to such a -degree of rarefaction; and if fire come near, it forces -the smoak into flame, the smoak changing it self by its -figurative motions into flame; but when smoak is above -the flame, the flame cannot force the smoak to fire or enkindle -it self, for the flame cannot so well encounter it; -which shews, as if smoak had a swifter motion then -flame, although flame is more rarified then smoak; and -if moisture predominate, there is onely smoak, if fire, -then there is flame: But there are many figures, that do -not flame, until they are quite dissolved, as Leather, -and many other things. Neither can fire work upon -all bodies alike, but according to their several natures, -like as men cannot encounter several sorts of creatures after -one and the same manner; for not any part in nature -hath an absolute power, although it hath self-motion; -and this is the reason, that wax by fire is melted, and -clay hardened. The third question is, <i>Why some few -drops of water sprinkled upon fire, do encrease its flame?</i> -I answer, by reason of their little quantity, which being -over-powred by the greater quantity and force of -fire, is by its self-motions converted into fire; for water -being of a rare nature, and fire, for the most part, of a -rarifying quality, it cannot suddenly convert it self into -a more solid body then its nature is, but following its -nature by force it turns into flame. The fourth question -is, <i>Why the flame of spirit of Wine doth consume the -Wine, and yet cannot burn or hurt a linnen cloth?</i> I -answer, The Wine is the fuel that feeds the flame, -and upon what it feeds, it devoureth, and with the -food, the feeder; but by reason Wine is a rarer -body then Oyle, or Wood, or any other fuel, its -flame is also weaker. And thus much of these questions, -I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_50" id="Footnote_1_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_50"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 4. <i>art.</i> 97.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_51" id="Footnote_2_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_51"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Art.</i> 107.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XLII" id="I_XLII">XLII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>To conclude my discourse upon the Opinions of -these two famous and learned Authors, which I -have hitherto sent you in several Letters, I could -not chuse but repeat the ground of my own opinions in -this present; which I desire you to observe well, lest -you mistake any thing, whereof I have formerly discoursed. -First I am for self-moving matter, which I -call the sensitive and rational matter, and the perceptive -and architectonical part of nature, which is the life and -knowledg of nature. Next I am of an opinion, That all -Perception is made by corporeal, figuring self-motions, -and that the perception of forreign objects is made by patterning -them out: as for example, The sensitive perception -of forreign objects is by making or taking copies -from these objects, so as the sensitive corporeal motions -in the eyes copy out the objects of sight, and the sensitive -corporeal motions in the ears copy out the objects -of sound; the sensitive corporeal motions in the nostrils, -copy out the objects of sent; the sensitive corporeal motions -in the tongue and mouth, copy out the objects of -taste, and the sensitive corporeal motions in the flesh and -skin of the body copy out the forreign objects of touch; -for when you stand by the fire, it is not that the fire, or -the heat of the fire enters your flesh, but that the sensitive -motions copy out the objects of fire and heat. As -for my Book of Philosophy, I must tell you, that it -treats more of the production and architecture of Creatures -then of their perceptions, and more of the causes -then the effects, more in a general then peculiar way, -which I thought necessary to inform you of, and so I -remain,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XLIII" id="I_XLIII">XLIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I received your questions in your last: the first was, -<i>Whether there be more body compact together in a -heavy then in a light thing?</i> I answer, That -purity, rarity, little quantity, exteriour shape, as -also motion cause lightnesse; and grossness of bulk, -density, much quantity, exterior figure and motion -cause heaviness, as it may be confirmed by many examples: -but lightness and heaviness are onely conceptions -of man, as also ascent and descent; and it may be -questioned, whether there be such things really in nature; -for change of motions of one and the same body will -make lightness, and heaviness, as also rarity and density: -besides, the several figures and compositions of -bodies will cause them to ascend or descend, for Snow -is a light body and yet descends from the clouds, and -Water is a heavie body, and yet ascends in springs out -of the Earth; Dust is a dense body and yet is apt to ascend, -Rain or Dew is a rare body and yet is apt to -descend; Also a Bird ascends by his shape, and a small -worm although of less body and lighter will fall down; -and there can be no other proof of light and heavy bodies -but by their ascent and descent; But as really there is no -such thing as heavie or light in nature more then words, -and comparisons of different corporeal motions, so there -is no such thing, as high or low, place or time, but -onely words to make comparisons and to distinguish -different corporeal motions. The second question -was; <i>When a Bason with water is wasted into smoak, -which fills up a whole Room, Whether the air in the -room doth, as the sensitive motions of the eye, pattern -out the figure of the smoak; or whether all the room is -really fill'd with the vapour or smoak?</i> I answer, If it be -onely the pattern or figure of smoak or vapour, the extension -and dilation is not so much as man imagines; but -why may not the air, which in my opinion hath self-motion, -pattern out the figure of smoak as well as the eye; for -that the eye surely doth it, may be proved; because smoak, -if it enter the eye, makes it not onely smart and water -much, but blinds it quite for the present; wherefore -smoak doth not enter the eye, when the eye seeth it, but -the eye patterns out the figure of smoak, and this is -perception; In the same manner may the air pattern -out the figure of smoak. The third question was, -<i>Whether all that they name qualities of bodies, as thickness, -thinness, hardness, softness, gravity, levity, transparentness -and the like, be substances?</i> I answer, That -all those, they call qualities, are nothing else but change -of motion and figure of the same body, and several -changes of motions are not several bodies, but several -actions of one body; for change of motion doth not -create new matter or multiply its quantity: for though -corporeal motions may divide and compose, contract -and dilate, yet they cannot create new matter, or make -matter any otherwise then it is by nature, neither can -they add or substract any thing from its nature. And -therefore my opinion is, not that they are things subsisting -by themselves without matter, but that there can -no abstraction be made of motion and figure from matter, -and that matter and motion being but one thing -and inseparable, make but one substance. Wherefore -density and rarity, gravity and levity, &c. being -nothing else but change of motions, cannot be without -matter, but a dense or rare, heavie or light matter is but -one substance or body; And thus having obeyed your -commands, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XLIV" id="I_XLIV">XLIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am very ready to give you my opinion of those two -questions you sent me, whereof the first was, <i>Whether -that, which is rare and subtil, be not withal pure?</i> -To which I answer, That all rare bodies are not subtil, -nor pure, and that all which is dense is not gross and -dull: As for example, Puddle-water, or also clear water, -is rarer then Quicksilver, and yet not so subtil and -pure as Quicksilver; the like of Gold; for Quicksilver -and Gold may be rarified to a transparentness, -and yet be so dense, as not to be easily dissolved; and -Quicksilver is very subtil and searching, so as to be -able to force other bodies to divide as well as it can divide -and compose its own parts. Wherefore my opinion -is, that the purest and subtilest degree of matter in -nature, is that degree of matter which can dilate and -contract, compose and divide into any figure by corporeal -self-motion. Your second question was, <i>Why a man's -hand cannot break a little hard body, as a little nail, whereas -yet it is bigger then the nail?</i> I answer, It is not because the -hand is softer then the nail, for one hard body will not -break suddenly another hard body, and a man may -easily break an iron nail with his hand, as I have bin informed; -but it is some kind of motion which can easier -do it, then another: for I have seen a strong cord -wound about both a man's hands, who pulled his hands -as hard and strongly asunder as he could, and yet was -not able to break it; when as a Youth taking the same -cord, and winding it about his hands as the former did, -immediately broke it; the cause was, that he did it with -another kind of motion or pulling, then the other did, -which though he used as much force and strength, as -he was able, yet could not break it, when the boy did -break it with the greatest ease, and turning onely his -hands a little, which shews, that many things may be -done by a slight of motion, which otherwise a great -strength and force cannot do. This is my answer and -opinion concerning your proposed questions; if you -have any more, I shall be ready to obey you, as,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="I_XLV" id="I_XLV">XLV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I understand by your last, that you are very desirous -to know, <i>Whether there be not in nature such animal -creatures both for purity and size, as we are not capable -to perceive by our sight.</i> Truly, <i>Madam</i>, in my opinion -it is very probable there may be animal creatures -of such rare bodies as are not subject to our exterior senses, -as well, as there are elements which are not subject -to all our exterior senses: as for example, fire is onely -subject to our sight and feeling, and not to any other -sense, water is subject to our sight, taste, touch and -hearing, but not to smelling; and earth is subject to our -sight, taste, touch and smelling, but not to our hearing; -and vapour is onely subject to our sight, and wind onely -to our hearing; but pure air is not subject to any of our -senses, but onely known by its effects: and so there may -likewise be animal creatures which are not subject to any -of our senses both for their purity and life; as for example, -I have seen pumpt out of a water pump small -worms which could hardly be discerned but by a bright -Sun-light, for they were smaller then the smallest hair, -some of a pure scarlet colour and some white, but -though they were the smallest creatures that ever I did -see, yet they were more agil and fuller of life, then many -a creature of a bigger size, and so small they were, -as I am confident, they were neither subject to tast, -smell, touch nor hearing, but onely to sight, and that -neither without difficulty, requiring both a sharp sight -and a clear light to perceive them; and I do verily believe -that these small animal creatures may be great in -comparison to others which may be in nature. But if -it be probable that there may be such small animal creatures -in nature, as are not subject to our exterior senses, -by reason of their littleness; it is also probable, that -there may be such great and big animal creatures in -nature as are beyond the reach and knowledg of our exterior -senses; for bigness and smallness are not to be judged -by our exterior senses, onely; but as sense and reason -inform us, that there are different degrees in Purity -and Rarity, so also in shapes, figures and sizes in all -natural creatures. Next you desired to know, <i>Whether -there can be an artificial Life, or a Life made by Art?</i> -My answer is, Not; for although there is Life in all -natures parts, yet not all the parts are life, for there is -one part of natural matter which in its nature is inanimate -or without life, and though natural Life doth produce -Art, yet Art cannot produce natural Life, for though -Art is the action of Life, yet it is not Life it self: not but -that there is Life in Art, but not art in life, for Life is natural, -and not artificial; and thus the several parts of a -watch may have sense and reason according to the -nature of their natural figure, which is steel, but not -as they have an artificial shape, for Art cannot put Life -into the watch, Life being onely natural, not artificial. -Lastly your desire was to know, <i>Whether a part of matter -may be so small, as it cannot be made less?</i> I answer, -there is no such thing in nature as biggest or least, nature -being Infinite as well in her actions as in her substance; -and I have mentioned in my book of Philosophy, and -in a letter, I sent you heretofore concerning Infinite, -that there are several sorts of Infinites, as Infinite in -quantity or bulk, Infinite in number, Infinite in quality, -as Infinite degrees of hardness, softness, thickness, -thinness, swiftness, slowness, &c. as also Infinite compositions, -divisions, creations, dissolutions, &c. in nature; -and my meaning is, that all these Infinite actions -do belong to the Infinite body of nature, which being -infinite in substance must also of necessity be infinite in -its actions; but although these Infinite actions are -inherent in the power of the Infinite substance of nature, -yet they are never put in act in her parts, by reason -there being contraries in nature, and every one of -the aforementioned actions having its opposite, they -do hinder and obstruct each other so, that none can -actually run into infinite; for the Infinite degrees of -compositions hinder the infinite degrees of divisions; and -the infinite degrees of rarity, softness, swiftness, &c. -hinder the infinite degrees of density, hardness, slowness, -&c. all which nature has ordered with great wisdom -and Prudence to make an amiable combination between -her parts; for if but one of these actions should run -into infinite, it would cause a horrid confusion between -natures parts, nay an utter destruction of the whole -body of nature, if I may call it whole: as for example, -if one part should have infinite compositions, without -the hinderance or obstruction of division, it would at -last mount and become equal to the Infinite body of -nature, and so from a part change to a whole, from -being finite to infinite, which is impossible; Wherefore, -though nature hath an Infinite natural power, -yet she doth not put this power in act in her particulars; -and although she has an infinite force or strength, yet -she doth not use this force or strength in her parts. -Moreover when I speak of Infinite divisions and compositions, -creations and dissolutions, &c. in nature, I -do not mean so much the infinite degrees of compositions -and divisions, as the actions themselves to be infinite -in number; for there being infinite parts in nature, -and every one having its compositions and divisions, -creations and dissolutions, these actions must of necessity -be infinite too, to wit, in number, according to -the Infinite number of parts, for as there is an Infinite -number of parts in nature, so there is also an infinite -number and variety of motions which are natural actions. -However let there be also infinite degrees of these -natural actions, in the body or substance of infinite -nature; yet, as I said, they are never put in act, by -reason every action hath its contrary or opposite, which -doth hinder and obstruct it from running actually into -infinite. And thus I hope, you conceive cleerly now, -what my opinion is, and that I do not contradict my self -in my works, as some have falsly accused me, for they -by misapprehending my meaning, judge not according -to the truth of my sense, but according to their own -false interpretation, which shews not onely a weakness -in their understandings and passions, but a great injustice -and injury to me, which I desire you to vindicate -when ever you chance to hear such accusations and blemishes -laid upon my works, by which you will Infinitely -oblige,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h2><a name="Sect_II" id="Sect_II">SECT. II.</a></h2> - -<h3>I.</h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Being come now to the Perusal of -the Works of that learned <i>Author</i> -Dr. <i>Moor</i>, I find that the onely design -of his Book called <i>Antidote</i>, is -<i>to prove the Existence</i> of a God, and -to refute, or rather convert Atheists; -which I wonder very much at, considering, -he says himself,<a name="FNanchor_1_52" id="FNanchor_1_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_52" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>there is no man -under the cope of Heaven but believes a God</i>; which if so, -what needs there to make so many arguments to no -purpose? unless it be to shew Learning and wit; In my -opinion, it were better to convert Pagans to be Christians, -or to reform irregular Christians to a more pious -life, then to prove that, which all men believe, which -is the way to bring it into question. For certainly, -according to the natural Light of Reason, there is a -God, and no man, I believe, doth doubt it; for though -there may be many vain words, yet I think there is no -such atheistical belief amongst man-kind, nay, not onely -amongst men, but also, amongst all other creatures, -for if nature believes a God, all her parts, especially -the sensitive and rational, which are the living and -knowing parts, and are in all natural creatures, do the -like, and therefore all parts and creatures in nature do -adore and worship God, for any thing man can -know to the contrary; for no question, but natures -soule adores and worships God as well as man's soule; -and why may not God be worshipped by all sorts and -kinds of creatures as well, as by one kind or sort? I will -not say the same way, but I believe there is a general -worship and adoration of God; for as God is an Infinite -Deity, so certainly he has an Infinite Worship and Adoration, -and there is not any part of nature, but adores and -worships the only omnipotent God, to whom belongs -Praise and Glory from and to all eternity: For it is very -improbable, that God should be worshipped onely in -part, and not in whole, and that all creatures were made to -obey man, and not to worship God, onely for man's -sake, and not for God's worship, for man's use, and not -God's adoration, for mans spoil and not God's blessing. -But this Presumption, Pride, Vain-glory and Ambition -of man, proceeds from the irregularity of nature, -who being a servant, is apt to commit errors; and cannot -be so absolute and exact in her devotion, adoration and -worship, as she ought, nor so well observant of God as -God is observing her: Nevertheless, there is not any -of her parts or creatures, that God is not acknowledged -by, though not so perfectly as he ought, which is -caused by the irregularities of nature, as I said before. -And so God of his mercy have mercy upon all Creatures; -To whose protection I commend your Ladiship, -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_52" id="Footnote_1_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_52"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antidote, Book</i> I. <i>c.</i> 10. <i>a.</i> 5.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_II" id="II_II">II.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since I spake in my last of the adoration and worship -of God, you would faine know, whether we -can have an Idea of God? I answer, That naturally -we may, and really have a knowledge of the existence -of God, as I proved in my former letter, to wit, that -there is a God, and, that he is the <i>Author</i> of all things, -who rules and governs all things, and is also the God of -Nature: but I dare not think, that naturally we can -have an Idea of the essence of God, so as to know what -God is in his very nature and essence; for how can -there be a finite Idea of an Infinite God? You may say, -As well as of Infinite space. I answer, Space is relative, -or has respect to body, but there is not any thing that -can be compared to God; for the Idea of Infinite nature -is material, as being a material creature of Infinite -material Nature. You will say, How can a finite -part have an Idea of infinite nature? I answer, Very -well, by reason the Idea is part of Infinite Nature, and -so of the same kind, as material; but God being an Eternal, -Infinite, Immaterial, Individable Being, no -natural creature can have an Idea of him. You will -say, That the Idea of God in the mind is immaterial; -I answer, I cannot conceive, that there can be any immaterial -Idea in nature; but be it granted, yet that Immaterial -is not a part of God, for God is individable, and -hath no parts; wherefore the Mind cannot have an -Idea of God, as it hath of Infinite nature, being a part -of nature; for the Idea of God cannot be of the essence -of God, as the Idea of nature is a corporeal part of -nature: and though nature may be known in some parts, -yet God being Incomprehensible, his Essence can by -no wayes or means be naturally known; and this is -constantly believed, by</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_III" id="II_III">III.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Although I mentioned in my last, that it is impossible -to have an Idea of God, yet your <i>Author</i> is -pleased to say,<a name="FNanchor_1_53" id="FNanchor_1_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_53" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>he will not stick to affirm, -that the Idea or notion of God is as easie, as any notion else -whatsoever, and that we may know as much of him as -of any thing else in the world</i>. To which I answer, That -in my opinion, God is not so easily to be known by any -creature, as man may know himself; nor his attributes -so well, as man can know his own natural proprieties: -for Gods Infinite attributes are not conceivable, and -cannot be comprehended by a finite knowledg and understanding, as -a finite part of nature; for though nature's -parts may be Infinite in number, and as they have a -relation to the Infinite whole, if I may call it so, which -is Infinite nature, yet no part is infinite in it self, and -therefore it cannot know so much as whole nature: and -God being an Infinite Deity, there is required an Infinite -capacity to conceive him; nay, Nature her self although -Infinite, yet cannot possibly have an exact notion -of God, by reason of the disparity between God and her -self; and therefore it is not probable, if the Infinite servant -of God is not able to conceive him, that a finite part -or creature of nature, of what kind or sort soever, whether -Spiritual, as your <i>Author</i> is pleased to name it, or -Corporeal, should comprehend God. Concerning -my belief of God, I submit wholly to the Church, -and believe as I have bin informed out of the <i>Athanasian</i> -Creed, that the Father is Incomprehensible, the Sonne -Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible; -and that there are not three, but one Incomprehensible -God; Wherefore if any man can prove (as I -do verily believe he cannot) that God is not Incomprehensible, -he must of necessity be more knowing then -the whole Church, however he must needs dissent -from the Church. But perchance your <i>Author</i> may -say, I raise new and prejudicial opinions, in saying that -matter is eternal. I answer, The Holy Writ doth not -mention Matter to be created, but onely Particular -Creatures, as this Visible World, with all its Parts, as -the history or description of the Creation of the World -in <i>Genesis</i> plainly shews; For <i>God said, Let it be -Light, and there was Light; Let there be a Firmament -in the midst of the Waters, and let it divide the Waters -from the Waters; and Let the Waters under the Heaven -be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry Land -appear; and let the Earth bring forth Grass, the Herb -yielding Seed, and the Fruit-tree yielding Fruit after his -kind; and let there be Lights in the Firmament of the -Heaven, to divide the Day from the Night,</i> &c. Which -proves, that all creatures and figures were made and produced -out of that rude and desolate heap or chaos -which the Scripture mentions, which is nothing else -but matter, by the powerful Word and Command of -God, executed by his Eternal Servant, Nature; as I -have heretofore declared it in a Letter I sent you in the -beginning concerning Infinite Nature. But least I -seem to encroach too much upon Divinity, I submit this -Interpretation to the Church; However, I think it not -against the ground of our Faith; for I am so far from -maintaining any thing either against Church or State, -as I am submitting to both in all duty, and shall do so as -long as I live, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_53" id="Footnote_1_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_53"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, pt.</i> 1., <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_IV" id="II_IV">IV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since your <i>Worthy</i> and <i>Learned Author</i> is pleased -to mention,<a name="FNanchor_1_54" id="FNanchor_1_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_54" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That an <i>ample experience both of Men -and Things doth enlarge our Understanding</i>, I have -taken occasion hence to enquire, how a mans Understanding -may be encreased or inlarged. The Understanding -must either be in Parts, or it must be Individable -as one; if in Parts, then there must be so many -Understandings as there are things understood; but if -Individable, and but one Understanding, then it must -dilate it self upon so many several objects. I for my -part, assent to the first, That Understanding increases -by Parts, and not by Dilation, which Dilation must -needs follow, if the Mind or Understanding of man be -indivisible and without parts; but if the Mind or Soul -be Individable, then I would fain know, how Understanding, -Imagination, Conception, Memory, Remembrance, -and the like, can be in the mind? You -will say, perhaps, they are so many faculties or properties -of the Incorporeal Mind, but, I hope, you do -not intend to make the Mind or Soul a Deity, with so -many attributes, Wherefore, in my opinion, it is -safer to say, That the Mind is composed of several active -Parts: but of these Parts I have treated in my Philosophy, -where you will find, that all the several Parts of Nature -are Living and Knowing, and that there is no part -that has not Life and Knowledg, being all composed -of rational and sensitive matter, which is the life and -soul of Nature; and that Nature being Material, is -composable and dividable, which is the cause of so many -several Creatures, where every Creature is a part of -Nature, and these Infinite parts or creatures are Nature -her self; for though Nature is a self-moving substance, -and by self-motion divides and composes her self several -manners or ways into several forms and figures, yet being -a knowing, as well as a living substance, she knows -how to order her parts and actions wisely; for as she -hath an Infinite body or substance, so she has an Infinite -life and knowledg; and as she hath an Infinite life and -knowledg, so she hath an infinite wisdom: But mistake -me not, <i>Madam</i>; I do not mean an Infinite Divine Wisdom, -but an Infinite Natural Wisdom, given her by -the Infinite bounty of the Omnipotent God; but yet -this Infinite Wisdom, Life and Knowledg in Nature -make but one Infinite. And as Nature hath degrees -of matter, so she has also degrees and variety of corporeal -motions; for some parts of matter are self-moving, -and some are moved by these self-moving parts of matter; -and all these parts, both the moving and moved, are -so intermixed, that none is without the other, no not in -any the least Creature or part of Nature we can conceive; -for there is no Creature or part of Nature, but -has a comixture of those mentioned parts of animate and -inanimate matter, and all the motions are so ordered by -Natures wisdom, as not any thing in Nature can be -otherwise, unless by a Supernatural Command and -Power of God; for no part of corporeal matter and -motion can either perish, or but rest; one part may -cause another part to alter its motions, but not to quit -motion, no more then one part of matter can annihilate -or destroy another; and therefore matter is not meerly -Passive, but always Active, by reason of the thorow -mixture of animate and inanimate matter; for although -the animate matter is onely active in its nature, and the -inanimate passive, yet because they are so closely united -and mixed together that they make but one body, -the parts of the animate or self-moving matter do bear -up and cause the inanimate parts to move and work with -them; and thus there is an activity in all parts of matter -moving and working as one body, without any fixation -or rest, for all is moveable, moving and moved. All -which, <i>Madam</i>, if it were well observed, there would -not be so many strange opinions concerning nature and -her actions, making the purest and subtillest part of matter -immaterial or incorporeal, which is as much, as to -extend her beyond nature, and to rack her quite to nothing. -But I fear the opinion of Immaterial substances -in Nature will at last bring in again the Heathen Religion, -and make us believe a god <i>Pan, Bacchus, Ceres, -Venus,</i> and the like, so as we may become worshippers -of Groves and shadows, Beans and Onions, as our -Forefathers. I say not this, as if I would ascribe any -worship to Nature, or make her a Deity, for she is onely -a servant to God, and so are all her parts or creatures, -which parts or creatures, although they are transformed, -yet cannot be annihilated, except Nature her self -be annihilated, which may be, whensoever the Great -God pleases; for her existence and resolution, or total -destruction, depends upon Gods Will and Decree, -whom she fears, adores, admires, praises and prayes -unto, as being her God and Master; and as she adores -God, so do all her parts and creatures, and amongst the -rest Man, so that there is no Atheist in Infinite Nature, -at least not in the opinion of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_54" id="Footnote_1_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_54"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. Book.</i> 2. <i>Ch.</i> 2. <i>a.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_V" id="II_V">V.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I cannot well conceive what your <i>Author</i> means -by the <i>Common Laws of Nature</i>;<a name="FNanchor_1_55" id="FNanchor_1_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_55" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> But if you desire -my opinion how many Laws Nature hath, and what -they are; I say Nature hath but One Law, which is a -wise Law, to keep Infinite matter in order, and to -keep so much Peace, as not to disturb the Foundation -of her Government: for though Natures actions are -various, and so many times opposite, which would seem -to make wars between several Parts, yet those active -Parts, being united into one Infinite body, cannot -break Natures general Peace; for that which Man -names War, Sickness, Sleep, Death, and the like, are -but various particular actions of the onely matter; not, -as your <i>Author</i> imagines, in a confusion, like Bullets, -or such like things juggled together in a mans Hat, but -very orderly and methodical; And the Playing motions -of nature are the actions of Art, but her serious actions -are the actions of Production, Generation and Transformation -in several kinds, sorts and particulars of her -Creatures, as also the action of ruling and governing -these her several active Parts. Concerning the Pre-eminence -and Prerogative of <i>Man</i>, whom your <i>Author</i> -calls<a name="FNanchor_2_56" id="FNanchor_2_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_56" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>The flower and chief of all the products of nature -upon this Globe of the earth</i>; I answer, That Man cannot -well be judged of himself, because he is a Party, and -so may be Partial; But if we observe well, we shall -find that the Elemental Creatures are as excellent as -Man, and as able to be a friend or foe to Man, as Man -to them, and so the rest of all Creatures; so that I cannot -perceive more abilities in Man then in the rest of natural -Creatures; for though he can build a stately House, -yet he cannot make a Honey-comb; and though he -can plant a Slip, yet he cannot make a Tree; though -he can make a Sword, or Knife, yet he cannot make -the Mettal. And as Man makes use of other Creatures, -so other Creatures make use of Man, as far as -he is good for any thing: But Man is not so useful to -his neighbour or fellow-creatures, as his neighbour or -fellow-creatures to him, being not so profitable for use, -as apt to make spoil. And so leaving him, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_55" id="Footnote_1_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_55"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. Book.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_56" id="Footnote_2_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_56"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>C.</i> 3.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_VI" id="II_VI">VI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> demands,<a name="FNanchor_1_57" id="FNanchor_1_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_57" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>Whether there was ever any -man, that was not mortal, and whether there be any -mortal that had not a beginning?</i> Truly, if nature -be eternal, all the material figures which ever were, -are, and can be, must be also eternal in nature; for the -figures cannot be annihilated, unless nature be destroyed; -and although a Creature is dissolved and transformed -into numerous different figures, yet all these -several figures remain still in those parts of matter, -whereof that creature was made, for matter never changes, -but is always one and the same, and figure is nothing -else but matter transposed or transformed by motion -several modes or ways. But if you conceive Matter -to be one thing, Figure another, and Motion a third, -several, distinct and dividable from each other, it will -produce gross errors, for, matter, motion, and figure, -are but one thing. And as for that common question, -whether the Egg was before the Chick, or the Chick -before the Egg, it is but a thred-bare argument, which -proves nothing, for there is no such thing as First in Eternity, -neither doth Time make productions or generations, -but Matter; and whatsoever matter can produce -or generate, was in matter before it was produced; -wherefore the question is, whether Matter, which is -Nature, had a beginning, or not? I say not: for -put the case, the figures of Earth, Air, Water, and Fire, -Light and Colours, Heat and Cold, Animals, Vegetables -and Minerals, &c. were not produced from all -Eternity, yet those figures have nevertheless been in -Matter, which is Nature, from all eternity, for these -mentioned Creatures are onely made by the corporeal -motions of Matter, transforming Matter into -such several figures; Neither can there be any perishing -or dying in Nature, for that which Man -calls so, is onely an alteration of Figure. And as -all other productions are but a change of Matters -sensitive motions, so all irregular and extravagant -opinions are nothing but a change of Matters rational -motions; onely productions by rational motions -are interior, and those by sensitive motions exterior. -For the Natural Mind is not less material -then the body, onely the Matter of the Mind is -much purer and subtiller then the Matter of the -Body. And thus there is nothing in Nature but -what is material; but he that thinks it absurd to -say, the World is composed of meer self-moving -Matter, may consider, that it is more absurd to -believe Immaterial substances or spirits in Nature, -as also a spirit of Nature, which is the Vicarious -power of God upon Matter; For why should it not -be as probable, that God did give Matter a self-moving -power to her self, as to have made another -Creature to govern her? For Nature is -not a Babe, or Child, to need such a Spiritual -Nurse, to teach her to go, or to move; neither -is she so young a Lady as to have need of a Governess, -for surely she can govern her self; she -needs not a Guardian for fear she should run away -with a younger Brother, or one that cannot make her a -Jointure. But leaving those strange opinions to the -fancies of their Authors, I'le add no more, but that -I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_57" id="Footnote_1_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_57"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. l.</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 15. <i>a.</i> 3.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_VII" id="II_VII">VII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> being very earnest in arguing against -those that maintain the opinion of Matter -being self-moving, amongst the rest of his arguments -brings in this:<a name="FNanchor_1_58" id="FNanchor_1_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_58" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>Suppose</i>, says he, <i>Matter could -move it self, would meer Matter with self-motion amount -to that admirable wise contrivance of things which we see -in the World?—All the evasion I can imagine, our adversaries -may use here, will be this: That Matter is capable -of sense, and the finest and most subtil of the most refined -sense; and consequently of Imagination too, yea happily -of Reason and Understanding.</i> I answer, it is very -probable, that not onely all the Matter in the World -or Universe hath Sense, but also Reason; and that the -sensitive part of matter is the builder, and the rational -the designer; whereof I have spoken of before, and you -may find more of it in my Book of Philosophy. <i>But,</i> -says your Author, <i>Let us see, if all their heads laid -together can contrive the anatomical Fabrick of any Creature -that liveth?</i> I answer, all parts of Nature are not -bound to have heads or tayls; but if they have, surely -they are wiser then many a man's. <i>I demand</i>, says he, -<i>Has every one of these Particles, that must have a hand -in the framing of the body of an animal, the whole design -of the work by the Impress of some Phantasme upon it? -or as they have several offices, so have they several parts -of the design?</i> I answer, All the actions of self-moving -Matter are not Impresses, nor is every part a hand-labourer, -but every part unites by degrees into such or -such a Figure. Again, says he, <i>How is it conceiveable -that any one Particle of Matter, or many together, (there -not existing, yet in Nature an animal) can have the Idea -Impressed of that Creature they are to frame?</i> I answer, -all figures whatsoever have been, are, or can be in Nature, -are existent in nature. <i>How</i>, says he, <i>can they -in framing several parts confer notes? by what language -or speech can they communicate their Counsels one to another?</i> -I answer, Knowledg doth not always require -speech, for speech is an effect and not a cause, but -knowledg is a cause and not an effect; and nature hath -infinite more ways to express knowledg then man can -imagine, <i>Wherefore</i>, he concludes, <i>that they should -mutually serve one another in such a design, is more impossible, -then that so many men, blind and dumb from their -nativity, should joyn their forces and wits together to build -a Castle, or carve a statue of such a Creature, as none of -them knew any more in several, then some one of the smallest -parts thereof, but not the relation it bore to the whole.</i> I -answer, Nature is neither blind nor dumb, nor any -ways defective, but infinitely wise and knowing; for -blindness and dumbness are but effects of some of her -particular actions, but there is no defect in self-moving -matter, nor in her actions in general; and it is absurd to -conceive the Generality of wisdom according to an Irregular -effect or defect of a particular Creature; for the -General actions of Nature are both life and knowledg, -which are the architects of all Creatures, and know -better how to frame all kinds and sorts of Creatures -then man can conceive; and the several parts of Matter -have a more easie way of communication, then Mans -head hath with his hand, or his hand with pen, ink, and -paper, when he is going to write; which later example -will make you understand my opinion the better, if you -do but compare the rational part of Matter to the head, -the sensitive to the hand, the inanimate to pen, ink and -paper, their action to writing, and their framed figures -to those figures or letters which are written; in all which -is a mutual agreement without noise or trouble. But -give me leave, <i>Madam</i>, to tell you, That self-moving -Matter may sometimes erre and move irregularly, and -in some parts not move so strong, curious, or subtil at -sometimes, as in other parts, for Nature delights in variety; -Nevertheless she is more wise then any Particular -Creature or part can conceive, which is the cause that -Man thinks Nature's wise, subtil and lively actions, are -as his own gross actions, conceiving them to be constrained -and turbulent, not free and easie, as well as wise -and knowing; Whereas Nature's Creating, Generating -and Producing actions are by an easie connexion -of parts to parts, without Counterbuffs, Joggs and -Jolts, producing a particular figure by degrees, and in -order and method, as humane sense and reason may -well perceive: And why may not the sensitive and rational -part of Matter know better how to make a Bee, -then a Bee doth how to make Honey and Wax? or -have a better communication betwixt them, then Bees -that fly several ways, meeting and joyning to make their -Combes in their Hives? But pardon, <i>Madam</i>, for I -think it a Crime to compare the Creating, Generating -and producing Corporeal Life and Wisdom of Nature -unto any particular Creature, although every particular -Creature hath their share, being a part of Nature. -Wherefore those, in my opinion, do grossly err, that -bind up the sensitive matter onely to taste, touch, hearing, -seeing, and smelling; as if the sensitive parts of -Nature had not more variety of actions, then to make -five senses; for we may well observe, in every Creature -there is difference of sense and reason according -to the several modes of self-motion; For the Sun, Stars, -Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Plants, Animals, Minerals; -although they have all sense and knowledg, yet -they have not all sense and knowledg alike, because sense -and knowledg moves not alike in every kind or sort of -Creatures, nay many times very different in one and the -same Creature; but yet this doth not cause a general -Ignorance, as to be altogether Insensible or Irrational, -neither do the erroneous and irregular actions of sense -and reason prove an annihilation of sense and reason; as -for example, a man may become Mad or a Fool -through the irregular motions of sense and reason, and -yet have still the Perception of sense and reason, onely -the alteration is caused through the alteration of the sensitive -and rational corporeal motions or actions, from -regular to irregular; nevertheless he has Perceptions, -Thoughts, Ideas, Passions, and whatsoever is made -by sensitive and rational Matter, neither can Perception -be divided from Motion, nor Motion from Matter; -for all sensation is Corporeal, and so is Perception. -I can add no more, but take my leave, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_58" id="Footnote_1_58"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_58"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 12.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_VIII" id="II_VIII">VIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> is pleased to say,<a name="FNanchor_1_59" id="FNanchor_1_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_59" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> that <i>Matter is a Principle -purely passive, and no otherwise moved or modified, -then as some other thing moves and modifies -it, but cannot move it self at all; which is most demonstrable -to them that contend for sense and perception in it: For -if it had any such perception, it would, by vertue of its -self-motion withdraw its self from under the knocks of -hammers, or fury of the fire; or of its own accord approach -to such things as are most agreeable to it, and pleasing, and -that without the help of muscles, it being thus immediately -endowed with a self-moving power.</i> By his leave, <i>Madam</i>, -I must tell you, that I see no consequence in this -argument; Because some parts of matter cannot withdraw -themselves from the force and power of other -parts, therefore they have neither sense, reason, nor -perception: For put the case, a man should be over-powr'd -by some other men, truely he would be forced -to suffer, and no Immaterial Spirits, I think, would -assist him. The very same may be said of other Creatures -or parts of Nature; for some may over-power -others, as the fire, hammer and hand doth over-power -a Horse-shooe, which cannot prevail over so much -odds of power and strength; And so likewise it is with -sickness and health, life and death; for example, some -corporeal motions in the body turning Rebels, by moving -contrary to the health of an animal Creature, it -must become sick; for not every particular creature -hath an absolute power, the power being in the Infinite -whole, and not in single divided parts: Indeed, -to speak properly, there is no such thing as an absolute -power in Nature; for though Nature hath power to -move it self, yet not beyond it self. But mistake me -not, for I mean by an absolute Power; not a circumscribed -and limited, but an unlimited power, no ways -bound or confined, but absolutely or every way Infinite, -and there is not anything that has such an absolute -power but God alone: neither can Nature be undividable, -being Corporeal or Material; nor rest from -motion being naturally self-moving, and in a perpetual -motion. Wherefore though Matter is self-moving, -and very wise, (although your <i>Author</i> denies it, calling -those Fools that maintain this opinion)<a name="FNanchor_2_60" id="FNanchor_2_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_60" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> yet it cannot -go beyond the rules of its Nature, no more then -any Art can go beyond its Rules and Principles: And -as for what your <i>Author</i> says, That every thing would -approach to that, which is agreeable and pleasant; I -think I need no demonstration to prove it; for we may -plainly see it in all effects of Nature, that there is Sympathy -and Antipathy, and what is this else, but approaching -to things agreeable and pleasant, and withdrawing -it self from things disagreeable, and hurtful or -offensive? But of this subject I shall discourse more -hereafter, wherefore I finish here, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_59" id="Footnote_1_59"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_59"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 2., <i>c.</i> 1. <i>a.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_60" id="Footnote_2_60"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_60"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>In the Append. to the Antid. c.</i> 3. <i>a.</i> 10.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_IX" id="II_IX">IX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Authors</i> opinion is,<a name="FNanchor_1_61" id="FNanchor_1_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_61" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Matter being once -actually divided as far as possibly it can, it is a perfect -contradiction it should be divided any further.</i> -I answer, Though Nature is Infinite, yet her actions -are not all dilative nor separative, but some divide and -some compose, some dilate and some contract, which -causes a mean betwixt Natures actions or motions. Next -your <i>Author</i> says, That <i>as Infinite Greatness has no -Figure, so Infinite Littleness hath none also.</i> I answer, -Whatsoever hath a body, has a figure; for it is -impossible that <i>substance</i>, or <i>body</i>, and <i>figure</i>, should be -separated from each other, but wheresoever is body or -substance, there is also figure, and if there be an infinite -substance, there must also be an infinite figure, -although not a certain determined or circumscribed figure, -for such a figure belongs onely to finite particulars; -and therefore I am of your <i>Authors</i> mind, That it is a -contradiction to say an Infinite Cube or Triangle, for -a Cube and a Triangle is a perfect circumscribed figure, -having its certain compass and circumference, be it never -so great or little; wherefore to say an Infinite Cube, -would be as much as to say a Finite Infinite. But as -for your <i>Authors</i> example of <i>Infinite matter, space or -duration, divided into three equal parts, all which he says -must needs be Infinite, or else the whole will not be so, and then -the middle part of them will seem both Finite and Infinite.</i> -I answer, That Matter is not dividable into three equal -parts, for three is a finite number and so are three equal -parts; but I say that Matter being an Infinite body, is -dividable into Infinite parts, and it doth not follow, as -your <i>Author</i> says, That one of those infinite parts must -be infinite also, for else there would be no difference -betwixt the whole and its parts; I say whole for distinctions -and better expressions sake, and do not mean -such a whole which hath a certain number of parts, -and is of a certain and limited figure, although never so -great; but an Infinite whole, which expression I must -needs use, by reason I speak of Infinite parts; and that -each one of these Infinite parts in number may be finite -in substance or figure, is no contradiction, but very -probable and rational; nay, I think it rather absurd -to say that each part is infinite; for then there would -be no difference betwixt parts and whole, as I said before. -Onely this is to be observed, that the Infinite -whole is Infinite in substance or bulk, but the parts are -Infinite in number, and not in bulk, for each part is -circumscribed, and finite in its exterior figure and substance. -But mistake me not, when I speak of circumscribed -and finite single parts; for I do not mean, that each -part doth subsist single and by it self, there being no such -thing as an absolute single part in Nature, but Infinite -Matter being by self-motion divided into an infinite -number of parts, all these parts have so near a relation -to each other, and to the infinite whole, that one cannot -subsist without the other; for the Infinite parts in -number do make the Infinite whole, and the Infinite -whole consists in the Infinite number of parts; wherefore -it is onely their figures which make a difference betwixt -them; for each part having its proper figure different -from the other, which is circumscribed and limited, it -is called a finite single part; and such a part cannot be -said Infinitely dividable, for infinite composition and -division belong onely to the Infinite body of Nature, -which being infinite in substance may also be infinitely -divided, but not a finite and single part: Besides, Infinite -composition doth hinder the Infinite division, and -Infinite division hinders the Infinite composition; so -that one part cannot be either infinitely composed, or -infinitely divided; and it is one thing to be dividable, -and another to be divided. And thus, when your <i>Author</i> -mentions in another place,<a name="FNanchor_2_62" id="FNanchor_2_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_62" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> That <i>if a body be divisible -into Infinite Parts, it hath an Infinite number of extended -parts:</i> If by extension he mean corporeal dimension, -I am of his opinion; for there is no part, be it never -so little in Nature, but is material; and if material, -it has a body; and if a body, it must needs have a bodily -dimension; and so every part will be an extended -part: but since there is no part but is finite in its self, -it cannot be divisible into infinite parts; neither can any -part be infinitely dilated or contracted; for as composition -and division do hinder and obstruct each other -from running into Infinite, so doth dilation hinder the -Infinite contraction, and contraction the Infinite dilation, -which, as I said before, causes a mean betwixt Nature's -actions; nevertheless, there are Infinite dilations -and contractions in Nature, because there are Infinite -contracted and dilated parts, and so are infinite divisions -because there are infinite divided parts; but contraction, -dilation, extension, composition, division, and -the like, are onely Nature's several actions; and as -there can be no single part in Nature that is Infinite, so -there can neither be any single Infinite action. But -as for Matter, Motion and Figure, those are Individable -and inseparable, and make but one body or substance; -for it is as impossible to divide them, as impossible -it is to your <i>Author</i> to separate the essential proprieties, -which he gives, from an Immortal Spirit; And as -Matter, Motion and Figure are inseparable; so is likewise -Matter, Space, Place and Duration; For Parts, -Motion, Figure, Place and Duration, are but one Infinite -body; onely the Infinite parts are the Infinite divisions -of the Infinite body, and the Infinite body is a -composition of the Infinite parts; but figure, place and -body are all one, and so is time, and duration, except -you will call time the division of duration, and duration -the composition of time; but infinite time, and infinite -duration is all one in Nature: and thus Nature's Principal -motions and actions are dividing, composing, and -disposing or ordering, according to her Natural wisdom, -by the Omnipotent God's leave and permission. -Concerning the <i>Sun</i>, which your <i>Author</i> speaks of in -the same place, and denies him to be a <i>Spectator of our -particular affairs upon Earth</i>; saying, there is no such -divine Principle in him, whereby he can do it. I will -speak nothing again it, nor for it; but I may say, that -the Sun hath such a Principle as other Creatures have, -which is, that he has sensitive and rational corporeal -motions, as well as animals or other Creatures, although -not in the same manner, nor the same organs; -and if he have sensitive and rational motions, he may also -have sensitive and rational knowledg or perception, -as well as man, or other animals and parts of Nature -have, for ought any body knows; for it is plain to humane -sense and reason, that all Creatures must needs -have rational and sensitive knowledg, because they -have all sensitive and rational matter and motions. But -leaving the Sun for Astronomers to contemplate upon, -I take my leave, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_61" id="Footnote_1_61"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_61"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>In the Preface before the Imm. of the Soul.</i></p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_62" id="Footnote_2_62"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_62"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Antid. Book.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_X" id="II_X">X.</a></h3> - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> in his arguments against <i>Motion</i>, being -a <i>Principle of Nature</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_63" id="FNanchor_1_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_63" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> endeavours to prove, -that Beauty, Colour, Symmetry, and the like, -in Plants, as well as in other Creatures, are no result -from the meer motion of the matter; and forming this -objection, <i>It may be said</i>, says he, <i>That the regular -motion of the matter made the first plant of every kind; but -we demand, What regulated the motion of it, so as to guide -it, to form it self into such a state?</i> I answer, The Wisdom -of Nature or infinite Matter did order its own -actions so, as to form those her Parts into such an exact -and beautiful figure, as such a Tree, or such a Flower, -or such a Fruit, and the like; and some of her Parts are -pleased and delighted with other parts, but some of her -parts are afraid or have an aversion to other parts; and -hence is like and dislike, or sympathy and antipathy, -hate and love, according as nature, which is infinite -self-moving matter, pleases to move; for though Natural -Wisdom is dividable into parts, yet these parts are -united in one infinite Body, and make but one Being -in it self, like as the several parts of a man make up but -one perfect man; for though a man may be wise in several -causes or actions, yet it is but one wisdom; and -though a Judg may shew Justice in several causes, yet it -is but one Justice; for Wisdom and Justice, though -they be practised in several causes, yet it is but one Wisdom, -and one Justice; and so, all the parts of a mans -body, although they move differently, yet are they -but one man's bodily actions; Just as a man, if he carve -or cut out by art several statues, or draw several Pictures, -those statues or pictures are but that one man's -work. The like may be said of Natures Motions and -Figures; all which are but one self-active or self-moving -Material Nature. But Wise Nature's Ground -or Fundamental actions are very Regular, as you may -observe in the several and distinct kinds, sorts and particulars -of her Creatures, and in their distinct Proprieties, -Qualities, and Faculties, belonging not onely -to each kind and sort, but to each particular Creature; -and since man is not able to know perfectly all those proprieties -which belong to animals, much less will he be -able to know and judg of those that are in Vegetables, -Minerals and Elements; and yet these Creatures, for any -thing Man knows, may be as knowing, understanding, -and wise as he; and each as knowing of its kind or -sort, as man is of his; But the mixture of ignorance -and knowledg in all Creatures proceeds from thence, -that they are but Parts; and there is no better proof, that -the mind of man is dividable, then that it is not perfectly -knowing; nor no better proof that it is composeable, -then that it knows so much: but all minds are not alike, -but some are more composed then others, which is the -cause, some know more then others; for if the mind in -all men were alike, all men would have the same Imaginations, -Fancies, Conceptions, Memories, Remembrances, -Passions, Affections, Understanding, and so -forth: The same may be said of their bodies; for if all -mens sensitive parts were as one, and not dividable and -composeable, all their Faculties, Proprieties, Constitutions, -Complexions, Appetites, would be the same -in every man without any difference; but humane sense -and reason doth well perceive, that neither the mind, -life nor body are as one piece, without division and composition. -Concerning the divine Soul, I do not treat -of it; onely this I may say, That all are not devout alike, -nor those which are, are not at all times alike devout. -But to conclude: some of our modern Philosophers -think they do God good service, when they endeavour -to prove Nature, as Gods good Servant, to -be stupid, ignorant, foolish and mad, or any thing -rather then wise, and yet they believe themselves wise, -as if they were no part of Nature; but I cannot imagine -any reason why they should rail on her, except -Nature had not given them as great a share or portion, -as she hath given to others; for children in this case do -often rail at their Parents, for leaving their Brothers and -Sisters more then themselves. However, Nature can -do more then any of her Creatures: and if Man can -Paint, Imbroider, Carve, Ingrave curiously; why -may not Nature have more Ingenuity, Wit and Wisdom -then any of her particular Creatures? The same -may be said of her Government. And so leaving Wise -Nature, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_63" id="Footnote_1_63"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_63"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Append. to the Antid. c.</i> 11.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XI" id="II_XI">XI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>To your <i>Authors</i> argument,<a name="FNanchor_1_64" id="FNanchor_1_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_64" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>if Motion belong -naturally to Matter, Matter being Uniform, -it must be alike moved in every part or particle imaginable -of it, by reason this Motion being natural and essential -to Matter, is alike every way.</i> I answer, That -this is no more necessary, then that the several actions -of one body, or of one part of a body should be alike; -for though Matter is one and the same in its Nature, -and never changes, yet the motions are various, which -motions are the several actions of one and the same Natural -Matter; and this is the cause of so many several -Creatures; for self-moving matter by its self-moving -power can act several ways, modes or manners; and -had not natural matter a self-acting power, there could -not be any variety in Nature; for Nature knows of no -rest, there being no such thing as rest in Nature; but -she is in a perpetual motion, I mean self-motion, given -her from God: Neither do I think it Atheistical (as -your <i>Author</i> deems) to maintain this opinion of self-motion, -as long as I do not deny the Omnipotency of -God; but I should rather think it Irreligious to make -so many several Creatures as Immaterial Spirits, like so -many severall Deities, to rule and govern Nature and -all material substances in Nature; for what Atheism -doth there lie in saying, that natural matter is naturally -moving, and wise in her self? Doth this oppose -the omnipotency and Infinite wisdom of God? It rather -proves and confirms it; for all Natures free power -of moving and wisdom is a gift of God, and proceeds -from him; but I must confess, it destroys the power of -Immaterial substances, for Nature will not be ruled nor -governed by them, and to be against Natural Immaterial -substances, I think, is no Atheisme, except we make -them Deities; neither is Atheisme to contradict the -opinion of those, that believe such natural incorporeal -Spirits, unless man make himself a God. But although -Nature is wise, as I said before, and acts methodically, -yet the variety of motions is the cause of so many Irregularities -in Nature, as also the cause of Irregular opinions; -for all opinions are made by self-moving matters -motions, or (which is all one) by corporeal self-motion, -and some in their opinions do conceive Nature according -to the measure of themselves, as that Nature can, nor -could not do more, then they think, nay, some believe -they can do as much as Nature doth; which opinions, -whether they be probable or regular, I'le let any man -judg; adding onely this, that to humane sense and reason -it appears plainly, that as God has given Nature a -power to act freely, so he doth approve of her actions, -being wise and methodical in all her several Productions, -Generations, Transformations and Designs: And so I -conclude for the present, onely subscribe my self, as really -I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_64" id="Footnote_1_64"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_64"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. l.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 1.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XII" id="II_XII">XII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am of your <i>Authors</i> opinion, concerning self-activity -or self-motion,<a name="FNanchor_1_65" id="FNanchor_1_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_65" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That what is Active of it self, can -no more cease to be active then to be</i>: And I have been -always of this opinion, even from the first beginning of -my conceptions in natural Philosophy, as you may see -in my first Treatise of Natural Philosophy, which I put -forth eleven years since; where I say, That self-moving -Matter is in a Perpetual motion; But your <i>Author</i> endeavors -from thence to conclude, That <i>Matter is not -self active, because it is reducible to rest.</i> To which I -answer, That there is no such thing as Rest in Nature: -Not do I say, that all sorts of motions are subject to -our senses, for those that are subject to our sensitive Perceptions, -are but gross Motions, in comparison to those -that are not subject to our exterior senses: as for example; -We see some bodies dilate, others consume, others -corrupt; yet we do not see how they dilate, nor how -they consume, nor how they corrupt: Also we see some -bodies contract, some attract, some condense, some -consist, &c. yet we do not see their contracting, attracting, -condensing, consisting or retenting motions; and -yet we cannot say, they are not corporeal motions, because -not subject to our exterior senses; for if there were -not contracting, attracting, retenting or consistent corporeal -self-motions, it had been impossible that any -creature could have been composed into one united figure, -much less stayed and continued in the same figure -without a general alteration. But your <i>Author</i> -says, <i>If Matter, as Matter, had Motion, nothing would -hold together, but Flints, Adamants, Brass, Iron, yea, -this whole Earth, would suddenly melt into a thinner substance -then the subtil Air, or rather it never had been condensated -together to this consistency we find it.</i> But I -would ask him, what reason he can give, that corporeal -self-motion should make all matter rare and fluid, -unless he believe there is but one kind of motion in Nature, -but this, human sense and reason will contradict; -for we may observe there are Infinite changes of Motion, -and there is more variety and curiosity in corporeal -motions, then any one single Creature can imagine, -much less know; but I suppose he conceives all corporeal -matter to be gross, and that not any corporeal motion -can be subtil, penetrating, contracting and dilating; -and that whatsoever is penetrating, contracting -and dilating, is Individable: But by his leave, <i>Madam</i>, -this doth not follow; for though there be gross degrees -of Matter, and strong degrees of Corporeal Motions, -yet there are also pure and subtil degrees of Matter and -Motions; to wit, that degree of Matter, which I name -sensitive and rational Matter, which is natural Life and -Knowledg, as sensitive Life and rational Knowledg. -Again, your <i>Author</i> askes, <i>What glue or cement holds the -parts of hard matter in Stones and Metals together?</i> -I answer, Consistent or retentive corporeal motions, -by an agreeable union and conjunction in the several -parts of Metal or Stone; and these retentive or consistent -motions, are as strong and active, if not more, -then some dilative or contractive motions; for I have -mentioned heretofore, that, as sensitive and rational -corporeal motions are in all Creatures, so also in Stone, -Metal, and any other dense body whatsoever; so that -not any one Creature or part of Matter is without Motion, -and therefore not any thing is at rest. But, -<i>Madam</i>, I dare say, I could bring more reason and -sense to prove, that sensitive and rational Matter is fuller -of activity, and has more variety of motion, and -can change its own parts of self-moving Matter more -suddenly, and into more exterior figures, then Immaterial -Spirits can do upon natural Matter. But your -<i>Author</i> says, That Immaterial Spirits are endued with -Sense and Reason; I say, My sensitive and rational -corporeal Matter is Sense and Reason it self, and is the -Architect or Creator of all figures of Natural matter, -for though all the parts of Matter are not self-moving, -yet there is not any part that is not moving or moved, by -and with the mover, which is animate matter. And thus -I conclude, and rest constantly,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_65" id="Footnote_1_65"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_65"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 7.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XIII" id="II_XIII">XIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>That Matter is uncapable of Sense, your <i>Author</i> -proves by the example of dead Carcasses;<a name="FNanchor_1_66" id="FNanchor_1_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_66" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>For,</i> -says he, <i>Motion and Sense being really one and the -same thing, it must needs follow, that where there is motion, -there is also sense and perception; but on the contrary, -there is Reaction in dead Carcasses, and yet no Sense.</i> -I answer shortly, That it is no consequence, because -there is no animal sense nor exterior perceptible local -motion in a dead Carcass, therefore there is no -sense at all in it; for though it has not animal sense, yet -it may nevertheless have sense according to the nature of -that figure, into which it did change from being an animal. -Also he says, <i>If any Matter have sense, it will -follow, that upon reaction all shall have the like; and that a -Bell while it is ringing, and a Bow while it is bent, and every -Jack-in-a-box, that School-boys play with, shall be -living animals.</i> I answer, It is true, if reaction made -sense; but reaction doth not make sense, but sense -makes reaction; and though the Bell hath not an animal -knowledg, yet it may have a mineral life and -knowledg, and the Bow, and the Jack-in-a-box a vegetable -knowledg; for the shape and form of the Bell, -Bow, and Jack-in-a-box, is artificial; nevertheless each -in its own kind may have as much knowledg as an animal -in his kind; onely they are different according to -the different proprieties of their Figures: And who -can prove the contrary that they have not? For certainly -Man cannot prove what he cannot know; but Mans -nature is so, that knowing but little of other Creatures, -he presently judges there is no more knowledg in Nature, -then what Man, at least Animals, have; and confines -all sense onely to Animal sense, and all knowledg -to Animal knowledg. Again says your Author, <i>That -Matter is utterly uncapable of such operations as we -find in our selves, and that therefore there is something -in us Immaterial or Incorporeal; for we find in our selves -that one and the same thing, both hears, and sees, and -tastes, and perceives all the variety of objects that Nature -manifests unto us.</i> I answer, That is the reason -there is but one matter, and that all natural perception -is made by the animate part of matter; but although -there is but one matter in Nature, yet there are several -parts or degrees, and consequently several actions of -that onely matter, which causes such a variety of perceptions, -both sensitive and rational: the sensitive perception -is made by the sensitive corporeal motions, copying -out the figures of forreign objects in the sensitive organs -of the sentient; and if those sensitive motions do pattern -out forreign objects in each sensitive organ alike at -one and the same time, then we hear, see, taste, touch -and smell, at one and the same time: But Thoughts and -Passions, as Imagination, Conception, Fancy, Memory, -Love, Hate, Fear, Joy, and the like, are made -by the rational corporeal motions in their own degree of -matter, to wit, the rational. And thus all perception is -made by one and the same matter, through the variety -of its actions or motions, making various and several figures, -both sensitive and rational. But all this variety -in sense and reason, or of sensitive and rational perceptions, -is not made by parts pressing upon parts, but by -changing their own parts of matter into several figures -by the power of self-motion: For example, I see -a Man or Beast; that Man or Beast doth not touch my -eye, in the least, neither in it self, nor by pressing the adjoyning -parts: but the sensitive corporeal motions streight -upon the sight of the Man or Beast make the like figure -in the sensitive organ, the Eye, and in the eyes own substance -or matter, as being in the eye as well as the other -degrees of matter, to wit, the rational and inanimate, -for they are all mixt together. But this is to be observed, -That the rational matter can and doth move in its -own substance, as being the purest and subtillest degree -of matter; but the sensitive being not so pure and subtil, -moves always with the inanimate Matter, and so -the perceptive figures which the rational Matter, or rational -corporeal Motions make, are made in their own -degree of Matter; but those figures which the sensitive -patterns out, are made in the organs or parts of the sentient -body proper to such or such a sense or perception: -as in an animal Creature, the perception of sight -is made by the sensitive corporeal motions in the Eye; -the perception of hearing, in the Ear, and so forth. -As for what your <i>Author</i> says, <i>That we cannot conceive -any portion of Matter, but is either hard or soft</i>; I -answer, That these are but effects of Matters actions, -and so is rare, and dense, and the like; but there are -some Creatures which seem neither perfectly rare, nor -dense, nor hard, nor soft, but of mixt qualities; as for -example, Quicksilver seems rare, and yet is dense; soft, -and yet is hard; for though liquid Quicksilver is soft to -our touch, and rare to our sight, yet it is so dense and hard, -as not to be readily dissolved from its nature; and if there -be such contraries and mixtures in one particular creature -made of self-moving Matter, what will there not be in -Matter it self, according to the old saying: <i>If the Man such -praise shall have; What the Master that keeps the knave?</i> -So if a particular Creature hath such opposite qualities -and mixtures of corporeal motions, what will the Creator -have which is self-moving Matter? Wherefore -it is impossible to affirm, that self-moving Matter is either -all rare, or all dense, or all hard, or all soft; because -by its self-moving power it can be either, or both, -and so by the change and variety of motion, there may -be soft and rare Points, and hard and sharp Points, hard -and contracted Globes, and soft and rare Globes; also -there may be pressures of Parts without printing, and -printing without pressures. Concerning that part of -Matter which is the <i>Common Sensorium</i>, your <i>Author</i> demands, -<i>Whether some point of it receive the whole Image -of the object, or whether it be wholly received into every -point of it?</i> I answer, first, That all sensitive Matter -is not in Points; Next, That not any single part can -subsist of it self; and then that one Part doth not receive -all parts or any part into it self; but that Parts by the -power of self-motion can and do make several figures of -all sizes and sorts, and can Epitomize a great object into -a very little figure; for outward objects do not move the -body, but the sensitive and rational matter moves according -to the figures of outward objects: I do not say -always, but most commonly; <i>But</i>, says your Author, -<i>How can so smal a Point receive the Images of so vast or so -various objects at once, without obliteration or confusion.</i> -First, I answer, That, as I said before, sensitive Matter -is not bound up to a Point, nor to be a single self-subsisting -Part. Next, as for confusion, I say, that the -sensitive matter makes no more confusion, then an Engraver, -when he engraves several figures in a small -stone, and a Painter draws several figures in a small -compass; for a Carver will cut out several figures in a -Cherry-stone, and a Lady in a little black Patch; and if -gross and rude Art is able to do this, what may not Ingenious -and Wise Nature do? And as Nature is ingenious -and knowing in her self, so in her Parts, and her -Parts in her; for neither whole nor Parts are ignorant, -but have a knowledg, each according to the motion of -its own Parts; for knowledg is in Motion, and Motion in -Matter; and the diversity and variety of motion is the -diversity and variety of knowledg, so that every particular -figure and motion hath its particular knowledg, -as well as its proper and peculiar parts; and as the parts -join or divide, so doth knowledg, which many times -causes Arts to be lost and found, and memory and remembrance -in Particular Creatures: I do not say, they -are utterly lost in nature, but onely in respect to particular -Creatures, by the dissolving and dividing of their -particular figures. For the rational matter, by reason -it moves onely in its own parts, it can change and rechange -into several figures without division of parts, -which makes memory and remembrance: But men not -considering or believing there might be such a degree of -onely matter, namely rational, it has made them erre in -their judgments. Nevertheless there is a difference between -sensitive and rational parts and motions, and yet -they are agreeable most commonly in their actions, -though not always. Also the rational can make such -figures as the sensitive cannot, by reason the rational has -a greater power and subtiler faculty in making variety, -then the sensitive; for the sensitive is bound to move -with the inanimate, but the rational moves onely in its -own parts; for though the sensitive and rational oftentimes -cause each other to move, yet they are not of one -and the same degree of matter, nor have they the same -motions. And this rational Matter is the cause of all -Notions, Conceptions, Imaginations, Deliberation, -Determination, Memory, and any thing else that belongs -to the Mind; for this matter is the mind of Nature, -and so being dividable, the mind of all Creatures, -as the sensitive is the life; and it can move, as I said, more -subtilly, and more variously then the sensitive, and make -such figures as the sensitive cannot, without outward examples -and objects. But all diversity comes by change -of motion, and motions are as sympathetical and agreeing, -as antipathetical and disagreeing; And though Nature's -artificial motions, which are her Playing motions, -are sometimes extravagant, yet in her fundamental -actions there is no extravagancy, as we may observe -by her exact rules in the various generations, the distinct -kinds and sorts, the several exact measures, times, proportions -and motions of all her Creatures, in all which her -wisdom is well exprest, and in the variety her wise pleasure: -To which I leave her, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_66" id="Footnote_1_66"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_66"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XIV" id="II_XIV">XIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p><i>If there be any sense and perception in Matter</i>, says -your Author,<a name="FNanchor_1_67" id="FNanchor_1_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_67" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>it must needs be Motion or Reaction of -one part of matter against another; and that all diversity -of sense and perception doth necessarily arise from the -diversity of the Magnitude, Figure, Posture, Vigour -and Direction of Motion in Parts of the Matter; In -which variety of perceptions, Matter hath none, but such, -as are impressed by corporeal motions, that is to say, that -are perceptions of some actions, or modificated Impressions -of parts of matter bearing one against another.</i> I have -declared, <i>Madam</i>, my opinion concerning Perception -in my former Letters, that all Perception is not Impression -and Reaction, like as a Seal is printed on Wax: -For example, the corporeal rational motions in the -mind do not print, but move figuratively; but the sensitive -motions do carve, print, engrave, and, as it were, -pencil out, as also move figuratively in productions, and -do often take patterns from the rational figures, as the -rational motions make figures according to the sensitive -patterns; But the rational can move without patterns, -and so the sensitive: For surely, were a man born blind, -deaf, dumb, and had a numb palsie in his exterior -parts, the sensitive and rational motions would nevertheless -move both in body and mind according to the -nature of his figure; for though no copies were taken -from outward objects, yet he would have thoughts, -passions, appetites, and the like; and though he could -not see exterior objects, nor hear exterior sounds, yet no -question but he would see and hear interiously after the -manner of dreams, onely they might not be any thing -like to what is perceiveable by man in the World; but -if he sees not the Sun-light, yet he would see something -equivalent to it; and if he hears not such a thing as -Words, yet he would hear something equivalent to -words; for it is impossible, that his sensitive and rational -faculties should be lost for want of an Ear, or an -Eye; so that Perception may be without exterior object, -or marks, or patterns: for although the sensitive -Motions do usually pattern out the figures of exterior -objects, yet that doth not prove, but they can make interior -figures without such objects. Wherefore Perception -is not always Reaction, neither is Perception -and Reaction really one thing; for though Perception -and Action is one and the same, yet not always Reaction; -but did Perception proceed from the reaction of -outward objects, a blind and deaf man would not so -much as dream; for he would have no interior motion -in the head, having no other exterior sense but touch, -which, if the body was troubled with a painful disease, -he would neither be sensible of, but to feel pain, and -interiously feel nothing but hunger and fulness; and his -Mind would be as Irrational as some imagine Vegetables -and Minerals are. To which opinion I leave -them, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_67" id="Footnote_1_67"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_67"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 1. <i>a.</i> 1, 6, 7.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XV" id="II_XV">XV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> is pleased, in Mirth, and to disgrace -the opinion of those which hold, that Perception is -made by figuring, to bring in this following example:<a name="FNanchor_1_68" id="FNanchor_1_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_68" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -<i>Suppose</i>, says he, <i>one Particle should shape it self -into a</i> George on Horse-back <i>with a Lance in his hand, -and another into an Inchanted Castle; this</i> George on -Horse-back <i>must run against the Castle, to make the -Castle receive his impress and similitude: But what then? -Truly the Encounter will be very Unfortunate, for -S.</i> George <i>indeed may easily break his Lance, but it is -impossible that he should by justling against the Particle -in the form of a Castle, conveigh the intire shape of himself -and his Horse thereby, such as we find our selves able to -imagine of a man on Horse-back; which is a Truth as demonstrable -as any Theorem in Mathematicks.</i> I answer, -first, That there is no Particle single and alone by it self; -Next, I say, It is more easie for the rational matter to -put it self into such figures, and to make such encounters, -then for an Immaterial mind or substance to imagine -it; for no imagination can be without figure, and -how should an Immaterial created substance present such -Figures, but by making them either in it self or upon -matter? For S. <i>George</i> and the <i>Castle</i> are figures, and -their encounters are real fighting actions, and how such -figures and actions can be in the mind or memory, and -yet not be, is impossible to conceive; for, as I said, -those figures and actions must be either in the incorporeal -mind, or in the corporeal parts of matter; and if -the figures and motions may be in an incorporeal substance, -much more is it probable for them to be in a -corporeal; nay if the figures and their actions can be in -gross corporeal matter, why should they not be in the -purest part of matter, which is the rational matter? And -as for being made known to the whole body, and every -part thereof, it is not necessary, no more then it is necessary, -that the private actions of every Man or Family -should be made known to the whole Kingdom, or -Town, or Parish: But my opinion of self-corporeal -motion and perception, may be as demonstrable as -that of Immaterial Natural Spirits, which, in my mind, -is not demonstrable at all, by reason it is not corporeal -or material; For how can that be naturally demonstrable, -which naturally is nothing? But your <i>Author</i> -believes the Mind or rational Soul to be individable, and -therefore concludes, that the Parts of the same Matter, -although at great distance, must of necessity know each -Particular act of each several Part; but that is not necessary; -for if there were not ignorance through the division -of Parts, every man and other creatures would know -alike; and there is no better proof, that matter, or any -particular creature in nature is not governed by a created -Immaterial Spirit, then that knowledg is in parts; -for the hand doth not know what pain the head feels, -which certainly it would do, if the mind were not -dividable into parts, but an individable substance. -But this is well to be observed, that some parts -in some actions agree generally in one body, and -some not; as for example, temperance and appetite -do not agree; for the corporeal actions of -appetite desire to join with the corporeal actions of -such or such other parts, but the corporeal actions of -temperance do hinder and forbid it; whereupon there -is a faction amongst the several parts: for example, a -Man desires to be drunk with Wine; this desire is -made by such corporeal actions as make appetite; the -rational corporeal motions or actions which make temperance, -oppose those that make appetite, and that sort -of actions which hath the better, carryes it, the hand -and other parts of the body obeying the strongest side; -and if there be no wine to satisfie the appetite, yet many -times the appetite continues; that is, the parts continue -in the same motions that make such an appetite; -but if the appetite doth not continue, then those parts -have changed their motions; or when by drinking, the -appetite is satisfied, and ceases, then those parts that made -the appetite, have altered their former motions. But -oftentimes the rational corporeal motions may so agree -with the sensitive, as there may be no opposition or crossing -at all, but a sympathetical mutual agreement betwixt -them, at least an approvement; so that the rational -may approve what the sensitive covet or desire: Also -some motions of the rational, as also of the sensitive matter, -may disagree amongst themselves, as we see, that a man -will often have a divided mind; for he will love and hate -the same thing, desire and not desire one and the same -thing, as to be in Heaven, and yet to be in the World: -Moreover, this is to be observed, That all rational perceptions -or cogitations, are not so perspicuous and clear -as if they were Mathematical Demonstrations, but there -is some obscurity, more or less in them, at least they are -not so well perceivable without comparing several figures -together, which proves, they are not made by an individable, -immaterial Spirit, but by dividable corporeal -parts: As for example, Man writes oftentimes false, and -seldom so exact, but he is forced to mend his hand, and -correct his opinions, and sometimes quite to alter them, -according as the figures continue or are dissolved and altered -by change of motion, and according as the actions -are quick or slow in these alterations, the humane -mind is setled or wavering; and as figures are made, or -dissolved and transformed, Opinions, Conceptions, Imaginations, -Understanding, and the like, are more -or less; And according as these figures last, so is constancy -or inconstancy, memory or forgetfulness, and as -those figures are repeated, so is remembrance; but sometimes -they are so constant and permanent, as they last -as long as the figure of the body, and sometimes it happens -not once in an age, that the like figures are repeated, -and sometimes they are repeated every moment: -As for example; a man remembers or calls to mind the -figure of another man, his friend, with all his qualities, -dispositions, actions, proprieties, and the like, several -times in an hour, and sometimes not once in a year, and -so as often as he remembers him, as often is the figure -of that man repeated; and as oft as he forgets him, so -often is his figure dissolved. But some imagine the rational -motions to be so gross as the Trotting of a Horse, -and that all the motions of Animate matter are as rude -and course as renting or tearing asunder, or that all impressions -must needs make dents or creases. But as Nature -hath degrees of corporeal matter, so she hath also -degrees of corporeal motions, Matter and Motion being -but one substance; and it is absurd to judg of the interior -motions of self-moving matter, by artificial or -exterior gross motions, as that all motions must be like -the tearing of a sheet of Paper, or that the printing and -patterning of several figures of rational and sensitive -matter must be like the printing of Books; nay, all artificial -Printings are not so hard, as to make dents and -impresses; witness Writing, Painting, and the like; -for they do not disturb the ground whereon the letters -are written, or the picture drawn, and so the curious -actions of the purest rational matter are neither rude nor -rough; but although this matter is so subtil and pure, as -not subject to exterior human senses and organs, yet -certainly it is dividable, not onely in several Creatures, -but in the several parts of one and the same Creature, as -well as the sensitive, which is the Life of Nature, as -the other is the Soul; not the Divine, but natural Soul; -neither is this Soul Immaterial, but Corporeal; not -composed of raggs and shreds, but it is the purest, -simplest and subtillest matter in Nature. But to conclude, -I desire you to remember, <i>Madam</i>, that this -rational and sensitive Matter in one united and finite -Figure or particular Creature, has both common -and particular actions, for as there are several -kinds and sorts of Creatures, and particulars in -every kind and sort: so the like for the actions of the -rational and sensitive matter in one particular Creature. -Also it is to be noted, That the Parts of -rational matter, can more suddenly give and take Intelligence -to and from each other, then the sensitive; -nevertheless, all Parts in Nature, at least adjoyning -parts, have Intelligence between each other, more -or less, because all parts make but one body; for it is -not with the parts of Matter, as with several Constables -in several Hundreds, or several Parishes, which -are a great way distant from each other, but they -may be as close as the combs of Bees, and yet as -partable and as active as Bees. But concerning the -Intelligence of Natures Parts, I have sufficiently spoken -in other places; and so I'le add no more, but that -I unfeignedly remain;</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_68" id="Footnote_1_68"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_68"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>In the second Book of the Immortality of the Soul, ch.</i> 6.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XVI" id="II_XVI">XVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p><i>Sensation in corporeal motion is first, and Perception -follows</i>, sayes your <i>Author</i>:<a name="FNanchor_1_69" id="FNanchor_1_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_69" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> to which opinion I -give no assent, but do believe that Perception and -Sensation are done both at one and the same time, as being -one and the same thing without division, either in -reason or sense, and are performed without any knocks, -or jolts, or hitting against. But let me tell you, <i>Madam</i>, -there arises a great mistake by many, from not -distinguishing well, sensitive Motion, and rational Motion; -for though all motions are in one onely matter, -yet that matter doth not move always in the same manner, -for then there could be no variety in Nature; and -truly, if man, who is but a part of Nature, may move -diversly, and put himself into numerous postures; Why -may not Nature? But concerning Motions, and -their variety, to avoid tedious repetitions, I must still referr -you to my Book of <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>; I'le add -onely this, that it is well to be observed, That all Motions -are not Impressions, neither do all Impressions -make such dents, as to disturb the adjoyning Parts: -Wherefore those, in my opinion, understand <i>Nature</i> -best, which say, that Sensation and Perception are really -one and the same; but they are out, that say, there -can be no communication at a distance, unless by pressing -and crowding; for the patterning of an outward -object, may be done without any inforcement or -disturbance, jogging or crowding, as I have declared -heretofore; for the sensitive and rational motions in the -sensitive and rational parts of matter in one creature, observing -the exterior motions in outward objects, move -accordingly, either regularly or irregularly in patterns; -and if they have no exterior objects, as in dreams, they -work by rote. And so to conclude, I am absolutely -of their opinion, who believe, that there is nothing -existent in Nature, but what is purely Corporeal, for -this seems most probable in sense and reason to me,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_69" id="Footnote_1_69"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_69"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>In the Pref. of the Imm. of the Soul.</i></p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XVII" id="II_XVII">XVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Outward Objects, as I have told you before, do -not make Sense and Reason, but Sense and -Reason do perceive and judg of outward objects; -For the Sun doth not make sight, nor doth sight make -light; but sense and reason in a Man, or any other -creature, do perceive and know there are such objects -as Sun, and Light, or whatsoever objects are presented -to them. Neither doth Dumbness, Deafness, Blindness, -&c. cause an Insensibility, but Sense through irregular -actions causes them; I say, through Irregular -actions, because those effects do not properly belong to -the nature of that kind of Creatures; for every Creature, -if regularly made, hath particular motions proper -to its figure; for natural Matters wisdom makes -distinctions by her distinct corporeal motions, giving -every particular Creature their due Portion and Proportion -according to the nature of their figures, and to -the rules of her actions, but not to the rules of Arts, -Mathematical Compasses, Lines, Figures, and the -like. And thus the Sun, Stars, Meteors, Air, Fire, -Water, Earth, Minerals, Vegetables and Animals, -may all have Sense and Reason, although it doth not -move in one kind or sort of Creatures, or in one -particular, as in another: For the corporeal motions -differ not onely in kinds and sorts, but also in Particulars, -as is perceivable by human sense and reason; -Which is the cause, that Elements have elemental sense -and knowledg, and Animals animal sense and knowledg, -and so of Vegetables, Minerals, and the like. -Wherefore the Sun and Stars may have as much sensitive -and rational life and knowledg as other Creatures, -but such as is according to the nature of their figures, and -not animal, or vegetable, or mineral sense and knowledg. -And so leaving them, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XVIII" id="II_XVIII">XVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> denying that Fancy, Reason and -Animadversion are seated in the Brain, and that -the Brain is figured into this or that Conception:<a name="FNanchor_1_70" id="FNanchor_1_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_70" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -<i>I demand</i>, says he, <i>in what knot, loop or interval thereof -doth this faculty of free Fancy and active Reason reside?</i> -My answer is, that in my opinion, Fancy and Reason -are not made in the Brain, as there is a Brain, but as -there is sensitive and rational matter, which makes not -onely the Brain, but all Thoughts, Conceptions, Imaginations, -Fancy, Understanding, Memory, Remembrance, -and whatsoever motions are in the Head, -or Brain: neither doth this sensitive and rational matter -remain or act in one place of the Brain, but in every -part thereof; and not onely in every part of the Brain, -but in every part of the Body; nay, not onely in every -part of a Mans Body, but in every part of Nature. But, -<i>Madam</i>, I would ask those, that say the Brain has -neither sense, reason, nor self-motion, and therefore -no Perception; but that all proceeds from an Immaterial -Principle, as an Incorporeal Spirit, distinct from -the body, which moveth and actuates corporeal matter; -I would fain ask them, I say, where their Immaterial -Ideas reside, in what part or place of the Body? and -whether they be little or great? Also I would ask them, -whether there can be many, or but one Idea of God? If -they say many, then there must be several, distinct Deitical -Ideas; if but one, Where doth this Idea reside? -If they say in the head, then the heart is ignorant of -God; if in the heart, then the head is ignorant thereof, -and so for all parts of the body; but if they say, in every -part, then that Idea may be disfigured by a lost member; -if they say, it may dilate and contract, then I say -it is not the Idea of God, for God can neither contract -nor extend; nor can the Idea it self dilate and contract, -being immaterial; for contraction and dilation belong -onely to bodies, or material beings: Wherefore the -comparisons betwixt Nature and a particular Creature, -and between God and Nature, are improper; much -more betwixt God and Natures particular motions and -figures, which are various and changeable, although -methodical. The same I may ask of the Mind of -Man, as I do of the Idea in the Mind. Also I might -ask them, what they conceive the natural mind of man -to be, whether material or immaterial? If material, -their opinion is rational, and so the mind is dividable -and composable; if immaterial, then it is a Spirit; and -if a Spirit, it cannot possibly dilate nor contract, having -no dimension nor divisibility of parts, (although your -<i>Author</i> proves it by the example of Light; but I have -exprest my meaning heretofore, that <i>light</i> is divisible) -and if it have no dimension, how can it be confined in -a material body? Wherefore when your <i>Author</i> says, -the mind is a substance, it is to my reason very probable; -but not when he says, it is an immaterial substance, -which will never agree with my sense and reason; for it -must be either something, or nothing, there being no -<i>medium</i> between, in Nature. But pray mistake me -not, <i>Madam</i>, when I say Immaterial is nothing; for -I mean nothing Natural, or so as to be a part of Nature; -for God forbid, I should deny, that God is a -Spiritual Immaterial substance, or Being; neither do I -deny that we can have an Idea, notion, conception, or -thought of the existence of God; for I am of your <i>Authors</i> -opinion, That there is no Man under the cope of -Heaven, that doth not by the light of Nature, know, -and believe there is a God; but that we should have -such a perfect Idea of God, as of any thing else in the -World, or as of our selves, as your <i>Author</i> says, I cannot -in sense and reason conceive to be true or possible. -Neither am I against those Spirits, which the holy -Scripture mentions, as Angels and Devils, and the divine -Soul of Man; but I say onely, that no Immaterial -Spirit belongs to Nature, so as to be a part thereof; for -Nature is Material, or Corporeal; and whatsoever is -not composed of matter or body, belongs not to Nature; -nevertheless, Immaterial Spirits may be in Nature, -although not parts of Nature. But there can neither -be an Immaterial Nature, nor a Natural Immaterial; -Nay, our very thoughts and conceptions of Immaterial -are Material, as made of self-moving Matter. -Wherefore to conclude, these opinions in Men proceed -from a Vain-glory, as to have found out something -that is not in Nature; to which I leave them, and -their natural Immaterial Substances, like so many -Hobgoblins to fright Children withal, resting in the -mean time,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_70" id="Footnote_1_70"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_70"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. lib.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 11.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XIX" id="II_XIX">XIX.</a></h3> - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>There are various opinions concerning the seat of -Common Sense, as your <i>Author</i> rehearseth them -in his Treatise of the Immortality of the Soul;<a name="FNanchor_1_71" id="FNanchor_1_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_71" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -But my opinion is, That common sense hath also a -common place; for as there is not any part of the body -that hath not sense and reason, so sense and reason is in -all parts of the body, as it is observable by this, that every -part is subject to pain and pleasure, and all parts are -moveable, moving and moved; also appetites are in every -part of the body: As for example, if any part -itches, it hath an appetite to be scratched, and every part -can pattern out several objects, and so several touches; -and though the rational part of matter is mixt in all -parts of the body, yet it hath more liberty to make variety -of Motions in the head, heart, liver, spleen, stomack, -bowels, and the like, then in the other parts of -the body; nevertheless, it is in every part, together -with the sensitive: but they do not move in every part -alike, but differ in each part more or less, as it may be -observed; and although every part hath some difference -of knowledg, yet all have life and knowledg, sense -and reason, some more, some less, and the whole body -moves according to each part, and so do all the bodily -Faculties and Proprieties, and not according to one -single part; the rational Soul being in all parts of the body: -for if one part of the body should have a dead Palsie, -it is not, that the Soul is gone from that part, but that -the sensitive and rational matter has altered its motion -and figure from animal to some other kind; for certainly, -the rational Soul, and so life, is in every part, as well -in the Pores of the skin, as in the ventricles of the brain, -and as well in the heel as in the head; and every part -of the body knows its own office, what it ought to do, -from whence follows an agreement of all the parts: -And since there is difference of knowledg in every -part of one body, well may there be difference between -several kinds and sorts, and yet there is knowledg -in all; for difference of knowledg is no argument -to prove they have no knowledg at all. Wherefore -I am not of the opinion, that that which moves the -whole body, is as a Point, or some such thing in a little -kernel or <i>Glandula</i> of the Brain, as an Ostrich-egge is -hung up to the roof of a Chamber; or that it is in -the stomack like a single penny in a great Purse; neither -is it in the midst of the heart, like a Lady in a -Lobster; nor in the blood, like as a Menow, or Sprat -in the Sea; nor in the fourth Ventricle of the Brain, -as a lousie Souldier in a Watch-tower. But you may -say, it is like a farthing Candle in a great Church: I -answer, That Light will not enlighten the by Chappels -of the Church, nor the Quest-house, nor the -Belfrey; neither doth the Light move the Church, -though it enlightens it: Wherefore the Soul after -this manner doth not move the corporeal body, no -more then the Candle moves the Church, or the -Lady moves the Lobster, or the Sprat the Sea as -to make it ebb and flow. But this I desire you to -observe, <i>Madam</i>, that though all the body of man -or any other Creature, hath sense and reason, which is -life and knowledg, in all parts, yet these parts being all -corporeal, and having their certain proportions, can -have no more then what is belonging or proportionable -to each figure: As for example; if a Man should -feed, and not evacuate some ways or other, he could -not live; and if he should evacuate and not feed, he -could not subsist: wherefore in all Natures parts there -is ingress and egress, although not always perceived by -one creature, as Man; but all exterior objects do not -enter into Man, or any other Creature, but are figured -by the rational, and some by the sensitive parts or motions -in the body; wherefore it is not rational to believe, -that exterior objects take up any more room, then if -there were none presented to the sensitive organs: Nor -is there any thing which can better prove the mind to be -corporeal, then that there may be several Figures in several -parts of the body made at one time, as Sight, Hearing, -Tasting, Smelling, and Touching, and all these -in each several organ, as well at one, as at several times, -either by patterns, or not; which figuring without -Pattern, may be done as well by the sensitive motions in -the organs, as by the rational in the mind, and is called -remembrance. As for example: a Man may hear or -see without an object; which is, that the sensitive and rational -matter repeat such figurative actions, or make others -in the sensitive organs, or in the mind: and Thoughts, -Memory, Imagination, as also Passion, are no less corporeal -actions then the motion of the hand or heel; -neither hath the rational matter, being naturally wise, -occasion to jumble and knock her parts together, by -reason every part knows naturally their office what -they ought to do, or what they may do. But I conclude, -repeating onely what I have said oft before, that -all Perceptions, Thoughts, and the like, are the Effects, -and Life and Knowledg, the Nature and Essence of -self-moving Matter. And so I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_71" id="Footnote_1_71"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_71"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Lib.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XX" id="II_XX">XX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am not able to conceive how the Mind of Man can be -compared to a Table-book, in which nothing -is writ;<a name="FNanchor_1_72" id="FNanchor_1_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_72" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> nor how to a Musician, who being asleep, -doth not so much as dream of any Musick, but being -jogg'd and awakend by another, who tells him two or -three words of a Song, and desires him to sing it, presently -recovers himself, and sings upon so slight an Intimation: -For such intimations are nothing else but outward -objects, which the interior sense consents to, and obeys; -for interior sense and reason doth often obey outward -objects: and in my opinion there is no rest in Nature, -and so neither in the Mind or natural Soul of Man, -which is in a perpetual motion, and needs therefore no -jogging to put it into any actual motion; for it hath -actual motion and knowledg in it self, because it is a self-moving -substance, actually knowing, and Material or -Corporeal, not Immaterial, as your <i>Author</i> thinks: -and this material or corporeal Mind is nothing else -but what I call the rational matter, and the corporeal -life is the sensitive matter. But this is to be observed, -that the motions of the corporeal Mind do often imitate -the motions of the sensitive Life, and these again -the motions of the mind: I say oftentimes; for they -do it not always, but each one can move without -taking any pattern from the other. And all this I understand -of the Natural Soul of Man; not of the Divine -Soul, and her powers and faculties, for I leave -that to Divines to inform us of; onely this I say, that -men not conceiving the distinction between this natural -and divine Soul, make such a confusion betwixt -those two Souls and their actions, which causes so -many disputes and opinions. But if Nature hath -power from God to produce all kinds of Vegetables, -Minerals, Elements, Animals, and other sorts of -Creatures, Why not also Man? Truly if all Creatures -are natural Creatures, Man must be so too; and -if Man is a natural Creature, he must needs have natural -sense and reason, as well as other Creatures, being -composed of the same matter they are of. Neither -is it requisite, that all Creatures, being of the same -matter, must have the same manner of sensitive and -rational knowledg; which if so, it is not necessary -for Corn to have Ears to hear the whistling or chirping -of Birds, nor for Stones to have such a touch of -feeling as animals have, and to suffer pain, as they -do, when Carts go over them; as your <i>Author</i> is -pleased to argue out of <i>Æsopes</i> Tales; or for the Heliotrope -to have eyes to see the Sun: for what necessity -is there that they should have humane sense and reason? -which is, that the rational and sensitive matter should -act and move in them as she doth in man or animals: -Certainly if there must be any variety in nature, it is -requisite she should not; wherefore all Vegetables, Minerals, -Elements, and Animals, have their proper motions -different from each others, not onely in their -kinds and sorts, but also in their particulars. And though -Stones have no progressive motion to withdraw -themselves from the Carts going over them, which -your <i>Author</i> thinks they would do, if they had sense, -to avoid pain: nevertheless they have motion, and consequently -sense and reason, according to the nature and -propriety of their figure, as well as man has according -to his. But this is also to be observed, that not any -humane Creature, which is accounted to have the perfectest -sense and reason, is able always to avoid what is -hurtful or painful, for it is subject to it by Nature: Nay, -the Immaterial Soul it self, according to your <i>Author</i>,<a name="FNanchor_2_73" id="FNanchor_2_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_73" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -cannot by her self-contracting faculty withdraw her self -from pain. Wherefore there is no manner of consequence -to conclude from the sense of Animals to the -sense of Minerals, they being as much different as their -Figures are; And saying this, I have said enough to -express the opinion and mind of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_72" id="Footnote_1_72"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_72"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. Book</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 5.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_73" id="Footnote_2_73"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_73"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Append. to the Antid. ch.</i> 3.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXI" id="II_XXI">XXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> endeavours very much to prove the -existency of a <i>Natural Immaterial Spirit</i>, whom -he defines to be an <i>Incorporeal substance, Indivisible, -that can move it self, can penetrate, contract and -dilate it self, and can also move and alter the matter.</i> -Whereof, if you will have my opinion, I confess freely -to you, that in my sense and reason I cannot conceive -it to be possible, that these is any such thing in Nature; -for all that is a substance in Nature, is a body, and what -has a body, is corporeal; for though there be several -degrees of matter, as in purity, rarity, subtilty, activity; -yet there is no degree so pure, rare and subtil, that can -go beyond its nature, and change from corporeal to -incorporeal, except it could change from being something -to nothing, which is impossible in Nature. Next, -there is no substance in Nature that is not divisible; for -all that is a body, or a bodily substance, hath extension, -and all extension hath parts, and what has parts, is divisible. -As for self-motion, contraction and dilation, -these are actions onely of Natural Matter; for Matter -by the Power of God is self-moving, and all sorts of -motions, as contraction, dilation, alteration, penetration, -&c. do properly belong to Matter; so that natural -Matter stands in no need to have some Immaterial or -Incorporeal substance to move, rule, guide and govern -her; but she is able enough to do it all her self, by the -free Gift of the Omnipotent God; for why should we -trouble our selves to invent or frame other unconceivable -substances, when there is no need for it, but Matter -can act, and move as well without them and of it self? -Is not God able to give such power to Matter, as to an -other Incorporeal substance? But I suppose this opinion -of natural Immaterial Spirits doth proceed from -Chymistry, where the extracts are vulgarly called Spirits; -and from that degree of Matter, which by reason -of its purity, subtilty and activity, is not subject to our -grosser senses; However, these are not Incorporeal, be -they never so pure and subtil. And I wonder much that -men endeavour to prove Immaterial Spirits by corporeal -Arts, when as Art is not able to demonstrate Nature -and her actions; for Art is but the effect of Nature, -and expresses rather the variety, then the truth of natural -motions; and if Art cannot do this, much less will -it be able to express what is not in Nature, or what is -beyond Nature; as to <i>trace the Visible</i> (or rather Invisible) -<i>footsteps of the divine Councel and Providence</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_74" id="FNanchor_1_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_74" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> or -to demonstrate things supernatural, and which go beyond -mans reach and capacity. But to return to Immaterial -Spirits, that they should rule and govern infinite -corporeal matter, like so many demy-Gods, by a -dilating nod, and a contracting frown, and cause so many -kinds and sorts of Corporeal Figures to arise, being Incorporeal -themselves, is Impossible for me to conceive; for -how can an Immaterial substance cause a Material corporeal -substance, which has no motion in it self, to form -so many several and various figures and creatures, and -make so many alterations, and continue their kinds and -sorts by perpetual successions of Particulars? But -perchance the Immaterial substance gives corporeal -matter motion. I answer, My sense and reason cannot -understand, how it can give motion, unless motion be -different, distinct and separable from it; nay, if -it were, yet being no substance or body it self, according -to your <i>Authors</i> and others opinion, the question is, -how it can be transmitted or given away to corporeal -matter? Your <i>Author</i> may say, That his Immaterial -and Incorporeal spirit of Nature, having self-motion, -doth form Matter into several Figures: I answer, Then -that Immaterial substance must be transformed and metamorphosed -into as many several figures as there are -figures in Matter; or there must be as many spirits, as -there are figures; but when the figures change, what -doth become of the spirits? Neither can I imagine, -that an Immaterial substance, being without body, can -have such a great strength, as to grapple with gross, heavy, -dull, and dead Matter; Certainly, in my opinion, -no Angel, nor Devil, except God Impower him, would -be able to move corporeal Matter, were it not self-moving, -much less any Natural Spirit. But God is a -Spirit, and Immovable; and if created natural Immaterial -participate of that Nature, as they do of the -Name, then they must be Immovable also. Your <i>Author, -Madam</i>, may make many several degrees of -Spirits; but certainly not I, nor I think any natural -Creature else, will be able naturally to conceive them. -He may say, perchance, There is such a close conjunction -betwixt Body and Spirit, as I make betwixt rational, -sensitive, and inanimate Matter. I answer, That these -degrees are all but one Matter, and of one and the same -Nature as meer Matter, different onely in degrees of -purity, subtilty, and activity, whereas Spirit and Body -are things of contrary Natures. In fine, I cannot conceive, -how a Spirit should fill up a place or space, having -no body, nor how it can have the effects of a body, -being none it self; for the effects flow from the cause; -and as the cause is, so are its effects: And so confessing -my ignorance, I can say no more, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_74" id="Footnote_1_74"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_74"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. lib.</i> 2. <i>ch.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXII" id="II_XXII">XXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> having assigned Indivisibility to the -Soul or Spirit that moves and actuates matter, I -desire to know, how one Indivisible Spirit can be in -so many dividable parts? For there being Infinite -parts in Nature, they must either have one Infinite Spirit -to move them, which must be dilated infinitely, or -this Spirit must move severally in every part of Nature: -If the first, then I cannot conceive, but all motion must -be uniform, or after one and the same manner; nay, I cannot -understand, how there can be any dilation and contraction, -or rather any motion of the same spirit, by reason -if it dilate, then, (being equally spread out in all the parts -of Matter,) it must dilate beyond Matter; and if it contract, -it must leave some parts of matter void, and without -motion. But if the Spirit moves every part severally, -then he is divisible; neither can I think, that there are so -many Spirits as there are Parts in Nature; for your -<i>Author</i> says, there is but one Spirit of Nature; I will -give an easie and plain example: When a Worm is -cut into two or three parts, we see there is sensitive life -and motion in every part, for every part will strive and -endeavour to meet and joyn again to make up the whole -body; now if there were but one indivisible Life, Spirit, -and Motion, I would fain know, how these severed -parts could move all by one Spirit. Wherefore, -Matter, in my opinion, has self-motion in it self, which -is the onely soul and life of Nature, and is dividable -as well as composable, and full of variety of action; for -it is as easie for several parts to act in separation, as in -composition, and as easie in composition as in separation; -Neither is every part bound to one kind or sort -of Motions; for we see in exterior local motions, that -one man can put his body into several shapes and postures, -much more can Nature. But is it not strange, -<i>Madam</i>, that a man accounts it absurd, ridiculous, -and a prejudice to Gods Omnipotency, to attribute self-motion -to Matter, or a material Creature, when it is -not absurd, ridiculous, or any prejudice to God, to -attribute it to an Immaterial Creature? What reason of -absurdity lies herein? Surely I can conceive none, except -it be absurd and ridiculous to make that, which no -man can know or conceive what it is, <i>viz.</i> an immaterial -natural Spirit, (which is as much as to say, a natural -No-thing) to have motion, and not onely motion, -but self-motion; nay, not onely self-motion, but -to move, actuate, rule, govern, and guide Matter, -or corporeal Nature, and to be the cause of all the most -curious varieties and effects in nature: Was not God -able to give self-motion as well to a Material, as to an -Immaterial Creature, and endow Matter with a self-moving -power? I do not say, <i>Madam</i>, that Matter hath -motion of it self, so, that it is the prime cause and principle -of its own self-motion; for that were to make -Matter a God, which I am far from believing; but my opinion -is, That the self-motion of Matter proceeds from -God, as well as the self-motion of an Immaterial Spirit; -and that I am of this opinion, the last Chapter of my -Book of Philosophy will enform you, where I treat of -the Deitical Centre, as the Fountain from whence all -things do flow, and which is the supream Cause, Author, -Ruler and Governor of all. Perhaps you will -say, it is, because I make Matter Eternal. 'Tis true, -<i>Madam</i>, I do so: but I think Eternity doth not take off -the dependance upon God, for God may nevertheless -be above Matter, as I have told you before. You may -ask me how that can be? I say, As well as any thing else -that God can do beyond our understanding: For I do -but tell you my opinion, that I think it most probable -to be so, but I can give you no Mathematical Demonstrations -for it: Onely this I am sure of, That it is not -impossible for the Omnipotent God; and he that questions -the truth of it, may question Gods Omnipotency. -Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I wonder how man can say, God is -Omnipotent, and can do beyond our Understanding, -and yet deny all that he is not able to comprehend -with his reason. However, as I said, it is my opinion, -That Matter is self-moving by the power of God; -Neither can Animadversion, and Perception, as also the -variety of Figures, prove, that there must be another -external Agent or Power to work all this in Matter; but -it proves rather the contrary; for were there no self-motion -in Matter, there would be no Perception, nor -no variety of Creatures in their Figures, Shapes, Natures, -Qualities, Faculties, Proprieties, as also in their -Productions, Creations or Generations, Transformations, -Compositions, Dissolutions, and the like, as -Growth, Maturity, Decay, &c. and for Animals, were -not Corporeal Matter self-moving, dividable and composable; -there could not be such variety of Passions, -Complexions, Humors, Features, Statures, Appetites, -Diseases, Infirmities, Youth, Age, &c. Neither -would they have any nourishing Food, healing -Salves, soveraign Medicines, reviving Cordials, or -deadly Poysons. In short, there is so much variety in -Nature, proceeding from the self-motion of Matter, -as not possible to be numbred, nor thorowly known -by any Creature: Wherefore I should labour in vain, -if I endeavoured to express any more thereof; and this -is the cause that I break off here, and onely subscribe my -self,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXIII" id="II_XXIII">XXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning the comparison, your <i>Author</i> makes -between an Immaterial Spirit, and Light,<a name="FNanchor_1_75" id="FNanchor_1_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_75" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That, -<i>as Light is contractive and dilative, and yet not divisible, -so is also an Immaterial substance.</i> Give me leave -to tell you, that in my opinion, all that is contractive -and dilative, is also dividable, and so is light: As for example; -when a Candle is snuff'd, the Snuffers do not -onely clip the wick, but also the light: The like when -a dark body is interposed, or crosses the rays of the Sun; -it cuts those rays asunder, which by reason they cannot -joyn together again, because of the interposed body, -the light cut off, suddenly goeth out; that is, the matter -of light is altered from the figure of light, to some other -thing, but not annihilated: And since no more -light can flow into the room from the Fountain or -Spring of Light, the Sun, because the passage is stopt -close, the room remaineth dark: For Light is somewhat -of the nature of Water; so long as the Spring is open, -the Water flows, and whatsoever is taken away, the -Spring supplies; and if another body onely presses thorow -it, it immediately joyns and closes its severed parts -again, without any difficulty or loss; The same doth -Light; onely the difference is, that the substance of -Light is extraordinary rare, and pure; for as Air is so -much rarer then Water, so Light is so much rarer and -purer then Air, and its matter may be of so dilating a -nature, as to dilate from a point into numerous rayes. -As for ordinary Fire-light, it doth not last longer, then -it hath fuel to feed it, and so likewise it is with the light -of the Sun; for Light is according to the substance that -feeds it; and though it is a substance it self, yet it increases -and decreases, according as it hath something -that succours or nourishes it. But some may object, -that if Light were a body, and did contract and dilate, -as I say, it is impossible that it could display it self in so -great and vast a compass, and remove so suddenly and -instantly as it doth. To which objection, I answer, first, -That although I say, Light is a real corporeal substance, -and doth contract and dilate it self from a point into numerous -rayes, as also in another Letter I sent you before,<a name="FNanchor_2_76" id="FNanchor_2_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_76" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -That Light and Darkness do succeed each other; -nevertheless, as for the perception of Light, I am not -so eager in maintaining this opinion, as if it was an Infallible -Truth, and impossible to be otherwise; but I -say onely, That, to my sense and reason, it seems very -probable, that it may be so, that the light of the Sun doth -really dilate it self into so vast a compass as we see, and -that light and darkness do really succeed each other, as -all other Creatures do: But yet it seems also probable -to mee, that the parts of the Air may onely pattern out -the figure of light, and that the light we see in the Air -may be onely patterns taken from the real figure of the -light of the Sun: And therefore, if it be according to -the former opinion, to wit, That the light of the Sun -doth really dilate it self into so vast a compass, My answer -is, That contraction and dilation are natural corporeal -actions or motions, and that there is no alteration -of motion in Nature, but is done in Time, that is, -successively, not instantly; for Time is nothing else but -the alteration of motion: Besides, I do not perceive -any so sudden and swift alteration and succession of -light, but that it is done by degrees: As for example; -in the morning, when it begins to dawn and grow light, -it appears clearly to our sight how light doth come -forth, and darkness remove by degrees; and so at -night, when it grows dark, how light removes, and -darkness succeeds; nay, if there be any such sudden -change of the motions of Light, I desire you to consider, -<i>Madam</i>, that light is a very subtil, rare, piercing -and active body, and therefore its motions are -much quicker then those of grosser bodies, and cannot -so well be perceived by our gross exterior senses. But -if it be, that the Air doth pattern out the light of the -Sun, then the framed objection can prove nothing, because -there is not then such a real dilation or succession -of light, but the corporeal figurative motions of the Air -do make patterns of the light of the Sun, and dissolve -those patterns or figures again, more suddenly and -quickly then man can shut and open his eyes, as being -more subtil then his gross exterior senses. But it may be -said, that if Air did pattern out the light of the Sun, the -light would increase by these numerous patterns. I answer, -that cannot appear to our Eyes; for we see onely -the pattern'd figure of light, and that a great compass -is enlightned; also that the further the air is from the -Sun, the darker it is; nevertheless, I do verily believe, -that the body of the Sun is far brighter then the light -we see, and that the substance of light, and the patterns -taken from light, are not one and the same, but very -different. And thus much of light. As for Penetration, -I conceive it to be nothing else but division; as -when some parts pierce and enter through other parts, -as Duellers run each other thorow, or as water runs -through a sieve. And this is the opinion of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_75" id="Footnote_1_75"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_75"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>In the Append. to the Antid. c.</i> 3. and -<i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 5.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_76" id="Footnote_2_76"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_76"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Sect.</i> 1. <a href="#I_XX"><i>Let.</i> 20</a>.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXIV" id="II_XXIV">XXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Having given you my opinion, both of the substance -and perception of Light, in my last Letter, -I perceive your desire is to know how <i>Shadows</i> -are made. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, to my sense and reason, -it appears most probable, that shadows are made -by the way of patterning: As for example; when a -Man's, or Trees, or any other the like Creature's shadow -is made upon the Ground, or Wall, or the like; -those bodies, as the Ground, or Wall, do, in my opinion, -pattern out the interposing body that is between -the light and them: And the reason that the shadow -is longer or shorter, or bigger or less, is according as -the light is nearer or further off; for when the light is -perpendicular, the interposing body cannot obscure the -light, because the light surrounding the interposing -body by its brightness, rather obscures the body, then the -body the light; for the numerous and splendorous patterns -of light taken from the body of the Sun, do quite -involve the interposing body. Next, you desire to -know, <i>Whether the light we see in the Moon, be the -Moons own natural light, or a borrowed light from the -Sun</i>: I answer, that in my opinion, it is a borrowed -light; to wit, that the Moon doth pattern out the light -of the Sun: and the proof of it is, that when the Sun -is in an Eclipse, we do plainly perceive that so much of -the Sun is darkned as the Moon covers; for though -those parts of the Moon, that are next the Sun, may, -for any thing we know, pattern out the light of the Sun, -yet the Moon is dark on that side which is from the -Sun. I will not say, but that part of the Moon which -is towards the Earth, may pattern out the Earth, or -the shadow of the Earth, which may make the Moon -appear more dark and sullen; But when the Moon is -in an Eclipse, then it is plainly perceived that the Moon -patterns out the Earth, or the shadow of the Earth. -Besides, those parts of the Moon that are farthest from -the Sun, are dark, as we may observe when as the Moon -is in the Wane, and enlightened when the Sun is nearer. -But I will leave this argument to observing Astrologers, -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXV" id="II_XXV">XXV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>If according to your <i>Authors</i> opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_77" id="FNanchor_1_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_77" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>In every particular -world, such as Man is especially, his own Soul</i> -(which is a Spirit) <i>be the peculiar and most perfective -architect of the Fabrick of his Body, as the Soul of the -world is of it</i>: Then I cannot conceive in my reason, how -the separation is made in death; for I see, that all animals, -and so man-kind, have a natural desire to live, -and that life and soul are unwilling to part; And if the -power lies in the Soul, why doth she not continue with -the Body, and animate, move and actuate it, as she -did before, or order the matter so, as not to dissolve? -But if the dissolution lies in the body, then the body has -self-motion: Yet it is most probable, if the soul be the -architect of the body, it must also be the dissolver of it; -and if there come not another soul into the parts of matter, -the body must either be annihilated, or lie immoved -as long as the world lasts, which is improbable; for -surely all the bodies of men, or other animals, are imployed -by Nature to some use or other: However, it is -requisite, that the soul must stay so long in the body, -until it be turned into dust and ashes; otherwise, the -body having no self-motion, would remain as it was -when the soul left it, that is, entire and undissolved: As -for example; when a man dies, if there be no motion -in his body, and the soul, which was the mover, be -gone, it cannot possibly corrupt; for certainly, that -we call corruption, is made by motion, and the body -requires as much motion to be dissolved or divided, -as it doth to be framed or composed; Wherefore a -dead body would remain in the same state continually, -it had no self-motion in it: And if another -soul should enter into the body, and work it to another -figure, then certainly there must be many -more souls then bodies, because bodies are subject to -change into several forms; but if the animal spirits, -which are left in the body after the soul is gone, -are able to dissolve it without the help of the soul, -then it is probable they could have fram'd it without -the help of the soul; and so they being material, it -must be granted, that matter is self-moving: But if -corporeal matter have corporeal self-motion, a self-moving -Immaterial Spirit, by reason of their different -natures, would make great obstruction, and so -a general confusion; for the corporeal and incorporeal -motions would hinder and oppose each other, -their natures being quite different; and though they -might subsist together without disturbance of each other, -yet it is not probable they should act together, -and that in such a conjunction, as if they were one -united body; for it is, in my opinion, more probable, -that one material should act upon another -material, or one immaterial upon another immaterial, -then that an immaterial should act upon a -material or corporeal. Thus the consideration or -contemplation of immaterial natural Spirits puts me -always into doubts, and raises so many contradictions -in my sense and reason, as I know not, nor am not -able to reconcile them: However, though I am -doubtful of them, yet I can assure your self that I -continue,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_77" id="Footnote_1_77"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_77"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 10.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXVI" id="II_XXVI">XXVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>By reason the <i>Soul</i> is a <i>Spirit</i>, and therefore <i>Contractible</i> -and <i>Dilatable</i>, your <i>Authors</i> opinion is,<a name="FNanchor_1_78" id="FNanchor_1_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_78" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -That <i>it begins within less compass at first in organising -the fitly prepared matter, and so bears it self on in the -same tenour of work, till the body hath attained its full -growth; and that the Soul dilates it self in the dilating of -the Body, and so possesses it through all the members -thereof.</i> Truly, <i>Madam</i>, as for the contraction and -dilation of an immaterial Spirit, if I heard never so many -arguments, I should hardly be able to conceive the -possibility of it; For in my opinion, dilating and contracting -are motions and actions of Nature, which belong -to natural material Creatures, and to none else; for -dilation and contraction cannot be without extension, -but extension belongs to parts which an immaterial Spirit -hath not: But suppose it be so, then the Soul must contract -and dilate, extend and shrink together, and so -grow less and bigger, according to the extension of the -body; and when the body dies, the soul, in my opinion, -must contract to a very point; and if one part of the -body die before the other, the soul must by degrees -withdraw out of those parts: also when a part of the -body is cut off, the soul must needs contract, and grow -less; the like when a man is let blood. Which contracting -of the soul, by your <i>Authors</i> leave, doth seem, -to my imagination, just like the contracting of Hodmandod -into her shell. Besides, if the soul be individable, -and equally spread all over the body, then, to my -opinion, she must necessarily be of a human shape; and -if the body be deformed, the soul must be deformed also; -and if the body be casually extended, as by taking -Poyson into the body, the soul must be so too, as being -individable and filling every part; and if a man be -born with six fingers or toes, the soul must be so too; -or if a dwarf, the soul must be a dwarf also; and if he be -born deaf and dumb, the soul must be so too. But if -two Twins, as it may fall out, should be born united -in one body, I would fain know then, whether they -would have two souls, or but one? As for example, if -they should have but one body, and one stomack, liver, -heart, spleen, lungs, bowels, and yet have four legs, -four hands, and two heads: It seems, to my opinion, -that then two Immaterial Souls must be joyned as into -one; neither do I know yet how this could well be, the -monster having but one body, nor how that Immaterial -Soul can be divided, being inseparably double, -when the body dies. But, <i>Madam</i>, all this I speak -of the Natural Soul of Man, not of the Divine Soul, -which is not subject to natural imperfections, and corporeal -errors, being not made by Nature, but a supernatural -and divine gift of the Omnipotent God, who -surely will not give any thing that is not perfect. Wherefore -it is not probable, this Divine Soul, being not subject -to Nature, should be an architect of the body, as -having an higher and more divine imployment, <i>viz.</i> to -fix her self on her Creator, and being indued with supernatural -faculties, and residing in the body in a supernatural -manner; all which I leave to the Church: for -I should be loth to affirm any thing contrary to their -Doctrine, or the Information of the holy Scripture, as -grounding my belief onely upon the sacred Word of -God, and its true Interpretation made by the Orthodox -Church; but not upon the opinions of particular persons: -for particular mens opinions are not authentical, -being so different and various, as a man would be -puzled which to adhere to. Thus, <i>Madam</i>, I avoid, -as much as ever I can, not to mix Divinity with -Natural Philosophy; for I consider, that such a mixture -would breed more confusion in the Church, then -do any good to either; witness the doctrine of the Soul -of Man, whereof are so many different opinions: The -onely cause, in my opinion, is, that men do not conceive -the difference between the Divine, and Natural -material Soul of Man, making them both as one, and -mixing or confounding their faculties and proprieties, -which yet are quite different; thus they make a -Hodg-podg, Bisk or Olio of both; proving Divinity -by Nature, and Faith by Reason; and bringing -Arguments for Articles of Faith, and sacred Mysteries -out of Natural Arts and Sciences; whereas yet Faith -and Reason are two contrary things, and cannot consist -together; according to the Proverb, Where -Reason ends, Faith begins. Neither is it possible that -Divinity can be proved by Mathematical Demonstrations; -for if Nature be not able to do it, much less is -Art: Wherefore it is inconvenient to mix supernatural -Spirits with Air, Fire, Light, Heat, Cold, &c. and -to apply corporeal actions and qualities to them; and the -Divine Soul, with the Brain, Blood, Flesh, Animal -Spirits, Muscles, Nerves, Bones, &c. of Man; all -which makes a confusion betwixt the Mind or Natural -Soul of Man, and the Supernatural and Divine Soul -inspired into him by God; for both their faculties and -proprieties are different, and so are their effects, as -proceeding from so different causes. And therefore, -<i>Madam</i>, as for Divinity, I pray devoutly, and believe -without disputing; but as for Natural Philosophy, -I reason freely, and argue without believing, -or adhering to any ones particular opinion, which I -think is the best and safest way to choose for,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_78" id="Footnote_1_78"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_78"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul, l.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 10.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXVII" id="II_XXVII">XXVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> in the continuation of his discourse -concerning the Immaterial Soul of Man, demonstrating, -that her seat is not bound up in a certain -place of the body, but that she pervades all the body and -every part thereof, takes, amongst the rest, an argument -from Passions and Sympathies: <i>Moreover</i>, says -he,<a name="FNanchor_1_79" id="FNanchor_1_79"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_79" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>Passions and Sympathies, in my judgment, are more -easily to be resolved into this hypothesis of the Soul's pervading -the whole Body, then in restraining its essential -presence to one part thereof.—But it is evident that they -arise in us against both our will and appetite; For who -would bear the tortures of fears and jelousies, if he could -avoid it?</i> Concerning Passions, <i>Madam</i>, I have given -my opinion at large in my Book of Philosophy, -and am of your <i>Authors</i> mind, that Passions are made -in the Heart, but not by an Immaterial spirit, but by -the Rational soul which is material; and there is no -doubt, but that many Passions, as Fear, Jealousie &c. -arise against our will and appetite; for so may forreign -Nations invade any Kingdom without the will or desire -of the Inhabitants, and yet they are corporeal men: The -same may be said of Passions; and several parts of matter -may invade each other, whereof one may be afraid -of the other, yet all this is but according as corporeal -matter moves, either Generally, or Particularly: Generally, -that is, when many parts of Matter unite or -joyn together, having the like appetites, wills, designs; -as we may observe, that there are general agreements -amongst several parts, in Plagues, as well as Wars, -which Plagues are not onely amongst Men, but amongst -Beasts; and sometimes but in one sort of animals, -as a general Rot amongst Sheep, a general Mange -amongst Dogs, a general Farcy amongst Horses, a general -Plague amongst Men; all which could not be -without a general Infection, one part infecting another, -or rather one part imitating the motions of the other, -that is next adjoyning to it; for such infections come -by the neer adhesion of parts, as is observable, which -immaterial and individable natural Spirits could not effect; -that is, to make such a general infection in so many -several parts of so many several Creatures, to the -Creatures dissolution: Also there will be several Invasions -at one time, as Plague, and War, amongst neighbouring -and adjoining Creatures or Parts. But this is -to be observed, That the sensitive corporeal motions -make all diseases, and not the Rational, although the -Rational are many times the occasion, that the sensitive -do move into such or such a disease; for all those that -are sick by conceit, their sicknesses are caused by the rational -corporeal motions. But being loth to make tedious -repetitions hereof, having discoursed of diseases, -and passions in my mentioned Book of <i>Philosophy</i>, I -will refer you thither, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_79" id="Footnote_1_79"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_79"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Immort. of the Soul. Book</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 10</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXVIII" id="II_XXVIII">XXVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning <i>Dimness</i> of <i>Sight</i>, which your <i>Author</i> -will have to <i>proceed from the deficiency of the Animal -Spirits</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_80" id="FNanchor_1_80"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_80" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> My meaning in short is, That when -sight is dim, though the sensitive organs are perfect, -this dimness is caused by the alteration onely of the sensitive -motions in the organs, not moving to the nature -of sight. And so is made Deafness, Dumbness, Lameness, -and the like, as also Weariness; for the Relaxation -of strength in several parts, is onely an alteration of -such sorts of motions which make the nerves strong; -and if a man be more dull at one time, then at another, -it is that there are not so many changes of motions, nor -so quick motions at that time, as at another; for -Nature may use more or less force as she pleases: Also -she can and doth often use opposite actions, and often -sympathetical and agreeable actions, as she pleases; for -Nature having a free power to move, may move as -she will; but being wise, she moves as she thinks best, -either in her separating or uniting motions, for continuance, -as well as for variety. But if, according to your -<i>Author</i>, the Immaterial Soul should determinate matter -in motion, it would, in my opinion, make a confusion; -for the motions of the Matter would often oppose -and cross the motions of the Immaterial Soul, -and so they would disagree, as a King and his Subjects, -(except God had given the Soul an absolute power of -command, and restrained matter to an irrisistible and -necessitated obedience; which, in my opinion, is not -probable:) By which disagreement, Nature, and all -that is in Nature, would have been quite ruined at this -time; for no kinds, sorts, or particulars, would keep -any distinction, if Matter did not govern it self, and if -all the parts did not know their own affairs, abilities, -offices, and functions: Besides, it would, to my thinking, -take up a great deal of time, to receive commands -in every several action, at least so much, that -for example, a man could not have so many several -thoughts in so short a time, as he hath. But concerning -the Animal Spirits, which your <i>Author</i> calls the -Instruments, Organs and Engines of the Incorporeal -Soul; I would fain know, whether they have no -motion but what comes from the Soul, or whether -they have their own motion of themselves? If the -first, then the Soul must, in my opinion, be like a -Deity, and have a divine Power, to give and impart -Motion; if the second, then the spirits being -material, it follows that Matter hath motion of it self, -or is self-moving; But if the Immaterial natural Soul -can transfer her gifts upon corporeal matter, then it -must give numerous sorts of motions, with all their degrees; -as also the faculty of figuring, or moving figuratively -in all corporeal Matter: Which power, -in my judgment, is too much for a Creature to -give. If you say, the Immaterial Soul hath this power -from God; I answer, Matter may have the same; -and I cannot imagine why God should make an Immaterial -Spirit to be the Proxy or Vice-gerent of his -Power, or the <i>Quarter-master General of his Divine -Providence</i>, as your <i>Author</i> is pleased to style it,<a name="FNanchor_2_81" id="FNanchor_2_81"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_81" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> when -he is able to effect it without any Under-Officers, -and in a more easie and compendious way, as to -impart immediately such self-moving power to Natural -Matter, which man attributes to an Incorporeal -Spirit. But to conclude, if the Animal Spirits -be the Instruments of the Incorporeal Soul, then -the Spirits of Wine are more powerful then the -Animal Spirits, nay, then the Immaterial Soul her -self; for they can put them and all their actions quite -out of order: the same may be done by other material -things, Vegetables, Minerals, and the like. And so -leaving this discourse to your better consideration, I -take my leave for this time, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful and affectionate Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_80" id="Footnote_1_80"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_80"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Immort. of the Soul. Book</i> 2. <i>ch.</i> 8.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_81" id="Footnote_2_81"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_81"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Immort. of the Soul. Book</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 13.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXIX" id="II_XXIX">XXIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Touching the State or Condition of the Supernatural -and Divine Soul, both in, and after this -life, I must crave your excuse that I can give no -account of it; for I dare affirm nothing; not onely that -I am no professed Divine, and think it unfit to take any -thing upon me that belongs not to me, but also that I -am unwilling to mingle Divinity and Natural Philosophy -together, to the great disadvantage and prejudice -of either; for if each one did contain himself within -the circle of his own Profession, and no body did -pretend to be a Divine Philosopher, many absurdities, -confusions, contentions, and the like, would be avoided, -which now disturb both Church and Schools, -and will in time cause their utter ruine and destruction; -For what is Supernatural, cannot naturally be known -by any natural Creature; neither can any supernatural -Creature, but the Infinite and Eternal God, know -thorowly everything that is in Nature, she being the Infinite -servant of the Infinite God, whom no finite Creature, -of what degree soever, whether natural or supernatural, -can conceive; for if no Angel nor Devil can know -our thoughts, much less will they know Infinite -Nature; nay, one finite supernatural Creature cannot, -in my opinion, know perfectly another supernatural -Creature, but God alone, who is all-knowing; And -therefore all what is said of supernatural Spirits, I believe, -so far as the Scripture makes mention of them; further -I dare not presume to go; the like of the supernatural -or divine Soul: for all that I have writ hitherto to you -of the Soul, concerns the natural Soul of Man, which -is material, and not the supernatural or divine Soul; -neither do I contradict any thing concerning this divine -soul, but I am onely against those opinions, which -make the natural soul of man an immaterial natural -spirit, and confound supernatural Creatures with natural, -believing those spirits to be as well natural Creatures -and parts of Nature, as material and corporeal -beings are; when as there is great difference betwixt -them, and nothing in Nature to be found, but what -is corporeal. Upon this account I take all their relations -of Dæmons, of the Genii, and of the Souls after the -departure from humane Bodies, their Vehicles, Shapes, -Habitations, Converses, Conferences, Entertainments, -Exercises, Pleasures, Pastimes, Governments, Orders, -Laws, Magistrates, Officers, Executioners, Punishments, -and the like, rather for Poetical Fictions, then -Rational Probabilities; containing more Fancy, then -Truth and Reason, whether they concern the divine -or natural Soul: for as for the divine Soul, the Scripture -makes no other mention of it, but that immediately -after her departure out of this natural life, she goeth -either to Heaven or Hell, either to enjoy Reward, or -to suffer Punishment, according to man's actions in this -life. But as for the Natural Soul, she being material, -has no need of any Vehicles, neither is natural death -any thing else but an alteration of the rational and sensitive -motions, which from the dissolution of one figure -go to the formation or production of another. Thus -the natural soul is not like a Traveller, going out of one -body into another, neither is air her lodging; for certainly, -if the natural humane soul should travel through -the airy regions, she would at last grow weary, it being -so great a journey, except she did meet with the soul -of a Horse, and so ease her self with riding on Horse-back. -Neither can I believe Souls or Dæmons in the -Air have any Common-wealth, Magistrates, Officers -and Executioners in their airy Kingdom; for -wheresoever are Governments, Magistrates and Executioners, -there are also Offences, and where there is power -to offend, as well as to obey, there may and will be -sometimes Rebellions and Civil Wars; for there being -different sorts of Spirits, it is impossible they should all -so well agree, especially the good and evil Genii, which -certainly will fight more valiantly then <i>Hector</i> and -<i>Achilles</i>, nay, the Spirits of one sort would have more -Civil Wars then ever the <i>Romans</i> had; and if the Soul -of <i>Cæsar</i> and <i>Pompey</i> should meet, there would be a -cruel fight between those two Heroical souls; the like -between <i>Augustus's</i> and <i>Antonius's</i> Soul. But, <i>Madam</i>, -all these, as I said, I take for fancies proceeding -from the Religion of the Gentiles, not fit for Christians -to embrace for any truth; for if we should, we might -at last, by avoiding to be Atheists, become Pagans, and -so leap out of the Frying-pan into the Fire, as turning -from Divine Faith to Poetical Fancy; and if <i>Ovid</i> should -revive again, he would, perhaps, be the chief head or -pillar of the Church. By this you may plainly see, -<i>Madam</i>, that I am no Platonick; for this opinion is -dangerous, especially for married Women, by reason -the conversation of the Souls may be a great temptation, -and a means to bring Platonick Lovers to a neerer acquaintance, -not allowable by the Laws of Marriage, -although by the sympathy of the Souls. But I -conclude, and desire you, not to interpret amiss this -my discourse, as if I had been too invective against Poetical -Fancies; for that I am a great lover of them, my -Poetical Works will witness; onely I think it not fit -to bring Fancies into Religion: Wherefore what I have -writ now to you, is rather to express my zeal for God -and his true Worship, then to prejudice any body; and -if you be of that same Opinion, as above mentioned, I -wish my Letter may convert you, and so I should not -account my labour lost, but judg my self happy, that -any good could proceed to the advancement of your -Soul, from,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXX" id="II_XXX">XXX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I sent you word in my last, I would not meddle with -writing any thing of the Divine Soul of Man, by -reason it belongs to Faith and Religion, and not to -Natural Philosophy; but since you desire my opinion -concerning the Immortality of the Divine Soul, I cannot -but answer you plainly, that first I did wonder -much you made question of that, whose truth, in my -opinion, is so clear, as hardly any rational man will -make a doubt of it; for I think there is almost no Christian -in the world, but believes the Immortality of the -Soul, no not Christians onely, but Mahometans and -Jews: But I left to wonder at you, when I saw Wise -and Learned Men, and great Divines, take so much -pains as to write whole volumes, and bring so many -arguments to prove the Immortality of the Soul; for -this was a greater Miracle to me, then if Nature had -shewed me some of her secret and hidden effects, or if -I had seen an Immaterial Spirit. Certainly, <i>Madam</i>, -it seems as strange to me to prove the Immortality of the -Soul, as to convert Atheists; for it [is] impossible, almost, -that any Atheist should be found in the World: For -what Man would be so senceless as to deny a God? -Wherefore to prove either a God, or the Immortality -of the Soul, is to make a man doubt of either: for as -Physicians and Surgeons apply strengthening Medicines -onely to those parts of the body which they suppose -the weakest, so it is with proofs and arguments, -those being for the most part used in such subjects, the -truth of which is most questionable. But in things -Divine, Disputes do rather weaken Faith, then prove -Truth, and breed several strange opinions; for -Man being naturally ambitious, and endeavouring to -excel each other, will not content himself with what -God has been pleased to reveal in his holy Word; but -invents and adds something of his own; and hence -arise so many monstrous expressions and opinions, that -a simple man is puzzled, not knowing which to adhere -to; which is the cause of so many schismes, sects, -and divisions in Religion: Hence it comes also, that -some pretend to know the very nature and essence of -God, his divine Counsels, all his Actions, Designs, -Rules, Decrees, Power, Attributes, nay, his Motions, -Affections, and Passions, as if the Omnipotent -Infinite God were of a humane shape; so that there -are already more divisions then Religions, which disturb -the peace and quiet both of mind and body; -when as the ground of our belief consists but in some -few and short Articles, which clearly explained, and -the moral part of Divinity well pressed upon the People, -would do more good, then unnecessary and tedious -disputes, which rather confound Religion, then -advance it: but if man had a mind to shew Learning, -and exercise his Wit, certainly there are other subjects, -wherein he can do it with more profit, and less -danger, then by proving Christian Religion by Natural -Philosophy, which is the way to destroy them -both. I could wish, <i>Madam</i>, that every one would -but observe the Command of Christ, and give to God -what is Gods, and to <i>Cæsar</i> what is <i>Cæsars</i>, and so -distinguish what belongs to the actions of Nature, -and what to the actions of Religion; for it appears to my -Reason, that God hath given Nature, his eternal Servant, -a peculiar freedom of working and acting, as a -self-moving Power from Eternity; but when the Omnipotent -God acts, he acts supernaturally, as beyond -Nature; of which divine actions none but the holy -Church, as one united body, mind and soul, should discourse, -and declare the truth of them, according to the -Revelation made by God in his holy Word, to her Flock -the Laity, not suffering any one single person, of what -profession or degree soever, indifferently to comment, -interpret, explain, and declare the meaning or sense of -the Scripture after his own fancy. And as for Nature's -actions, let those whom Nature hath indued with such -a proportion of Reason, as is able to search into the hidden -causes of natural effects, contemplate freely, without -any restraint or confinement; for Nature acts freely, -and so may natural Creatures, and amongst the rest -Man, in things which are purely natural; but as for -things supernatural, man cannot act freely, by reason -they are beyond his sphere of conception and understanding, -so as he is forced to set aside Reason, and -onely to work by Faith. And thus, <i>Madam</i>, you see -the cause why I cannot give you a full description of the -Divine Soul of Man, as I mentioned already in my -last, but that I do onely send you my opinion of the -natural soul, which I call the rational soul; not that I -dare say, the supernatural soul is without natural reason, -but natural reason is not the divine soul; neither can -natural reason, without Faith, advance the divine soul -to Heaven, or beget a pious zeal, without divine and -supernatural Grace: Wherefore Reason, or the rational -Soul is onely the Soul of Nature, which being material, -is dividable, and so becomes numerous in particular -natural Creatures; like as the sensitive life being -also material and dividable, becomes numerous, as being -in every Creature, and in every part of every Creature; -for as there is life in every Creature, so there is -also a soul in every Creature; nay, not onely in every -Creature, but in every particle of every Creature, by -reason every Creature is made of rational and sensitive -Matter; and as all Creatures or parts of Nature are but -one infinite body of Nature, so all their particular souls -and lives make but one infinite soul and life of Nature; -and this natural soul hath onely natural actions, not -supernatural; nor has the supernatural soul natural actions; -for although they subsist both together in one body, -yet each works without disturbance to the other; -and both are Immortal; for of the supernatural soul -there is no question, and of the natural soul, I have said -before, that nothing is perishable or subject to annihilation -in nature, and so no death, but what is called by -the name of death, is onely an alteration of the corporeal -natural motions of such a figure to another figure; -and therefore as it is impossible, that one part of Matter -should perish in Nature, so is it impossible, that the -natural or rational soul can perish, being material: -The natural humane soul may alter, so as not to move -in an animal way, or not to have animal motions, but -this doth not prove her destruction or annihilation, but -onely a change of the animal figure and its motions, all -remaining still in Nature. Thus my Faith of the Divine, -and my opinion of the Natural Soul, is, that -they are both Immortal; as for the immediate actions -of the Divine Soul, I leave you to the Church, which -are the Ministers of God, and the faithful dispensers of -the sacred mysteries of the Gospel, the true Expounders -of the Word of God, Reformers of mens lives, and -Tutors of the Ignorant, to whom I submit my self in -all that belongs to the salvation of my Soul, and the regulating -of the actions of my life, to the honour and glory -of God. And I hope they will not take any offence -at the maintaining and publishing my opinions concerning -Nature and Natural effects, for they are as -harmless, and as little prejudicial to them, as my designs; -for my onely and chief design is, and ever hath -been to understand Nature rightly, obey the Church -exactly, Believe undoubtedly, Pray zealously, Live -vertuously, and Wish earnestly, that both Church -and Schools may increase and flourish in the sacred -knowledg of the true Word of God, and that each one -may live peaceable and happily in this world, die quietly, -and rise blessedly and gloriously to everlasting Life -and happiness: Which happiness I pray God also to -confer upon your Ladiship; Till then, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful and constant</i></p> - -<p><i>Friend, to serve you.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXXI" id="II_XXXI">XXXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I will leave the Controversie of Free-Will and Necessity, -which your <i>Author</i> is discoursing of,<a name="FNanchor_1_82" id="FNanchor_1_82"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_82" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> to Divines -to decide it, onely I say this, that Nature hath -a natural Free-will and power of self-moving, and is -not necessitated; but yet that this Free-will proceeds from -God, who hath given her both will and power to act -freely. But as for the question, whether there be nothing -in the Universe, but meer body?<a name="FNanchor_2_83" id="FNanchor_2_83"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_83" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> I answer, My -opinion is not, that there is nothing in the world but -meer Body; but that Nature is purely material or corporeal, -and that there is no part of Nature, or natural -Creature, which is not Matter, or Body, or made of -Matter; also, that there is not any thing else mixt with -body, as a copartner in natural actions, which is distinct -from Body or Matter; nevertheless, there may -be supernatural spiritual beings or substances in Nature, -without any hinderance to Matter or corporeal Nature. -The same I may say of the natural material, and the -divine and supernatural Soul; for though the divine -Soul is in a natural body, and both their powers and -actions be different, yet they cause no ruine or disturbance -to each other, but do in many cases agree with -each other, without incroachment upon each others -powers or actions; for God, as he is the God of all -things, so the God of Order. Wherefore it is not probable, -that created Immaterial or Incorporeal beings -should order Corporeal Nature, no more then Corporeal -Nature orders Immaterial or Incorporeal Creatures. -Neither can, in my opinion, Incorporeal -Creatures be clearly conceived by Corporeals, although -they may really exist and subsist in Nature; -onely, as I said before, it is well to be considered, that -there is difference betwixt being in Nature, and being a -part of Nature; for bodiless things, and so spiritual substances, -although they may exist in Nature, yet -they are not natural, nor parts of Nature, but supernatural, -Nature being meerly corporeal, and Matter -the ground of Nature; and all that is not built upon -this material ground, is nothing in Nature. But you -will say, The divine Soul is a part of Man, and Man -a part of Nature, wherefore the divine Soul must -needs be a part of Nature. I answer, Not: For the -divine Soul is not a part of Nature, but supernatural, -as a supernatural Gift from God onely to Man, and -to no other Creature: and although in this respect it -may be called a part of Man, yet it is no natural or -material part of Man; neither doth this supernatural -Gift disturb Nature or natural Matter, or natural -Matter this supernatural Gift. And so leaving them -both, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_82" id="Footnote_1_82"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_82"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Of the Immortality of the Soul. l.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_83" id="Footnote_2_83"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_83"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Lib.</i> 2. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXXII" id="II_XXXII">XXXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>If you desire my opinion concerning Witches, -whereof your Learned <i>Author</i> hath many Discourses -and Stories:<a name="FNanchor_1_84" id="FNanchor_1_84"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_84" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> I will tell you really, that in my sense -and reason, I do not believe any, except it be the witch -of <i>Endor</i>, which the Scripture makes mention of; for -though I believe that there is a Devil, as the Word of -God and the Church inform me, yet I am not of the -opinion, that God should suffer him to have such a -familiar conjunction, and make such contracts with -Man, as to impower him to do mischief and hurt to -others, or to foretell things to come, and the like; for -I believe that all things Immaterial, as Spirits, Angels, -Devils, and the divine Soul of Man, are no parts of Nature, -but Supernatural, Nature knowing of no Creature -that belongs to her, but what is material; and since -incorporeal Creatures are no parts of Nature, they neither -have natural actions, nor are they concerned as co-partners -or co-agents in the actions of Nature and natural -Creatures; but as their substances, so their actions -are supernatural, and beyond our conceivement. As -for Faires, I will not say, but there may be such Creatures -in Nature, and have airy bodies, and be of a humane -shape, and have humane actions, as I have described -in my Book of Poems; for there are many -things, in Nature, whereof Man hath no knowledg at -all, and it would be a great folly for any one to deny -what he doth not see, or to ascribe all the unusual effects -in Nature to Immaterial Spirits; for Nature is -so full of variety, that she can and doth present sometimes -such figures to our exterior senses, as are -not familiar to us, so as we need not to take our refuge -to Immaterial Spirits: nay, even those that are -so much for Incorporeal Spirits, must confess, that -they cannot be seen in their own natures, as being -Invisible, and therefore have need to take vehicles -of some grosser bodies to manifest themselves to men: -and if Spirits cannot appear without bodies, the neerest -way is to ascribe such unusual effects or apparitions, -as happen sometimes, rather to matter that is -already corporeal, and not to go so far as to draw -Immaterial Spirits to Natural actions, and to make -those Spirits take vehicles fit for their purposes: for -Nature takes sometimes delight in unusual Varieties. -Concerning those stories which your <i>Author</i> relates<a name="FNanchor_2_85" id="FNanchor_2_85"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_85" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -of the strange effects of Food received into a -mans body, how they did work upon the Imagination, -and change and transform the humors of those -that did feed upon them, those, I say, seem very probable -to me. As for example; of a <i>Wench who being -struck into an Epilepsy, upon the seeing of a Malefactors -Head cut off, was advised to drink Cats-blood; -which being done, she not long after degenerated into -the nature and property of that Animal, cried and jump'd -like a Cat, and hunted Mice with the same silence and -watchfulness as they do. Then of a Man, being long -fed with Swines-blood, which took a special pleasure in -wallowing and tumbling himself in the mire. Also of -a Girle, which being nourished up with Goats-milk, -would skip like a Goat, and brouze on Trees as Goats -use to do. And of a Man, who by eating the brains of a -Bear, became of a Bear-like disposition.</i> All these -stories I believe to be true; for naturally the motions -of a Man may sometimes Sympathize so much with -the received food, as to make an alteration in his humour -or disposition. But although it be natural, yet -it is not regular, at least not usual, but proceeds from -an irregular and unusual change of motions, like as -the conception and generation of a Monster; For if -it were ordinary, then those which drink much of the -blood of beasts, would also degenerate into a beastly -nature, the contrary whereof is sufficiently known: -Likewise those that drink much of Cows-milk, would -change into their humors and natures. But certainly, -some kinds of meats do not onely cause sickness, but -madness, and strange Imaginations; all which unnatural -or unusual accidents are caused by Matter's irregular -motions; Whereof I have declared my opinion -in other places; and so I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - - -<p><i>Your faithful and constant</i></p> - -<p><i>Friend, to serve you.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_84" id="Footnote_1_84"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_84"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Antid. lib.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_85" id="Footnote_2_85"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_85"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>In his discourse of Enthusiasm.</i></p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXXIII" id="II_XXXIII">XXXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>You will have my opinion of the Book that treats -of <i>the Pre-existence of Souls</i>, and the <i>Key that -unlocks the Divine Providence</i>; but I have told -you heretofore, that there are so many different opinions -concerning the Soul, as I do not know which to -embrace, for the multiplicity confounds my choice: -and the cause of these various opinions, in my simple -judgment, is, that most men make no difference between -the Divine, and Natural Soul. As for the Natural -Soul, humane sense and reason may perceive, that -it consists of Matter, as being Material; but as for the -Divine Soul, being not material, no humane sense and -reason is able naturally to conceive it; for there cannot -possibly be so much as an Idea of a natural nothing, or -an immaterial being, neither can sense and reason naturally -conceive the Creation of an Immaterial substance; -for as the Creation of material Creatures, as of -this World, belongs to Faith, and not to Reason, so -doth also the Creation of Immaterial substances, as Spirits; -nay, it is more difficult to understand a Natural -Nothing to be made out of nothing, then a Natural -Something out of nothing. And as for the <i>Progress of -Immaterial Souls</i>, which the same <i>Author</i> mentions, I -cannot conceive how No-thing can make a Progress, -and therefore I suppose, it is an Improper, or Metaphorical -expression. The truth is, what is Immaterial, -belongs not to a Natural knowledg or understanding, -but is Supernatural, and goes beyond a natural -reach or capacity. Concerning <i>the Key of Divine -Providence</i>, I believe God did never give or lend -it to any man; for surely, God, who is infinitely Wise, -would never intrust so frail and foolish a Creature as -Man, with it, as to let him know his secret Counsels, -Acts, and Decrees. But setting aside Pride and Presumption, -Sense and Reason may easily perceive, that -Man, though counted the best of Creatures, is not -made with such infinite Excellence, as to pierce into -the least secrets of God; Wherefore I am in a maze -when I hear of such men, which pretend to know so -much, as if they had plundered the Celestial Cabinet -of the Omnipotent God; for certainly, had they done -it, they could not pretend to more knowledg then they -do. But I, <i>Madam</i>, confess my Ignorance, as having -neither divine Inspirations, nor extraordinary Visions, -nor any divine or humane learning, but what -Nature has been pleased to bestow upon me; Yet in -all this Ignorance, I know that I am, and ought -to be,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="II_XXXIV" id="II_XXXIV">XXXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since in my former Letters I have discoursed of Immaterial -Spirits, and declared my meaning, that -I do not believe them to be natural Creatures, or -parts of Nature; you are of opinion, as if I did contradict -my self, by reason that in the first Edition of my -Book called <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, I name the rational -and sensitive Matter, rational and sensitive Spirits. To -which I answer, first, That when I did write my first -Conceptions in Natural Philosophy, I was not so experienced, -nor had I those observations which I have -had since; Neither did I give those first Conceptions -time to digest, and come to a maturity or perfect -growth, but forced them forth as soon as conceived, and -this made the first publishing of them so full of Imperfections, -which I am much sorry for; But since that -time, I have not onely reviewed, but corrected and altered -them in several places, so that the last Impression -of my <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, you will find more perfect -and exact then the former. Next, I pray you to -take notice, <i>Madam</i>, that in the mentioned first Edition, -by the word Spirits, I meant Material, not Immaterial -Spirits; for observing, that Learned Men do -discourse much of Animal Spirits, which are Material, -and that also high extracts in Chymistry are called Spirits; -I used that word purposely, thinking it most proper -and convenient to express my sense and meaning of -that degree of matter which I call rational and sensitive. -But considering again, that my opinions, being new, -would be subject to misapprehensions and mis-interpretations; -to prevent those, I thought it fitter to leave out -the word <i>Spirits</i> in the second, as also in the last Edition -of my named Book of <i>Philosophy</i>, lest my Readers -should think I meant Immaterial Spirits; for I confess -really, that I never understood, nor cannot as yet apprehend -Immaterial Spirits; for though I believe the -Scripture, and the Church, that there are Spirits, and -do not doubt the existency of them, yet I cannot conceive -the nature of Immaterial Spirits, and what they -are; Wherefore I do onely treat of natural material -substances, and not of incorporeal; also my discourse is -of the Infinite servant of the Infinite God, which servant -is corporeal or material Nature: God is onely -to be admired, adored, and worshipped; but not ungloriously -to be discoursed of; Which Omnipotent -God, I pray of his Infinite Mercy to give me Faith to -believe in him, and not to let presumption prevail with -me so, as to liken vain and idle conceptions to that -Incomprehensible Deity. These, <i>Madam</i>, are my -humble Prayers to God; and my request to you is, that -I may continue the same in your love and affection, -which I have been hitherto; so shall I live content, and -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h2><a name="SECT_III" id="SECT_III">SECT. III.</a></h2> - -<h3>I.</h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I have discharged my duty thus far, -that in obedience to your commands, -I have given you my answers to the -opinions of three of those famous and -learned <i>Authors</i> you sent me, <i>viz. -Hobbes, Des Cartes</i>, and <i>More</i>, and -explained my own opinions by examining -theirs; My onely task shall be now to proceed -in the same manner with that famous Philosopher -and Chymist, <i>Van Helmont</i>; But him I find more difficult -to be understood then any of the forementioned, -not onely by reason of the Art of Chymistry, which I -confess myself not versed in, but especially, that he has -such strange terms and unusual expressions as may puzle -any body to apprehend the sense and meaning of -them: Wherefore, if you receive not that full satisfaction -you expect from me, in examining his opinions -and arguments, I beg your pardon before-hand, and -desire you to remember, that I sent you word in the beginning, -I did undertake this work more out of desire -to clear my own opinions, then a quarrelsome humor to -contradict others; which if I do but obtain, I have my -aim. And so to the business: When as your <i>Author</i> -discourses of the causes and beginnings of Natural -things, he is pleased to say,<a name="FNanchor_1_86" id="FNanchor_1_86"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_86" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Souls and Lives, as -they know no Degrees, so they know no Parts</i>; which -opinion is very different from mine: For although I -confess, that there is but one kind of Life, and one kind -of Soul in Nature, which is the sensitive Life, and the -rational Soul, both consisting not onely of Matter, but -of one kind of Matter, to wit, Animate; nevertheless -they are of different degrees, the matter of the rational -Soul being more agil, subtil and active, then the matter -of the sensitive Life; which is the reason that the rational -can act in its own substance or degree of matter, and -make figures in it self, and its own parts; when as the -sensitive, being of somewhat a grosser degree then the -rational, and not so subtil and active, is confined to -work with and upon the Inanimate matter. But mistake -me not, <i>Madam</i>, for I make onely a difference of the degrees -of Subtilty, Activity, Agility, Purity, betwixt -rational and sensitive Matter; but as for the rational -Matter it self, it has no degrees of Purity, Subtilty -and Activity in its own Nature or Parts, but is always -one and the same in its substance in all Creatures, and -so is the sensitive. You will ask me, How comes then -the difference of so many Parts and Creatures in Nature, -if there be no degrees of Purity, Activity, and -Subtilty in the substance of the rational, and in the substance -of the sensitive Matter? As for example: if -there were no such degrees of the Parts of rational Matter -amongst themselves, as also of the Parts of the sensitive, -there would be no difference betwixt Animals, -Vegetables, Minerals, and Elements, but all Creatures -would be alike without distinction, and have the same -manner of sense and reason, life and knowledg. I -answer, That although each sort or degree of animate -Matter, rational as well as sensitive, has in it self or its -own substance no degrees of purity, rarity, and subtilty, -but is one and the same in its nature or essence; nevertheless, -each has degrees of quantity, or parts, which -degrees of quantity do make the onely difference betwixt -the several creatures or parts of Nature, as well in -their general, as particular kinds; for both the rational -and sensitive matter being corporeal, and so dividable -into parts, some creatures do partake more, some less -of them, which makes them to have more or less, and -so different sense and reason, each according to the nature -of its kind: Nay this difference of the degrees of -quantity or parts in the substance of the rational and sensitive -Matter, makes also the difference betwixt particulars -in every sort of Creatures, as for example, between -several particular Men: But as I said, the nature -or essence of the sensitive and rational Matter is the -same in all; for the difference consists not in the Nature -of Matter, but onely in the degrees of quantity, and -parts of Matter, and in the various and different actions -or motions of this same Matter. And thus Matter -being dividable, there are numerous lives and souls in -Nature, according to the variousness of her several -Parts and Creatures. Next your <i>Author</i>, mentioning -the <i>Causes and Principles of natural Bodies</i>, assigns -two first or chief beginnings and corporeal causes of every -Creature, to wit, the <i>Element of Water</i>, and the -<i>Ferment or Leaven</i>; which Ferment he calls a formal -created being; neither a substance, nor an accident, but -a neutral thing. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, my reason is not -able to conceive this neutral Being; for it must either be -something or nothing in Nature: and if he makes it any -thing betwixt both, it is a strange Monster; and will -produce monstrous effects: and for Water, if he -doth make it a Principle of Natural things, I see no reason -why he excludes the rest of the Elements: But, in -my opinion, Water, and the rest of the Elements, are -but effects of Nature, as other Creatures are, and so cannot -be prime causes. The like the Ferment, which, to -my sense and reason, is nothing else, but a natural effect -of natural matter. Concerning his opinion, That -<i>Causes and Beginnings</i> are all one, or that there is but -little difference betwixt them, I do readily subscribe unto -it; but when he speaks of those <i>things, which are produced -without life</i>, my reason cannot find out, what, or -where they should be; for certainly, in Nature they are -not, Nature being Life and Soul her self, and all her -parts being enlivened and soulified, so that there can be -no generation or natural production without Life. Neither -is my sense and reason capable to understand his -meaning, when he says, That the <i>Seeds of things, and the -Spirits, as the Dispensers thereof, are divided from the -Material Cause</i>: For I do see no difference betwixt the -Seed, and the material Cause, but they are all one -thing, it being undeniable, that the seed is the matter of -that which is produced. But your <i>Author</i> was pleased -to say heretofore, that there are but two beginnings or -causes of natural things, and now he makes so many -more; for, says he, Of <i>Efficient and Seminal Causes, -some are efficiently effecting, and others effectively effecting</i>: -which nice distinctions, in my opinion, do but -make a confusion in natural knowledg, setting a mans -brain on the rack; for who is able to conceive all those -<i>Chymæras</i> and Fancies of the <i>Archeus, Ferment,</i> various -<i>Ideas, Blas, Gas,</i> and many more, which are neither -something nor no-thing in Nature, but betwixt both, -except a man have the same Fancies, Visions and -Dreams, your <i>Author</i> had? Nature is easie to be understood, -and without any difficulty, so as we stand in -no need to frame so many strange names, able to fright -any body. Neither do natural bodies know many prime -causes and beginnings, but there is but one onely chief -and prime cause from which all effects and varieties -proceed, which cause is corporeal Nature, or natural -self-moving Matter, which forms and produces all natural -things; and all the variety and difference of natural -Creatures arises from her various actions, which are -the various motions in Nature; some whereof are Regular, -some Irregular: I mean Irregular, as to particular -Creatures, not as to Nature her self, for Nature -cannot be disturbed or discomposed, or else all would -run into confusion; Wherefore Irregularities do onely -concern particular Creatures, not Infinite Nature; -and the Irregularities of some parts may cause the Irregularities -of other Parts, as the Regularities of some -parts do cause the Regularities of others: And thus according -as Regularities and Irregularities have power, -they cause either Peace or War, Sickness or Health, -Delight and Pleasure, or Grief and Pain, Life or Death, -to particular Creatures or parts of Nature; but all -these various actions are but various Effects, and not -prime Causes; which is well to be observed, lest we -confound Causes with Effects. And so leaving this -discourse for the present, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_86" id="Footnote_1_86"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_86"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Van Helm, <i>in his Book intituled</i>, -Physick Refined, <i>ch.</i> 4. <i>of the Causes and -beginning of natural things.</i></p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_II" id="III_II">II.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>It is no wonder, your <i>Author</i> has so many odd and -strange opinions in Philosophy, since they do not -onely proceed from strange Visions, Apparitions, -and Dreams, but are built upon so strange grounds and -principles as <i>Ideas, Archeus, Gas, Blas, Ferment,</i> and -the like, the names of which sound so harsh and terrifying, -as they might put any body easily into a fright, like -so many Hobgoblins or Immaterial spirits; but the best -is, they can do no great harm, except it be to trouble -the brains of them, that love to maintain those opinions; -for though they are thought to be powerful beings, -yet being not corporeal substances, I cannot imagine -wherein their power should consist; for Nothing -can do nothing. But to mention each apart; first his -<i>Archeus</i> he calls<a name="FNanchor_1_87" id="FNanchor_1_87"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_87" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>the Spirit of Life; a vital gas or Light; -the Balsam preferring from Corruption; the</i> Vulcan <i>or -Smith of Generation; the stirrer up, and inward director -of generation; an Air; a skiey or airy Spirit; cloathing -himself presently with a bodily cloathing, in things -soulified, walking through all the dens and retiring places -of the seed, and transforming the matter according to the -perfect act of its own Image, remaining the president and -overseer or inward ruler of his bounds even till death; the -Principle of Life: the Inn of Life, the onely immediate -Witness, Executor, and Instrument of Life; the Prince -and Center of Life; the Ruler of the Stern; the Keeper -of Life, and promoter of Transmutations; the Porter of -the Soul; a Fountainous being; a Flint.</i><a name="FNanchor_2_88" id="FNanchor_2_88"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_88" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> These, and -many more names your <i>Author</i> attributes to his <i>Archeus</i>, -but what properly it is, and what its Nature and its peculiar -office, I am not able to conceive. In the next -place, <i>Gas</i> and <i>Blas</i> are to your <i>Author</i> also true Principles -of Natural things; for<a name="FNanchor_3_89" id="FNanchor_3_89"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_89" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>Gas is the Vapour into -which Water is dissolved by Cold, but yet it is a far more -fine and subtil thing then Vapour</i>; which he demonstrates -by the Art of Chymistry. This <i>Gas</i> in another -place he calls<a name="FNanchor_4_90" id="FNanchor_4_90"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_90" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> a <i>Wild Spirit, or Breath, unknown hitherto; -which can neither be constrained by Vessels, nor reduced -into a visible body; in some things it is nothing but -Water, as for example in Salt, in Fruits, and the like.</i> -But<a name="FNanchor_5_91" id="FNanchor_5_91"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_91" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> <i>Blas proceeds from the local and alterative motion of -the Stars, and is the general beginning of motion, producing -heat and cold, and that especially with the changing -of the Winds.</i> There is also<a name="FNanchor_6_92" id="FNanchor_6_92"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_92" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> <i>Blas in all sublunary -things</i>; witness Amulets or preserving Pomanders, -whereby they do constrain objects to obey them; <i>Which -Incorporeal Blas of Government acts without a Corporeal -Efflux, even as the Moon makes the Sea to swell; but -the fleshly generation</i><a name="FNanchor_7_93" id="FNanchor_7_93"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_93" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> <i>hath a Blas of its own, and it is twofold, -one which existeth by a natural Motion, the other -voluntary, which existeth as a mover to it self by an Internal -Willing.</i> There is also a <i>Blas of the Heart</i>, which is -<i>the fuel of the Vital Spirit, and consequently of its heat.</i> -The <i>Ferment</i><a name="FNanchor_8_94" id="FNanchor_8_94"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_94" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> he describes to be <i>A true Principle or Original -beginning of things, to wit, a Formal Created beginning, -which is neither a substance, nor an accident, but a -Neutral being, framed from the beginning of the World in -the places of its own Monarchy, in the manner of Light, -Fire, the magnal or sheath of the Air, Forms, &c. that it -may prepare, stir up, and go before the Seeds.</i> Lastly, his <i>Ideas</i> -are <i>Certain formal seminal Lights,</i><a name="FNanchor_9_95" id="FNanchor_9_95"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_95" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> <i>mutually piercing -each other without the adultery of Union; For</i>, says he, -<i>although at first, that, which is imagined, is nothing, but -a meer being of reason, yet it doth not remain such; for -truely the Fancy is a sealifying vertue, and in this respect -is called Imaginative, because it forms the Images of Likenesses, -or Ideas of things conceived, and doth characterize -them in its own Vital Spirit, and therefore that Idea is made -a spiritual or seminal powerful being, to perform things of -great moment.</i> And those Ideas he makes various and numerous; -as <i>Archeal Ideas, Ideas of Diseases, Sealifying Ideas, -Piercing Ideas, Forreign and strange Ideas, Mad -Ideas, Irrational and Incorrigible Ideas, Staggering Ideas,</i> -and a hundred others: the like of <i>Gas, Blas,</i> and the -rest. Thus, <i>Madam</i>, I have made a rehearsal of -your <i>Authors</i> strange, and hitherto unknown, Principles -(as his Confession is) of Natural things, which, -to my sense and reason, are so obscure, intricate and -perplex, as is almost impossible exactly to conceive them; -when as Principles ought to be easie, plain, and without -any difficulty to be understood; Wherefore what -with his Spirits, meer-beings, <i>non</i>-beings, and neutral-beings, -he troubles Nature, and puzles the brains of -his Readers so, that, I think, if all men were of his -opinion, or did follow the way of his Philosophy, -Nature would desire God she might be annihilated: -Onely, of all other, she doth not fear his Non-beings, for -they are the weakest of all, and can do her the least hurt, as -not being able to obstruct real and corporeal actions of -Nature; for Nature is a corporeal substance, and -without a substance Motion cannot be, and without -Motion opposition cannot be made, nor any action in -Nature, whether Prints, Seals, Stamps, Productions, -Generations, Thoughts, Conceptions, Imaginations, -Passions, Appetites, or the like: and if motions cannot -be without substance; then all Creatures, their properties, -faculties, natures, &c., being made by corporeal -motions, cannot be <i>Non</i>-beings, no nor anything -else that is in Nature; for <i>non</i>-beings are not in the -number of Natural things, Nature containing nothing -within her, but what is substantially, really, and corporeally -existent. But your Authors <i>Ideal Entity</i>, -(whereof he is speaking in another place of his Works,)<a name="FNanchor_10_96" id="FNanchor_10_96"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_96" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> -which performs all the Works of Nature, seems to me, -as if it were the Jack of all Offices, or like the Jack in a -Clock, that makes every Wheel move; for it hath an -admirable power to put off and on Corporeality and Incorporeality, -and to make it self Something and Nothing -as often as it has occasion; but if this <i>Proteus</i> -have such power, it may well be named the Magick of -Nature. Your <i>Author</i> saith, it is not the Devil, nor -any effect thereof: but certainly, in my opinion, according -to its description, and the effects laid to its performance, -it must be more then the Devil; wherefore, -in my Reason, I cannot conceive it, neither am I able to -understand his <i>Phantastick Activity, Fancy of Forms, the -Souls acting by an insensible way,</i> and many more such -like expressions. But I conceive that all these can be -nothing else but the several motions of the sensitive and -rational matter, which is the Active, Ingenious, Distinguishing, -Knowing, Wise and Understanding -part of Infinite corporeal Nature; and though Infinite -Matter hath Infinite parts in general, yet there is a finiteness -in every part considered by it self: not that I think -a Part can really subsist single and by it self, but it is -onely considered so in the manner of our Conception, -by reason of the difference and variousness of natural -Creatures: for these being different from each other in -their figures, and not all alike, so that we can make a -distinction betwixt them; this difference and distinction -causes us to conceive every part of a different figure by -it self: but properly and according to the Truth of Nature, -there is no part by it self subsisting; for all parts -are to be considered, not onely as parts of the whole, -but as parts of other parts, all parts being joyned in Infinite -Nature, and tied by an inseparable tie one way -or other, although we do not altogether perceive it. -But to return to <i>Ideas</i>: I had almost forgot to tell you, -<i>Madam</i>, of another kind of <i>Ideas</i>, by your <i>Author</i> named, -<i>Bewitching</i> or <i>Inchanting Ideas</i>,<a name="FNanchor_11_97" id="FNanchor_11_97"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_97" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> which are for -the most part found in Women, against which I cannot -but take exception in the behalf of our Sex: For, says -he, <i>Women stamp Ideas on themselves, whereby they, -no otherwise then Witches driven about with a malignant -spirit of despair, are oftentimes governed or snatched away -unto those things, which otherwise they would not, and -do bewail unto us their own and unvoluntary Madness: -These Ideas are hurtful to themselves, and do, as it were, -Inchant, Infatuate, and weaken themselves; for so (as</i> Plutarch -<i>witnesses) a desire of death by hanging took hold -of all the young Maids in the Island</i> Chios. By this it -appears, that your <i>Author</i> has never been in Love, or -else he would have found, that Men have as well bewitching -<i>Ideas</i> as Women, and that they are as hurtful -to Men, as to Women. Neither can I be perswaded to -believe, that men should not have as well Mad <i>Ideas</i> as -Women; for to mention no other example, some, (I -will not speak of your <i>Author</i>) their Writings and -strange Opinions in Philosophy do sufficiently witness -it; but whence those Ideas do proceed, whether from -the Bride-bed of the Soul, or the Splene, your <i>Author</i> -doth not declare. As for the young Maids in <i>Chios</i>, I -must confess, it is a very strange example; but I think -there have been as many Men that have killed themselves, -as Women, if not more: However, I hope, by the -Grace of God, the young Maids in this Kingdom are -better advised; for if they should do the like, it would -be a sad fate for all young Men. To conclude, <i>Madam</i>, -all these rehearsed opinions of your <i>Author</i>, concerning -the Grounds or Principles of Natural Philosophy, -if you desire my Unfeigned Judgment, I can -say no more, but that they shew more Fancy, then -Reason and Truth, and so do many others; and, perhaps, -my opinions may be as far from Truth as his, although -their Ground is Sense and Reason; for there is -no single Creature in Nature, that is able to know the -perfectest Truth: but some opinions, to humane sense -and reason, may have more probability then others, and -every one thinks his to be most probable, according to -his own fancy and imagination, and so I think of mine; -nevertheless, I leave them to the censure of those, that -are endued with solid judgment and reason, and know -how to discern betwixt things of fancy and reason, and -amongst the rest, I submit them to the censure of your -<i>Ladiship</i>, whose solid and wise Judgment is the rule of -all the actions of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_87" id="Footnote_1_87"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_87"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>In his</i> ch. <i>called</i> The Fiction of -Elementary Complexions and Mixtures.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_88" id="Footnote_2_88"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_88"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>In the</i> ch. of the Birth and Original of -Forms. <i>In the</i> ch. Of the Ideas of Diseases. <i>See his</i> -ch. <i>called</i> The Seat of Diseases in the Soul is confirmed. -Ch. of Archeal Diseases. Ch. <i>called</i> The Subject of inhering -of Diseases is in the point of Life, &c.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_89" id="Footnote_3_89"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_89"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>In the</i> ch. Of the Gas of the Water.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_90" id="Footnote_4_90"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_90"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>In the</i> ch. of the Fiction of Elementary -Complexions and Mixtures.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_91" id="Footnote_5_91"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_91"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>In the</i> ch. Of the Blas of Meteors.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_6_92" id="Footnote_6_92"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_92"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> <i>In the</i> ch. Of the unknown action of Government.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_7_93" id="Footnote_7_93"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_93"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> <i>In the</i> ch. Of the Blas of Man.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_8_94" id="Footnote_8_94"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_94"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> Of the Causes and beginnings of Natural things.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_9_95" id="Footnote_9_95"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_95"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> Of the Ideas of Diseases.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_10_96" id="Footnote_10_96"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_96"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> Of the Magnetick cure of Wounds.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_11_97" id="Footnote_11_97"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_97"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> Of things Conceived, or Conceptions.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_III" id="III_III">III.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> relating how he dissents from the -<i>false Doctrine</i>, as he terms it, <i>of the Schools</i>, concerning -the Elements, and their Mixtures, Qualities, -Temperaments, Discords, &c. in order to Diseases, -is pleased to say as follows:<a name="FNanchor_1_212" id="FNanchor_1_212"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_212" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>I have sufficiently demonstrated, -that there are not four Elements in Nature, -and by consequence, if there are onely three, that four -cannot go together, or encounter; and that the fruits -which Antiquity hath believed to be mixt bodies, and those -composed from a concurrence of four elements, are materially -of one onely Element; also that those three Elements -are naturally cold; nor that native heat is any where in -things, except from Light, Life, Motion, and an altering -Blas: In like manner, that all actual moisture is -of Water, but all virtual moisture from the property of -the seeds: Likewise, that dryness is by it self in the Air -and Earth, but in Fruits by reason of the Seeds and -Coagulations; and that there are not Contraries in Nature.</i> -To give you my opinion hereof, first I think it too -great a presumption in any man, to feign himself so -much above the rest, as to accuse all others of ignorance, -and that none but he alone hath the true knowledg -of all things as infallible and undeniable, and that -so many Learned, Wise and Ingenious Men in so many -ages have been blinded with errors; for certainly, -no particular Creature in Nature can have any exact -or perfect knowledg of Natural things, and therefore -opinions cannot be infallible truths, although they may -seem probable; for how is it possible that a single finite -Creature should know the numberless varieties and hidden -actions of Nature? Wherefore your <i>Author</i> -cannot say, that he hath demonstrated any thing, which -could not be as much contradicted, and perhaps with -more reason, then he hath brought proofs and demonstrations: -And thus when he speaks of Elements, that -there are not four in Nature, and that they cannot go -together, or encounter, it may be his opinion; but others -have brought as many reasons to the contrary, and -I think with more probability; so as it is unnecessary to -make a tedious discourse thereof, and therefore I'le refer -you to those that have treated of it more learnedly -and solidly then I can do. But I perceive your <i>Author</i> -is much for Art, and since he can make solid bodies liquid, -and liquid bodies solid, he believes that all bodies -are composed out of the Element of Water, and that -Water therefore is the first Principle of all things; when -as Water, in my opinion, is but an Effect, as all other -natural Creatures, and therefore cannot be a cause or -principle of them. Concerning the <i>Natural coldness -of Water, Air, and Earth,</i> it may be, or not be so, for -any thing your <i>Author</i> can truly know; but to my sense -and reason, it seems probable that there are things naturally -hot and moist, and hot and dry, as well as cold -and moist, and cold and dry: But all these are but several -effects produced by the several actions of Natural -Matter, which Natural Matter is the onely Principle of -all Natural Effects and Creatures whatever; and this -Principle, I am confident your <i>Author</i> can no more -prove to be Water, then he can prove that Heat, Light, -Life, Motion, and <i>Blas</i>, are not material. Concerning -what he saith, That <i>Native Heat is no where in -things, except from Light, Life, Motion, and an altering -Blas</i>: I believe that motion of life makes not onely heat, -but all effects whatsoever; but this native heat is not -produced onely from the motions of Particular lives in -particular Creatures, but it is made by the motions of -Natures life; which life, in all probability, is the self-moving -Matter, which no doubt, can and doth make -Light and Blas without Heat, and Heat without Light -or Blas; Wherefore Light and Blas are not principles -of native Heat, no more then native Heat is the principle -of Light and Blas. Neither is Water the Principle -of Actual moisture, nor the propriety of seeds the -Principle of all Virtual moisture; but self-moving -Matter is the Principle of all, and makes both actual -and virtual moisture, and there is no question but there -are many sorts of moistures. As for <i>Dryness</i>, which -he says, <i>is by it self in the Air and Earth, and in Fruits -by reason of the Seeds and Coagulations</i>: I cannot conceive -how any thing can be by it self in Nature, by -reason there is nothing alone and single in Nature, but -all are inseparable parts of one body: perchance, he -means, it is naturally and essentially inherent in Air and -Earth; but neither can that be in my reason, because -all Creatures and Effects of Nature are Intermixt, and -there is as much dryness in other Creatures, as in Air -and Earth. Lastly, as for his opinion, That <i>there are -no Contraries in Nature</i>; I believe not in the essence or -nature of Matter; but sense and reason inform us, that -there are Contraries in Natures actions, which are Corporeal -motions, which cause mixtures, qualities, degrees, -discords, as also harmonious conjunctions and -concords, compositions, divisions, and the like effects -whatsoever. But though your <i>Author</i> seems to be an -enemy to the mixtures of Elements, yet he makes such -a mixture of Divinity, and natural Philosophy, that all -his Philosophy is nothing but a meer Hotch-potch, spoiling -one with the other. And so I will leave it to those -that delight in it, resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_212" id="Footnote_1_212"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_212"><span class="label">[1]</span></a><i>In his Treatise called</i>, A passive deceiving of the -Schools of the Humourists.</p></div> - - - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_IV" id="III_IV">IV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p><i>Water</i>, according to your <i>Authors</i> opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_98" id="FNanchor_1_98"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_98" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -<i>is frozen into Snow, Ice, or Hail, not by Cold, -but by its own Gas.</i> But since I am not able -to conceive what his Gas is, being a term invented by -him self, I will briefly declare my own opinion, which -is, That Snow, Ice, and Hail, in my judgment, are -made in the like manner, as Passions or Colours are -made and raised in Man; for a sad discourse, or a cruel -object will make a Man pale and cold, and a fearful -object, will make him tremble; whereas a wanton and -obscene discourse will make some red and hot. But -yet these discourses and objects are onely external, occasional, -and not immediate efficient causes of such alterations. -Also when a Man eats or drinks any thing -that is actually hot or cold, or enters into a cold or hot -room, bath, or air, he becomes hot or cold by the -actions of those external agents that work upon him, or -rather whose motions the sensitive motions of his body -do pattern out. The like for diseases; for they may be -caused either by hearing ill reports, or by taking either -hurtful or superfluous food into the Body, or by Infections -inwardly or outwardly, and many other ways. -Likewise may Colours be made different ways; And so -may Snow, Ice, and Hail; for all loose, rare, and -porous Bodies are more apt to alter and change then -close, solid, and dense bodies; and not onely to change -from what they are, but to rechange to what they were. -But, <i>Madam</i>, many studious persons study Nature -more in her own substance, then in her various actions, -which is the cause they arrive to no knowledg of Natures -Works; for the same parts of Matter may act -or work several ways: Like as a Man, or other animal -creature, may put one part of his body into various and -several postures, and move it many different ways. Your -<i>Author</i> may say, that although several Creatures may -be changed to our sight or perception, yet they are not -really changed in Nature. I answer, Their Principle, -which is a natural matter, of which all Creatures are -made, cannot be changed, because it is one, simple, and -unalterable in its Nature; but the figures of several -Creatures are changed continually by the various motions -of this matter; not from being matter, but onely -from such or such a figure into another; and those -figures which do change, in their room are others -produced to keep up the certain kinds of Creatures -by a continual successive alteration. And as there are -changes of parts, so there are also mixtures of several -parts, figures and motions in one and the same Matter; -for there are not different kinds in the nature of Matter: -But, although Matter is of several degrees, as partly animate -and partly inanimate, and the animate Matter -is partly rational, and partly sensitive; Nevertheless, in all -those degrees it remains the same onely or meer Matter; -that is, it is nothing else but Matter, and the -onely ground in which all changes are made. And therefore -I cannot perceive it to be impossible in Nature, as to -your <i>Author</i> it seems, That <i>Water should not be transchangeable -into Air</i>; for, that he says, <i>The Air would -have increased into a huge bulk, and all Water would -have long since failed</i>: It is no consequence, because -there is a Mutual transmutation of all figures -and parts of Nature, as I declared above; and -when one part is transchanged into another, that -part is supplied again by the change of another, so -that there can be no total mutation of kinds or sorts -of figures, but onely a mutual change of the particulars. -Neither is it of any consequence, when -your <i>Author</i> says, That <i>if Water should once be -turned into Air, it would always remain Air, because -a returning agent is wanting, which may turn Air -again into Water.</i> For he might as well say, a -Man cannot go or turn backward, being once -gone forward. And although he brings a General -Rule, That <i>every thing, as much as in it lies, -doth desire to remain in it self</i>; Yet it is impossible -to be done, by reason there is no rest in Nature, -she being in a perpetual motion, either working -to the consistance of a figure, or to the uniting -of several parts, or to the dissolving or dividing -of several parts, or any other ways. By dissolving, -I do not mean annihilating, but such a dissolving -of parts as is proper for the altering of -such a figure into one or many other figures. But -rather then your Author will consent to the transchanging -of Water into Air, he will feign several -grounds, soils or pavements in the Air, which he -calls <i>Peroledes</i>, and so many Flood-gates and Folding-dores, -and make the Planets their Key-keepers; -which are pretty Fancies, but not able to prove any -thing in Natural Philosophy. And so leaving them to -their Author, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_98" id="Footnote_1_98"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_98"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Gas of Water.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_V" id="III_V">V.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I cannot in reason give my consent to your <i>Authors</i> -opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_99" id="FNanchor_1_99"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_99" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Fishes do by the force or vertue of an -inbred Seed transchange simple water into fat, bones, -and their own flesh, and that materially they are nothing -but water transchanged, and that they return into water -by art.</i> For though my opinion is, that bodies change -and alter from one figure into another, yet they do -not all change into water, neither is water changed -into all other figures; and certainly Fishes do not live -nor subsist meerly by Water, but by several other -meats, as other animals do; either by feeding upon -other Fishes, the stronger devouring the weaker, or -upon Mud, and Grass, and Weeds, in the bottom -of Seas, Rivers and Ponds, and the like: As for example, -put Fish into a Pool or Sluce, wherein there -is not any thing but clear, pure water, and in a short -time they will be starved to death for want of Food; -and as they cannot live onely by water, so neither -can they breed by the power of water, but by the power -of their food, as a more solid substance: And if all -Creatures be nourished by those things whereof they -consist, then Fishes do not consist of water, being not -nourished by water; for it is not the transchanging -of water, by which Fishes live, and by which they -produce; but it is the transchange of food, proceeding -from other Creatures, as I mentioned above. 'Tis -true, Water is a proper element for them to live in, but -not to live on; and though I have neither learning, nor -experience in <i>Chymistry</i>, yet I believe, that your <i>Author</i>, -with all the subtilest Art he had, could not turn or convert -all Creatures into pure and simple water, but there -would have been dregs and several mixtures left: I will -not say, that the Furnace may not rarifie bodies extreamly, -but not convert them into such a substance or form as -Nature can. And although he thinks Gold is made of -Water, yet I do not believe he could convert it into -Water by the help of Fire; he might make it soluble, -fluid and rare, but all things that are supple, soluble, -flowing and liquid, are not Water; I am confident no -<i>Gas</i> or <i>Blas</i> will, or can transform it, nor no Art whatsoever; -what Nature may do, I know not. But since -your <i>Authors</i> opinion is, that Air is also a Primigenial -Element, and in its nature a substance, Why doth he -not make it a Principle of natural bodies, as well as Water? -I think it had not been so improper to liken Juices -to Water; but to make the onely Principle of the composition -and dissolution of all Creatures to be Water, seems -to me very improbable. Neither can I admit in reason -that the Elements should be called, first, pure, and -simple beings; we might as well call all other creatures, -first, pure, and simple beings: for although the -word Element sounds as much as Principle, yet they -are in my reason no more Principles of Nature, then -other Creatures are, there being but one Principle in -Nature, out of which all things are composed, <i>viz.</i> the -onely matter, which is a pure and simple corporeal substance; -and what Man names impure dregs and filths, -these are onely irregular and cross motions of that matter, -in respect to the nature of such or such a figure; -or such motions as are not agreeable and sympathetical -to our Passions, Humors, Appetites, and the like. Concerning -the Contrarieties, Differences and Wars in Nature, -which your <i>Author</i> denies, I have spoken thereof -already, and though he endeavours in a long discourse -to prove, that there is no War in nature; yet, in my -opinion, it is to little purpose, and it makes but a war -in the thoughts of the Reader; I know not what it did -in his own. But I observe he appeals often to Divinity -to bear him up in Natural Philosophy; but how -the Church doth approve his Interpretations of the -Scripture, I know not: Wherefore I will not meddle -with them, lest I offend the Truth of the Divine Scripture, -wherein I desire to submit to the Judgment of the -Church, which is much wiser then I, or any single -Person can be. However, for all what your <i>Author</i> -says, I do nevertheless verily believe, there is a war -between Natural motions: For example; between the -Regular motions of Health, and the Irregular motions -of Sickness; and that things applied do oftentimes -give assistance to one side or other, but many times in -the conflict, the applied remedies are destroyed, and -sometimes they are forced to be Neutrals: Wherefore -though the nature of Infinite Matter is simple, and -knows of no discord, yet her actions may be cross and -opposite: the truth is, Nature could never make such -variety, did her actions never oppose each other, but -live in a constant Peace and Unity. And thus leaving -them to agree, I am confident your <i>Ladiship</i> and I shall -never disagree; for as long as my life doth last, I shall -always prove,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_99" id="Footnote_1_99"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_99"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The Fiction of Elementary Complexions and Mixtures.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_VI" id="III_VI">VI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> condemns the <i>Schools</i> for saying,<a name="FNanchor_1_100" id="FNanchor_1_100"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_100" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That -<i>Air is moist</i>, or that it may be <i>converted into Water -by pressing it together</i>; bringing an example of -an <i>Iron Pipe, wherein Air has been pressed together, which -afterwards in its driving out has, like a Hand-gun discharged -with Gun-powder, sent a bullet thorow a board or -plank.</i> Truly, <i>Madam</i>, concerning the moisture of -Air, I am against it, but the transchanging of Air -into Water I do verily believe, <i>viz.</i> that some sorts of -Air may be contracted or condensed into Water, and -that Water again may be dilated into Air, but not readily, -commonly and easily by Art, but onely by Nature. -Wherefore your <i>Authors</i> Experiment can -serve for no proof; for an artificial trial cannot be an -infallible natural demonstration, the actions of Art, and -the actions of Nature being for the most part very different, -especially in productions and transmutations of -natural things: Neither can an alteration of parts, cause -an utter destruction of the whole, because when some -parts change from their figures, other parts of matter -change again into the like figures, by which successive -change the continuation of the whole is kept up. Next -your <i>Author</i> reproves the Schools for maintaining the -opinion, that <i>Air is hot</i>; for says he, <i>Water, Air, and -Earth, are cold by Creation, because without Light, Heat, -and the partaking of Life.</i> He might, in my opinion, -conclude, as well, that Man is cold by Creation, because -a Chameleon, or a Fish is cold, being all of animal -kind: But why may not some sorts of Air, Water -and Earth be hot, and some be cold, as well as some -sorts of Light are hot, and some cold; and so several other -Creatures? His Reasons prove nothing: for Light -doth not make Heat, nor is it the principle of Heat; and -it is no consequence to say, all that is without Light is -without Heat, there being many things without Light, -which nevertheless are Hot; But to say, Water, Air, -and Earth are cold, because they are without heat, is -no proof, but a meer begging of the principle; for it is -but the same thing, as if I should say, this is no Stone, -because it is no Glass. And that Water, Air and -Earth, do not partake of Life, must be proved first, for -that is not granted as yet, there being, according to my -opinion, not one Creature that wants Life in all Nature. -Again: your <i>Author</i> is of opinion, That <i>Water is the -first and chief Principle of all Natural things.</i> But -this I can no more believe, then that <i>Water should never -change or degenerate from its essence</i>: nay, if your -<i>Author</i> means, there shall always be Water in Nature, -it is another thing; but if he thinks that not any part -of water doth or can change or degenerate in its nature, -and is the principle and chief producer of all other -Creatures; then he makes Water rather a Creator -then a Creature; and it seems, that those Gentiles -which did worship Water, were of the same opinion, -whereas yet he condemns all Pagan opinions and all -those that follow them. Moreover, I cannot subscribe -to his opinion, That <i>Gas and Blas from the Stars -do make heat</i>: For heat is made several ways, according -to its several sorts; for there is a dry heat, and a -moist heat, a burning, melting, and evaporating heat, -and many more. But as for <i>Meteors</i>, that <i>they are -made by Gas and Blas</i>, I can say nothing, by reason I -am not skilled in Astrology, and the science of the -Heavens, Stars, and Planets; wherefore if I did offer -to meddle with them, I should rather express my -Ignorance, then give your <i>Ladiship</i> any solid reasons; -and so I am willing to leave this speculation to others, -resting content with that knowledg Nature hath given -me without the help of Learning: Which I wholly -dedicate and offer to your <i>Ladiship</i>, as becomes,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_100" id="Footnote_1_100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_100"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In the <i>ch.</i> of <i>Air.</i></p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_VII" id="III_VII">VII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Having made mention in my last of your <i>Authors</i> -opinion, <i>That Air is in its nature Cold</i>, I thought -it fit to take a stricter view of the temper of Air, -and to send you withal my own opinion thereof. First -of all, I would fain know, what sort of Air your <i>Author</i> -means; for if he thinks there is but one sort of Air, he -might as well say, that there is but one sort of Animals, -or Vegetables; whereas yet there are not onely different -sorts of animal and vegetable kind, but also different -particulars in one and the same sort: As for example; -what difference is not amongst Horses, as between -a Barb, a Turk, a Ginnet, a Courser of <i>Naples</i>, a -Flanders-horse, a Galloway, an English-horse, and so -forth? not onely in their shapes, but also in their natures, -tempers and dispositions? The like for Cows, -Oxen, Sheep, Goats, Dogs, as also for Fowl and -Fish, nay, for Men. And as for Vegetables, What -difference is there not between Barly and Wheat, and -between <i>French</i>-barly, <i>Pine</i>-barly, and ordinary Barly; -as also our <i>English</i>-wheat, <i>Spanish</i>-wheat, <i>Turkish</i>-wheat, -<i>Indian</i>-wheat, and the like? What difference -is there not amongst Grapes, as the <i>Malago, Muscadel</i>, -and other Grapes, and so of all the rest of Vegetables? -The same may be said of the Elements; for -there is as much difference amongst the Elements as -amongst other Creatures. And so of Air: for Air -in some places, as in the <i>Indies</i>, especially about <i>Brasilia</i>, -is very much different from our air, or from the -air that is in other places: Indeed, in every different -Climate, you shall find a difference of air, wherefore -'tis impossible to assign a certain temper of heat or cold -to air in general. But although my sense and reason inform -me, that air in its own nature or essence is neither -hot nor cold, yet it may become hot or cold, by hot -or cold motions; for the sensitive perceptive motions of -Air may pattern out heat or cold; and hence it is, that -in Summer, when as heat predominates, the air is hot; -and in Winter, when as cold predominates, the air is -cold. But, perhaps, you will say, air may be cooled -by moving it with a Fan, or such like thing which can -make wind; wherefore it follows, that air must needs -be naturally cold. I answer, That doth not prove Air -to be in its nature cold: for this moving or making of -wind may contract or condense the air into cold motions, -which may cause a cold wind, like as Ventiducts, where -the air running thorow narrow Pipes makes a cold -wind. The same may be done with a mans breath; -for if he contract his lips close, his breath will be cold, -but if he opens his mouth wide, his breath will be warm. -Again: you may say, that rain is congealed by the -coldness of the air into Snow, Hail and Ice. I answer; -Frost, Ice, Snow and Hail, do not proceed from the -coldness of the air, but rather the coldness of the air proceeds -from them; for Ice, Snow, and Hail, proceed -from cold contraction and condensation of a vaporous -or watery substance; and, as Frost and Snow cause air -to be cold, so Thunder and Lightning cause it to be -hot, so long as they last. Thus, <i>Madam</i>, though -Air may be altered either to heat or cold, yet it is -neither hot nor Cold in it self. And this is all for the -present that I can say concerning the Temper of Air; I -conclude, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_VIII" id="III_VIII">VIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Having hitherto considered your <i>Authors</i> Elements -or Principles of Natural things, you will -give me leave to present you now with a short -view of his Opinions concerning Wind, Vacuum, -Rainbows, Thunder, Lightning, Earth-quakes, and -the like; which I will do as briefly as I can, lest I betray -my Ignorance; for I confess my self not to be well -versed in the knowledg of Meteors, nor in those things -which properly belong to the Mathematicks, as in Astrology, -Geography, Opticks, and the like. But -your <i>Author</i> says, in the first place,<a name="FNanchor_1_101" id="FNanchor_1_101"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_101" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Natural Wind -is nothing but a flowing Air, moved by the Blas of the Stars.</i> -Certainly, <i>Madam</i>, if this were so, then, in my judgment, -when the Stars blaze, we should have constant -Winds, and the more they blaze, the more violent -winds there would be: But I have rather observed the -contrary, that when the Stars blaze most apparently, -we have the calmest weather either in Summer or Winter. -Perchance your <i>Author</i> will say, he doth not -mean this apparant and visible Blas, but another invisible -Blas. I answer; I know not, nor cannot conceive -any other Blas in the Stars, except I had seen it in -a Vision; neither do I think that Nature her self knows -of any other, But your <i>Author</i> doth refer himself upon -the Authority of <i>Hypocrates</i>, who says, That <i>not -onely the Wind is a blast, but that all Diseases are from -blasts; and that there is in us a Spirit stirring up all things -by its Blas; which Spirit, by a Microcosmical Analogy, -or the proportion of a little World, he compares to the -blasts of the world.</i> As for my particular, <i>Madam</i>, -I dare say, I could never perceive, by my sense and reason, -any such blazing Spirit in me; but I have found -by experience, that when my mind and thoughts have -been benighted with Melancholy, my Imagination hath -been more active and subtil, then when my mind has -been clear from dark Melancholy: Also I find that my -thoughts and conceptions are as active, if not more, -in the night then in the day; and though we may sometimes -dream of several Lights, yet I cannot perceive a -constant light in us; however Light, Blazes, and all -those effects are no more then other effects of Nature -are; nor can they have more power on other Creatures, -then other Creatures have on them: Neither are they -made otherwise then by the corporeal motions of Natural -Matter, and are dissolved and transchanged as other -Creatures, out of one form or figure into another. -Next your <i>Author</i> discoursing<a name="FNanchor_2_102" id="FNanchor_2_102"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_102" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> whether there be any -Vacuum in Nature, doth incline to the affirming -party, that there is a Vacuum in the Air; to wit, -<i>There is in the air something, that is less then a body, which fills -up the emptinesses or little holes and pores in the air, and -which is wholly annihilated by fire; It is actually void of -all matter, and is a middle thing between a body and an -Incorporeal Spirit, and almost nothing in respect of bodies; -for it came from Nothing, and so may easily be -reduced to nothing.</i> All this, <i>Madam</i>, surpasses my -capacity; for I can in no ways conceive any thing between -something and nothing, as to be less then -something, and more then nothing; for all that is corporeal -in Nature, is to my reason something; that is, -some really existent thing; but what is incorporeal in -Nature, is nothing; and if there be any absolute vacuum -in Nature, as your <i>Author</i> endeavours to prove, -then certainly this Vacuum cannot be any thing whatsoever; -for a Vacuum is a pure Nothing. But many -ingenious and learned men have brought as many arguments -and reasons against Vacuum, as others bring -for it, and so it is a thing which I leave to them to exercise -their brains withal. The like is the opinion which -many maintain concerning Place, <i>viz.</i> that there is -a constant succession of Place and Parts, so that when -one part removes, another doth succeed in its place; -the truth and manner whereof I was never able to comprehend: -for, in my opinion, there can be no place -without body, nor no body without place, body and -place being all but one thing. But as for the perpetual -Creation and annihilation of your <i>Authors</i> Vacuities, -give me leave to tell you, <i>Madam</i>, that it would be a -more laborious work, then to make a new World, or -then it was to make this present World; for God made -this World in six days, and rested the seventh day; but -this is a perpetual making of something out of nothing. -Again: concerning Rainbows, your <i>Author</i> says,<a name="FNanchor_3_103" id="FNanchor_3_103"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_103" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> That -<i>a Rainbow is not a natural effect of a natural Cause, but a -divine Mystery in its original; and that it has no matter, but -yet is in a place, and has its colours immediately in a place, -but in the air mediately, and that it is of the nature of -Light.</i> This is indeed a great mystery to my reason; -for I cannot conceive, as I said before, a place without -a body, nor how Light and Colours can be bodiless: -But as for Rainbows, I have observed, when as -water hath been blown up into the air into bubles, that -by the reflexion of light on the watery bubles, they -have had the like colours of the Rainbow; and I have -heard, that there hath been often seen at the rising and -setting of the Sun, Clouds of divers colours; Wherefore -I cannot be perswaded to believe that a Rainbow should -not have a natural cause, and consequently be a natural -effect; For that God has made it a sign of the Covenant -between him and mortal men, is no proof, that it is -not a natural effect; Neither can I believe that it has not -been before the Flood, and before it was made a sign by -God, as your <i>Author</i> imagines; for though it was no -sign before the Flood, yet it may nevertheless have had -its being and existence before the Flood. Moreover, as -for Thunder and Lightning, your <i>Authors</i> opinion -is; <i>That although they may have concurring natural Causes, -yet the mover of them is an Incorporeal Spirit, which -is the Devil; who having obtained the Principality of -this world, that he may be a certain executer of the judgments -of the chief Monarch, and so the Umpire and -Commissioner of Lightning and Thunder, stirs up a monstrous -and sudden Blas in the Air, yet under Covenanted -Conditions; for unless his power were bridled by -divine Goodness, he would shake the Earth with one stroke -so, as to destroy all mortal men: and thus the cracking noise -or voice of Thunder is nothing but a spiritual Blas of the -Evil Spirit.</i> I will not deny, <i>Madam</i>, that Thunder -and Lightning do argue the Power of the most Glorious -God, for so do all the rest of the Creatures; but that this -is the onely and immediate cause, which your <i>Author</i> -assigns of Thunder and Lightning, I cannot believe; -for surely, in my opinion, Thunder and Lightning are -as much natural effects as other Creatures in Nature; -and are not the Devils Blas, for I think they may be -made without the help of the Devil; nay, I believe, he -may be as much affraid of Thunder, as those Creatures -that live on Earth. But what the causes are, and how -Thunder and Lightning are made, I have elsewhere -declared more at large, especially in my <i>Philosophical -Opinions.</i> Again your <i>Author</i> speaking<a name="FNanchor_4_104" id="FNanchor_4_104"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_104" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> of the <i>Trembling -of the Earth, thinks it is nothing else but the Judgment -of God for the sins of Impenitent men.</i> For my -part, <i>Madam</i>, I can say little to it, either concerning -the divine, or the natural cause of Earthquakes: As -for the divine and supernatural Cause, which your -<i>Author</i> gives, if it was so, then I wonder much, why -God should command Earth-quakes in some parts of -the World more frequent then in others. As for example; -we here in these parts have very seldom Earthquakes, -and those we have, which is hardly one in -many ages, are not so furious, as to do much harm; -and so in many other places of the World, are as few -and as gentle Earth-quakes as here; when as in others, -Earth-quakes are very frequent and dreadful: From -whence it must needs follow, if Earth-quakes be onely -a Judgment from God for the sins of Impenitent Men, -and not a natural effect, that then those places, where -the Earth is not so apt to tremble, are the habitations of -the blessed, and that they, which inhabit those parts that -are apt to tremble, are the accursed; when as yet, in those -places where Earthquakes are not usual and frequent, or -none at all, People are as wicked and impious, if not -more, then in those where Earthquakes are common. But -the question is, Whether those parts which suffer frequent -and terrible Earthquakes, would not be so shaken -or have such trembling fits, were they uninhabited by -Man, or any other animal Creature? Certainly, in -my opinion, they would. But as for the Natural -Cause of Earthquakes, you must pardon me, <i>Madam</i>, -that I cannot knowingly discourse thereof, by reason I -am not so well skilled in Geography, as to know the several -Soils, Climats, Parts, Regions, or Countries, nor -what disposed matter may be within those parts that are -subject to frequent Earthquakes: Onely this I may say, -that I have observed, that the light of a small Fire or -Candle, will dilate it self round about; or rather that the -air round about the Fire or Candle, will pattern out both -its light and its heat. Also I have observed, That a -Man in a raging fit of Madness will have such an unusual -strength, as ten strong men shall hardly be able to -encounter or bind him, when as, this violent fit being -past, a single man, nay a youth, may over-master him: -Whence I conclude, that the actions, as the motions -of Nature, are very powerful when they use their -force, and that the ordinary actions of Nature are not -so forcible as necessary; but the extraordinary are more -forcible then necessary. Lastly, your <i>Author</i> takes -great pains to prove,<a name="FNanchor_5_105" id="FNanchor_5_105"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_105" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> That <i>the Sun with his light rules -the Day, and the Moon with hers the Night; and -that the Moon has her own Native light; and that -Bats, Mice, Dormice, Owles, and many others, as also -Men, which rise at night, and walk in their sleep, see -by the light and power of the Moon; also that Plants are -more plentifully nourished by the night.</i> But lest it might -be concluded, that all this is said without any probability -of Truth, by reason the Moon doth not every -night shine upon the Earth, he makes a difference between -the Manner of the Sun's and Moon's enlightning -the Earth; to wit, that the Sun strikes -his beams in a right line towards the Earth, but the -Moon doth not respect the Centre of the World, -which is the Earth, in a right line; but her Centre is -always excentrical, and she respects the Earth onely by -accident, when she is concentrical with the World; -And therefore he thinks there is another light under the -Earth even at Midnight, whereby many Eyes do see, -which owes also its rise to the Moon. This opinion -of your <i>Author</i> I leave to be examined by those that -have skill in Astronomy, and know both the Light and -the Course of the Moon: I will onely say thus much, -that when the Moon is concentrical, as he calls it, with -the World, as when it is Full and New Moon, she -doth not shine onely at night, but also in the day, and -therefore she may rule the day as well as the night, and -then there will be two lights for the ruling of the day, -or at least there will be a strife betwixt the Sun and the -Moon, which shall rule. But as for Men walking asleep -by the light of the Moon, my opinion is, That blind -men may walk as well by the light of the Sun, as sleeping -men by the light of the Moon. Neither is it probable, -that <i>the Moon or her Blas doth nourish Plants</i>; for -in a cold Moon-shiny night they will often die; but it -is rather the Regular motions in well tempered matter -that cause fruitful productions and maturity. And so -I repose my Pen, lest it trespass too much upon your -Patience, resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_101" id="Footnote_1_101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_101"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Blas of Meteors.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_102" id="Footnote_2_102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_102"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of Vacuum.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_103" id="Footnote_3_103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_103"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of an Irregular Meteor.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_104" id="Footnote_4_104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_104"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Earthquake.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_105" id="Footnote_5_105"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_105"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Birth or Original of Forms.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_IX" id="III_IX">IX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In my former, when I related your <i>Authors</i> opinion, -concerning Earthquakes, I forgot to tell you, that he -counts the Doctrine of the Schools absurd, when -they say that Air, or any Exhalation, is the cause of -them: For, says he, <i>There is no place in the Pavements -or soils of the Earth, wherein any airy body may be entertained, -whether that body be a wind, or an airy exhalation.</i> -But since I promised I would not offer to appoint -or assign any natural causes of Earthquakes, I have -only taken occasion hence to enquire, whether it may not -be probably affirmed, that there is air in the bowels of the -Earth: And to my reason it seems very probable; I -mean not this Exterior air, flowing about the circumference -of the Earth we inhabite; but such an airy -matter as is pure, refined, and subtil, there being -great difference in the Elements, as well as in all other -sorts of Creatures; for what difference is there not between -the natural heat of an animal, and the natural -heat of the Sun? and what difference is there not between -the natural moisture of an Animal, and the natural -moisture of Water? And so for the Purity of -Air, Dryness of Earth, and the like: Nay, there -is great difference also in the production of those Effects: -As for example; the heat of the Earth is not -produced from the Sun, nor the natural heat in Animals, -nor the natural heat in Vegetables; for if it -were so, then all Creatures in one Region or place of -the Earth would be of one temper. As for example: -Poppy, Night-shade, Lettuce, Thyme, Sage, Parsly, -&c. would be all of one temper and degree, growing -all in one Garden, and upon one patch of Ground, -whereon the Sun equally casts his beams, when as -yet they are all different in their natural tempers and -degrees. And so certainly there is Air, Fire, and -Water, in the bowels of the Earth, which were never -made by the Sun, the Sea, and this Exterior elemental -Air. Wherefore those, in my opinion, are -in gross Errors, who imagine that these Interior Effects -in the Earth are produced from the mentioned -Exterior Elements, or from some other forreign and -external Causes; for an external cause can onely produce -an external effect, or be an occasion to the -production of such or such an effect, but not be the -immediate efficient or essential cause of an interior -natural effect in another Creature, unless the Interior -natures of different Creatures have such an active power -and influence upon each other, as to work interiously -at a distance, such effects as are proper and essential to -their Natures, which is improbable; for though their -natures and dispositions may mutually agree and sympathize, -yet their powers cannot work upon their Interior -Natures so, as to produce internal natural effects -and proprieties in them. The truth is, it cannot be; for -as the Cause is, so is the Effect; and if the Cause be an -exterior Cause, the Effect must prove so too: As for -example; the heat of the Sun, and the heat of the Earth, -although they may both agree, yet one is not the cause -of the other; for the Suns heat cannot pierce into the -bowels of the Earth, neither can the heat of the Earth -ascend so far as to the Center of the Sun: As for the -heat of the Earth, it is certain enough, and needs no -proof; but as for the heat of the Sun, our senses will -sufficiently inform us, that although his beams are -shot forth in direct lines upon the face of the Earth, -yet they have not so much force, as to pierce into a low -Celler or Vault; Wherefore it is not probable, that -the Earth hath its natural heat from the Sun, and so neither -its dryness from the Air, nor its moisture from -the Sea, but these interior effects in the Earth proceed -from some other interior causes. And thus there may -be great difference between the heat, cold, moisture, -and drought which is in the Elements, and between -those which are in Vegetables, Minerals, and Animals, -not onely in their General kinds, but also in their Particulars: -And not onely a difference in the aforesaid -qualities of heat, cold, moisture, and drought, but also -in all other motions, as Dilations, Contractions, Rarefactions, -Densations, &c. nay, in their Mixtures and -Temperaments: As for example; the temper of a -Mineral is not the temper of an Animal, or of a Vegetable, -neither is the temper of these the temper -of the exterior Elements, no more then the temper -of the Elements is the temper of them; for every -Creature has a temper natural and peculiar to it -self, nay, every particular Creature, has not onely -different tempers, compositions, or mixtures, but -also different productions; or else, if there were no -difference in their productions, every Creature would -be alike, when as yet there are seldom two that do -exactly resemble each other. But I desire you to -understand me well, <i>Madam</i>, when I speak of -Particular heats, colds, droughts, and moistures; for -I do not believe that all Creatures are made out -of the four Elements, no more, then that the Elements -are produced from other Creatures, for the -Matter of all Creatures is but one and the same; -but although the Matter is the same, nevertheless, -the Tempers, compositions, Productions, Motions, -&c. of particular Creatures, may be different, -which is the cause of their different exterior figures, -or shapes, as also of their different Interiour -Natures, Qualities, Properties, and the like. And -so, to conclude, there is no impossibility or absurdity -in affirming, that there may be Air, Fire, -and Water, in the bowels of the Earth proper for -those Creatures, which are in her, although not such -an Elemental Air, Fire and Water, as is subject here -to our senses; but another kind of Air, Fire and Water, -different from those. But this being a subject for -Learned and Ingenious men to work and contemplate -upon, better, perhaps, then I can do, I will leave it to -them, and so remain,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_X" id="III_X">X.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> mentioning in his Works, several -Seeds of several Creatures, makes me express my -opinion thus in short concerning this Subject: Several -Seeds seem to me no otherwise then several Humours, -or several Elements, or several other Creatures -made of one and the same Matter, that produce -one thing out of another, and the barrenness of seeds -proceeds either from the irregularity of their natural -motions, or from their unaptness or unactivity of producing. -But it is to be observed, <i>Madam</i>, that not -every thing doth produce always its like, but one and -the same thing, or one and the same Creature, hath many -various and different productions; for sometimes -Vegetables do produce Animals, Animals produce Minerals, -Minerals produce Elements, and Elements again -Minerals, and so forth: for proof I will bring but -a mean and common example. Do not Animals produce -Stones, some in one, and some in another part of -their bodies, as some in the Heart, some in the Stomack, -some in the Head, some in the Gall, some in the Kidnies, -and some in the Bladder? I do not say, that this -Generation of Stone is made the same way as the natural -generation of Animals, as, for example, Man is -born of his Parents; but I speak of the generation or -production of Creatures in general, for otherwise all -Creatures would be alike, if all generations were after -one and the same manner and way. Likewise do not -Fruits, Roots, Flowers and Herbs, produce Worms? -And do not Stones produce Fire? witness the Flint. -And doth not Earth produce Metal? 'Tis true, some -talk of the seed of Metals, but who with all his diligent -observations could find it out as yet? Wherefore it is, -in my opinion, not probable, that Minerals are produced -by way of seeds. Neither can I perceive that -any of the Elements is produced by seed, unless Fire, -which seems, to my sense and reason, to encrease numerously -by its seed, but not any other of the Elements. -And thus productions are almost as various as Creatures, -or rather parts of Creatures, are; for we see how -many productions there are in one animal body, as the -production of flesh, bones, marrow, brains, gristles, -veines, sinews, blood, and the like, and all this comes -from Food, and Food from some other Creatures, but -all have their original from the onely matter, and the -various motions of Nature. And thus, in my opinion, -all things are made easily, and not by such constrained -ways as your <i>Author</i> describes, by Gas, Blas, -Ideas, and the like; for I am confident, Nature has -more various ways of producing natural things then -any Creature is able to conceive. I'le give another -example of Vegetables, I pray you but to consider, -<i>Madam</i>, how many several ways Vegetables are produced, -as some by seeds, some by slips, some by -grafts, &c. The graft infuses and commixes with the -whole stock and the branches, and these do the like -with the graft: As for example; an Apple grafted in -Colewort produces Apples; but those Apples will have -a taste and sent of the Colewort, which shews that several -parts of several Creatures mix, joyn, and act together; -and as for seeds, they are transchanged wholly, and every -part thereof into the produced fruit, and every -part of the seed makes a several production by the help -of the co-working parts of the Earth, which is the reason -that so many seeds are produced from one single seed; -But Producers, that waste not themselves in productions, -do not produce so numerously as those that do dissolve; -yet all Creatures increase more or less, according -to their supplies or assistances; for seeds will encrease and -multiply more in manured and fertile then in barren -grounds; nay, if the ground be very barren, no production -at all will be; which shews, that productions -come not barely from the seed, but require of necessity -some assistance, and therefore neither Archeus, nor seminal -Ideas, nor Gas, nor Blas, would do any good -in Vegetables, if the ground did not assist them in their -generations or productions, no more then a house -would be built without the assistance of labourers or -workmen; for let the materials lie never so long, surely -they will never joyn together of themselves to the artificial -structure of an house. Wherefore since there is so -much variety in the production of one kind of Creatures, -nay of every particular in every kind, what needs -Man to trouble his brain for the manner and way to -describe circumstantially every particular production -of every Creature by seminal or printing Ideas, or any -other far-fetched termes, since it is impossible to be -done? And as for those Creatures whose producers -are of two different sorts, as a Mule bred of an Asse -and a Horse, and another Creature bred of a Cony -and a Dormouse; all which your <i>Author</i> thinks<a name="FNanchor_1_106" id="FNanchor_1_106"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_106" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> do -take more after their mother then their father, more -after the breeder then the begetter; I will not eagerly -affirm the contrary, although it seems to me more -probable: But this I can say, that I have observed by -experience, that Faunes and Foales have taken more -after the Male then after the Female; for amongst -many several colour'd Deer, I have seen but one milk -white Doe; and she never brought forth a white Faun, -when as I have seen a white Buck beget white and -speckled Faunes of black and several coloured Does. -Also in Foals I have observed, that they have taken -more after the Male then after the Female, both in -shape and colour. And thus I express no more, but -what I have observed my self, others may find out -more examples; these are sufficient for me; so I leave -them, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_106" id="Footnote_1_106"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_106"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In the <i>Ch.</i> the Position is demonstrated; -and in the <i>ch.</i> called the Authority of the <i>Duumvirate</i>.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XI" id="III_XI">XI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>You will cease to wonder, that I am not altogether -capable to understand your <i>Authors</i> opinions in -Natural Philosophy, when you do but consider, -that his expressions are for the most part so obscure, mystical -and intricate, as may puzzle any brain that has -not the like Genius, or the same Conceptions with your -<i>Author</i>; wherefore I am forced oftentimes to express -my ignorance rather, then to declare to you the true -sense of his opinions. In the number of these is his discourse -of a <i>Middle Life</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_107" id="FNanchor_1_107"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_107" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>viz.</i> That <i>the qualities of a -middle life do remain in things that are transchanged:</i> For -I cannot understand what he means by a middle life; -whether it be a life that is between the strongest and -weakest, or whether he means a life between the time -of production and dissolution, or between the time of -conception and production; or whether he means a life -that is between two sorts of substances, as more then an -Animal, and not so high and excellent as an Angel; or -whether he means a middle life for places, as neither in -Heaven nor in Hell, but in Purgatory, or neither in, -nor out of the world, or any other kind of life: Wherefore -I'le leave this Hermaphroditical or neutral life to -better understandings then mine. Likewise I must -confess my disability of conceiving the overshadowing -of his <i>Archeus</i>, and <i>how it brings this middle life into its -first life.</i> For concerning Generation, I know of none -that is performed by overshadowing, except it be the -miraculous conception of the blessed Virgin, as Holy -Writ informs us; and I hope your <i>Author</i> will not -compare his <i>Archeus</i> to the Holy Spirit; But how a -middle life may be brought again into the first life, is -altogether unconceivable to me: And so is that, when he -says, that the <i>first life of the Fruit is the last of the seed</i>; -for I cannot imagine, that the seed dies in the fruit; but, -in my opinion, it lives rather in the fruit, and is numerously -increased, as appears by the production of seed -from the fruit. But the most difficult of all to be understood, -are his <i>Ideas</i>,<a name="FNanchor_2_108" id="FNanchor_2_108"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_108" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> which he makes <i>certain seminal Images, -Formal Lights, and operative means, whereby -the soul moves and governs the body</i>; whose number and -variety is so great, as it transcends my capacity, there being -<i>Ideas</i> of Inclination, of Affection, of Consideration -or Judgment, of Passion, and these either mild, or -violent, besides a great number of Archeal and forreign -Ideas. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I cannot admire enough -the powerful effects of these Ideas, they themselves being -no substances or material Creatures; For how that -can pierce, seal, and print a figure, which hath neither -substance nor matter, my reason is not able to comprehend, -since there can be no figure without matter or -substance, they being inseparably united together, so, -that where figure is, there is also substance, and where -substance is, there is also figure; neither can any figure -be made without a substance. You may say, Ideas, -though they are not material or corporeal beings themselves, -yet they may put on figures, and take bodies -when they please: I answer, That then they can do -more then Immaterial Spirits; for the Learned say, That -Immaterial Spirits are Immaterial substances; but your -<i>Author</i> says, that Ideas are no substances; and I think it -would be easier for a substance to take a body, then for -that which is no substance: But your <i>Author</i> might -have placed his Ideas as well amongst the number of -Immaterial Spirits, to wit, amongst Angels and Devils, -and then we should not have need to seek far for the -causes of the different natures and dispositions of Mankind, -but we might say, that Ill-natured men proceeded -from Evil, and Good-natured men from Good Spirits -or Ideas. However, <i>Madam</i>, I do not deny Ideas, -Images, or Conceptions of things, but I deny them -onely to be such powerful beings and Principal efficient -Causes of Natural effects; especially they being to your -<i>Author</i> neither bodies nor substances themselves. And -as for the <i>Figure of a Cherry</i>, which your <i>Author</i> makes -so frequent a repetition of, made by a longing Woman -on her Child; I dare say that there have been millions -of Women, which have longed for some or other thing, -and have not been satisfied with their desires, and yet -their Children have never had on their bodies the prints -or marks of those things they longed for: but because -some such figures are sometimes made by the irregular -motions of animate Matter, would this be a sufficient -proof, that all Conceptions, Ideas and Images have the -like effects, after the same manner, by piercing or penetrating -each other, and sealing or printing such or -such a figure upon the body of the Child? Lastly, I -cannot but smile when I read that your <i>Author</i> makes a -<i>Disease proceed from a non-being to a substantial being</i>: -Which if so, then a disease, according to his opinion, -is made as the World was, that is, out of Nothing; but -surely luxurious persons find it otherwise, who eat and -drink more then their natural digestive motions can dispose; -for those that have infirm bodies, caused by the -irregular motions of animate matter, find that a disease -proceeds from more then a <i>non</i>-being. But, <i>Madam</i>, -I have neither such an <i>Archeus</i>, which can produce, in -my mind, an Idea of Consent or approbation of these -your <i>Authors</i> opinions, nor such a light that is able to -produce a beam of Patience to tarry any longer upon -the examination of them; Wherefore I beg your leave -to cut off my discourse here, and onely to subscribe my -self, as really I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_107" id="Footnote_1_107"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_107"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> called <i>Magnum oporter</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_108" id="Footnote_2_108"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_108"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Of the Ideas of Diseases.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XII" id="III_XII">XII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I cannot well apprehend your <i>Authors</i> meaning, -when he says,<a name="FNanchor_1_109" id="FNanchor_1_109"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_109" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Nature doth rise from its fall</i>; -for if he understands Nature in general, I cannot -imagine how she should fall and rise; for though Man -did fall, yet Nature never did, nor cannot fall, being -Infinite: And therefore in another place,<a name="FNanchor_2_110" id="FNanchor_2_110"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_110" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> when he -saith, that <i>Nature first being a beautiful Virgin, was defiled -by sin; not by her own, but by Mans sin, for whose -use she was created</i>; I think it too great a presumption -and arrogancy to say that Infinite Nature was not onely -defiled by the sin of Man, but also to make Man the -chief over all Nature, and to believe Nature was onely -made for his sake; when as he is but a small finite -part of Infinite Nature, and almost Nothing in comparison -to it. But I suppose your <i>Author</i> doth not understand -Nature in general, but onely the nature of some -Particulars, when he speaks of the fall and rise of Nature; -however, this fall and rise of the nature of Particulars, -is nothing but a change of their natural motions. -And so likewise, I suppose, he understands the nature -of Particulars, when he says in another place,<a name="FNanchor_3_111" id="FNanchor_3_111"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_111" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> That -Nature in diseases is standing, sitting, and lying; for -surely Nature in general has more several postures then -sitting, standing, or lying: As also when he speaks<a name="FNanchor_4_112" id="FNanchor_4_112"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_112" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> of -the <i>Vertues and Properties that stick fast in the bosom of -Nature</i>, which I conceive to be a Metaphorical expression; -although I think it best to avoid Metaphorical, -similizing, and improper expressions in Natural -Philosophy, as much as one can; for they do rather -obscure then explain the truth of Nature; nay, your -<i>Author</i> himself is of this opinion,<a name="FNanchor_5_113" id="FNanchor_5_113"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_113" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> and yet he doth nothing -more frequent then bring in Metaphors and similitudes. -But to speak properly, there is not any thing that sticks -fast in the bosom of Nature, for Nature is in a perpetual -motion: Neither can she be <i>heightened or diminished -by Art</i>; for Nature will be Nature in despite of -her Hand-maid. And as for your <i>Authors</i> opinion, -That <i>there are no Contraries in Nature</i>, I am quite of -a contrary mind, that there is a Perpetual war and -discord amongst the parts of Nature, although not in -the nature and substance of Infinite Matter, which is -of a simple kind, and knows no contraries in it self, but -lives in Peace, when as the several actions are opposing -and crossing each other; and truly, I do not believe, -that there is any part or Creature of Nature, that hath -not met with opposers, let it be never so small or great. -But as War is made by the division of Natures parts, -and variety of natural actions, so Peace is caused by the -unity and simplicity of the nature and essence of onely -Matter, which Nature is peaceable, being always one -and the same, and having nothing in it self to be crossed -or opposed by; when as the actions of Nature, or natural -Matter, are continually driving against each other, -as being various and different. Again your <i>Author</i> says, -That <i>a Specifical being cannot be altered but by Fire, and -that Fire is the Death of other Creatures: also that Alchymy, -as it brings many things to a degree of greater efficacy, -and stirs up a new being, so on the other hand again, -it by a privy filching doth enfeeble many things.</i> I, -for my part, wonder, that Fire, being as your <i>Author</i> -says, no substantial body, but substanceless in its nature, -should work such effects; but however, I believe there -are many alterations without Fire, and many things -which cannot be altered by Fire. What your <i>Authors</i> -meaning is of a <i>new being</i>, I know not; for, to my reason, -there neither is; nor can be made any new being in -Nature, except we do call the change of motions and -figures a new Creation; but then an old suit turned or -dressed up may be called new too. Neither can I conceive -his <i>Filching or Stealing</i>: For Nature has or keeps -nothing within her self, but what is her own; and surely -she cannot steal from her self; nor can Art steal from -Nature; she may trouble Nature, or rather make -variety in Nature, but not take any thing from her, -for Art is the insnarled motions of Nature: But your -<i>Author</i>, being a Chymist, is much for the Art of Fire, -although it is impossible for Art to work as Nature -doth; for Art makes of natural Creatures artificial -Monsters, and doth oftner obscure and disturb Natures -ordinary actions, then prove any Truth in Nature. -But Nature loving variety doth rather smile at -Arts follies, then that she should be angry with her curiosity: -like as for example, a Poet will smile in expressing -the part or action of a Fool. Wherefore Pure -natural Philosophers, shall by natural sense and reason, -trace Natures ways, and observe her actions, more readily -then Chymists can do by Fire and Furnaces; for -Fire and Furnaces do often delude the Reason, blind -the Understanding, and make the Judgment stagger. -Nevertheless, your <i>Author</i> is so taken with Fire, that -from thence he imagines a Formal Light, which he believes -to be the Tip-top of Life; but certainly, he had, -in my opinion, not so much light as to observe, that -all sorts of light are but Creatures, and not Creators; -for he judges of several Parts of Matter, as if they were -several kinds of Matter, which causes him often to err, -although he conceits himself without any Error. In -which conceit I leave him, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_109" id="Footnote_1_109"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_109"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Nature is ignorant of Contraries.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_110" id="Footnote_2_110"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_110"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> In the Hist. of <i>Tartar</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_111" id="Footnote_3_111"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_111"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Disease is an unknown guest.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_112" id="Footnote_4_112"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_112"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> Nature is ignorant of Contraries.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_113" id="Footnote_5_113"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_113"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The Image of the Ferment begets the Mass with Child.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XIII" id="III_XIII">XIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>The Art of Fire, as I perceive, is in greater esteem -and respect with your <i>Author</i>, then Nature -her self: For he says,<a name="FNanchor_1_114" id="FNanchor_1_114"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_114" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>some things can be -done by Art, which Nature cannot do</i>; nay he calls<a name="FNanchor_2_115" id="FNanchor_2_115"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_115" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>Art</i> -The <i>Mistress of Nature, and subjects whole Nature -unto Chymical speculation</i>; For, <i>nothing</i>, says he,<a name="FNanchor_3_116" id="FNanchor_3_116"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_116" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>doth -more fully bring a Man, that is greedy of knowing, to the -knowledg of all things knowable, then the Fire; for the -root or radical knowledg of natural things consists in the -Fire:</i><a name="FNanchor_4_117" id="FNanchor_4_117"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_117" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <i>It pierces the secrets of Nature, and causes a -further searching out in Nature, then all other Sciences, -being put together; and pierces even into the utmost -depths of real truth:</i><a name="FNanchor_5_118" id="FNanchor_5_118"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_118" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> <i>It creates things which never were -before.</i> These, and many more the like expressions, -he has in the praise of Chymistry. And truly, <i>Madam</i>, -I cannot blame your <i>Author</i>, for commending -this Art, because it was his own profession, and no -man will be so unwise as to dispraise his own Art which -he professes; but whether those praises and commendations -do not exceed truth, and express more then -the Art of Fire can perform, I will let those judg, that -have more knowledg therein then I: But this I may -say, That what Art or Science soever is in Nature, let it -be the chief of all, yet it can never be call'd the Mistress -of Nature, nor be said to perform more then Nature -doth, except it be by a divine and supernatural -Power; much less to create things which never were before, -for this is an action which onely belongs to God: -The truth is, Art is but a Particular effect of Nature, -and as it were, Nature's Mimick or Fool, in whose playing -actions she sometimes takes delight; nay, your <i>Author</i> -confesses it himself, when he calls<a name="FNanchor_6_119" id="FNanchor_6_119"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_119" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> the <i>Art</i> of <i>Chymistry, -Nature's emulating Ape</i>, and <i>her Chamber-maid</i>, -and yet he says, <i>she is now and then the Mistress of -Nature</i>; which in my opinion doth not agree: for I -cannot conceive how it is possible to be a Chambermaid, -and yet to be the Mistress too; I suppose your -<i>Author</i> believes, they justle sometimes each other out, -or take by turns one anothers place. But whatever his -opinion be, I am sure, that the Art of Fire cannot create -and produce so, as Nature doth, nor dissolve substances -so, as she doth, nor transform and transchange, -as she doth, nor do any effect like Nature: And therefore -I cannot so much admire this Art as others do, for -it appears to me, rather to be a troubler, then an assistant -to Nature, producing more Monsters then perfect -Creatures; nay, it rather doth shut the Gates of Truth, -then unlock the Gates of Nature: For how can Art -inform us of Nature, when as it is but an effect of Nature? -You may say, The cause cannot be better known -then by its effect; for the knowledg of the effect, leads -us to the knowledg of the cause. I answer, 'Tis true: -but you will consider, that Nature is an Infinite cause, -and has Infinite effects; and if you knew all the Infinite -effects in nature, then perhaps you might come to some -knowledg of the cause; but to know nature by one single -effect, as art is, is impossible; nay, no man knows -this particular effect as yet perfectly; For who is he, that -has studied the art of fire so, as to produce all that this -art may be able to afford? witness the Philosophers-stone. -Besides, how is it possible to find out the onely -cause by so numerous variations of the effects? Wherefore -it is more easie, in my opinion, to know the various -effects in Nature by studying the Prime cause, then -by the uncertain study of the inconstant effects to arrive -to the true knowledg of the prime cause; truly it is -much easier to walk in a Labyrinth without a Guide, -then to gain a certain knowledg in any one art or natural -effect, without Nature her self be the guide, for -Nature is the onely Mistress and cause of all, which, as -she has made all other effects, so she has also made arts -for varieties sake; but most men study Chymistry more -for imployment, then for profit; not but that I believe, -there may be some excellent Medicines found out and -made by that art, but the expence and labour is more -then the benefit; neither are all those Medicines sure -and certain, nor in all diseases safe; neither can this art -produce so many medicines as there are several diseases -in Nature, and for the Universal Medicine, and the -Philosophers-stone or Elixir, which Chymists brag of -so much; it consists rather in hope and expectation, then -in assurance; for could Chymists find it out, they -would not be so poor, as most commonly they are, but -richer then <i>Solomon</i> was, or any Prince in the -World, and might have done many famous acts with -the supply of their vast Golden Treasures, to the eternal -and immortal fame of their Art; nay, Gold being the -Idol of this world, they would be worshipped as well -for the sake of Gold, as for their splendorous Art; but -how many have endeavored and laboured in vain and -without any effect? <i>Gold is easier to be made, then to be -destroyed</i>, says your <i>Author,</i><a name="FNanchor_7_120" id="FNanchor_7_120"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_120" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> but I believe one is as difficult -or impossible, nay more, then the other; for -there is more probability of dissolving or destroying a -natural effect by Art, then of generating or producing -one; for Art cannot go beyond her sphere of activity, -she can but produce an artificial effect, and Gold -is a natural Creature; neither were it Justice, that a -particular creature of Nature should have as much -power to act or work as Nature her self; but because -neither Reason, nor Art has found out as yet such a -powerful opposite to Gold, as can alter its nature; men -therefore conclude that it cannot be done. Your <i>Author</i> -relates<a name="FNanchor_8_121" id="FNanchor_8_121"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_121" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> to have seen the Gold-making stone, which -he says, was of colour such, as Saffron is in its powder, -but weighty and shining like unto powder'd Glass; one -fourth part of one grain thereof, (a grain he reckons -the six hundredth part of one ounce) being projected -upon eight ounces of Quicksilver made hot in a Crucible, -and straight way there were found eight ounces, -and a little less then eleven grains of the purest Gold; -therefore one onely grain of that powder had transchanged -19186 parts of Quicksilver, equal to it self, into -the best Gold. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I wish with all my -heart, the poor Royalists had had some quantity of that -powder; and I assure you, that if it were so, I my -self would turn a Chymist to gain so much as to repair -my Noble Husbands losses, that his noble family might -flourish the better. But leaving Gold, since it is but a -vain wish, I do verily believe, that some of the Chymical -medicines do, in some desperate cases, many times -produce more powerful and sudden effects then the -medicines of Galenists, and therefore I do not absolutely -condemn the art of Fire, as if I were an enemy to -it; but I am of an opinion, that my Opinions in <i>Philosophy</i>, -if well understood, will rather give a light to that art, -then obscure its worth; for if Chymists did but study well -the corporeal motions or actions of Natures substantial -body; they would, by their observations, understand -Nature better, then they do by the observation of the -actions of their Art; and out of this consideration and respect, -I should almost have an ambition, to become an -Artist in Chymistry, were I not too lazie and tender for -that imployment; but should I quit the one, and venture -the other, I am so vain as to perswade my self, I might -perform things worthy my labour upon the ground of -my own Philosophy, which is substantial Life, Sense, and -Reason; for I would not study Salt, Sulphur, and Mercury, -but the Natural motions of every Creature, and -observe the variety of Natures actions. But, perchance, -you will smile at my vain conceit, and, it may be, I my -self, should repent of my pains unsuccessfully bestowed, -my time vainly spent, my health rashly endangered, -and my Noble Lords Estate unprofitably wasted, in -fruitless tryals and experiments; Wherefore you may -be sure, that I will consider well before I act; for I would -not lose Health, Wealth, and Fame, and do no more then -others have done, which truly is not much, their effects -being of less weight then their words. But in the mean -time, my study shall be bent to your service, and how to -express my self worthily,</p> - -<p>MADAM,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_114" id="Footnote_1_114"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_114"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Ch. <i>called</i>, The Essay of a Meteor.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_115" id="Footnote_2_115"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_115"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Heat doth not digest efficiently, -but excitingly.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_116" id="Footnote_3_116"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_116"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The ignorant natural Philosophy of -<i>Aristotle</i> and <i>Galen</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_117" id="Footnote_4_117"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_117"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> A modern Pharmacopoly and dispensatory.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_118" id="Footnote_5_118"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_118"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Power of Medicines.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_6_119" id="Footnote_6_119"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_119"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Heat doth not digest efficiently, -but excitingly.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_7_120" id="Footnote_7_120"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_120"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The first Principles of the Chymists, -not the Essences of the same are of the Army of Diseases.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_8_121" id="Footnote_8_121"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_121"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> In the <i>Ch.</i> Of Life Eternal, and in the -<i>Ch.</i> Of the Tree of Life.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XIV" id="III_XIV">XIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I have read your <i>Authors</i> discourse concerning <i>Sensation</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_122" id="FNanchor_1_122"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_122" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -but it was as difficult to me to understand it, -ash was tedious to read it; Truly, all the business, -might have been easily declared in a short Chapter, -and with more clearness and perspicuity: For Sensation, -is nothing else but the action of sense proceeding -from the corporeal sensitive motions, which are in -all Creatures or parts of Nature, and so all have sense -and sensation, although not alike after one and the -same manner, but some more, some less, each according -to the nature and propriety of its figure. But your -<i>Author</i> speaks of <i>Motion without Sense, and Sense without -Motion</i>, which is a meer impossibility; for there -is not, nor cannot be any Motion in Nature without -Sense, nor any Sense without Motion; there being -no Creature without self-motion, although not always -perceptible by us, or our external senses; for all motion -is not exteriously local, and visible. Wherefore, -not any part of Nature, according to my opinion, -wants Sense and Reason, Life and Knowledg; but -not such a substanceless Life as your <i>Author</i> describes, -but a substantial, that is a corporeal Life. Neither -is Light the principle of Motion, but Motion, is the -principle of Light: Neither is Heat the principle of -Motion, but its effect as well as Cold is; for I cannot -perceive that Heat should be more active then -Cold. Neither is there any such thing as Unsensibleness -in Nature, except it be in respect of some -particular Sensation in some particular Figure: As -for example, when an Animal dies, or its Figure is -dissolved from the Figure of an Animal; we may say -it hath not animal sense or motion, but we cannot -say, it hath no sense or motion at all; for as long as -Matter is in Nature, Sense and Motion will be; so -that it is absurd and impossible to believe, or at least -to think, that Matter, as a body, can be totally deprived -of Life, Sense, and Motion, or that Life -can perish and be corrupted, be it the smallest part of -Matter conceivable, and the same turned or changed -into millions of Figures; for the Life and Soul of -Nature is self-moving Matter, which by Gods Power, -and leave, is the onely Framer and Maker, as also -the Dissolver and Transformer of all Creatures in Nature, -making as well Light, Heat, and Cold, Gas, -Blas, and Ferments, as all other natural Creatures beside, -as also Passions, Appetites, Digestions, Nourishments, -Inclination, Aversion, Sickness and Health; -nay, all Particular Ideas, Thoughts, Fancies, Conceptions, -Arts, Sciences, &c. In brief, it makes all that is -to be made in Nature. But many great Philosophers -conceive Nature to be fuller of Intricacy, Difficulty, -and Obscurity, then she is, puzling themselves about -her ordinary actions, which yet are easie and free, and -making their arguments hard, constrained, and mystical, -many of them containing neither sense nor reason; -when as, in my opinion, there is nothing else to be -studied in Nature, but her substance and her actions. -But I will leave them to their own Fancies and Humors, -and say no more, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_122" id="Footnote_1_122"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_122"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of the Disease of the Stone. <i>Ch.</i> 9.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XV" id="III_XV">XV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning Sympathy and Antipathy, and attractive -or magnetick Inclinations, which some do -ascribe to the influence of the Stars, others to an -unknown Spirit as the Mover, others to the Instinct of -Nature, hidden Proprieties, and certain formal Vertues; -but your <i>Author</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_123" id="FNanchor_1_123"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_123" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> doth attribute to <i>directing Ideas, -begotten by their Mother Charity, or a desire of -Good Will</i>, and calls it<a name="FNanchor_2_124" id="FNanchor_2_124"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_124" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> a <i>Gift naturally inherent in the -Archeusses of either part</i>: If you please to have my opinion -thereof, I think they are nothing else but plain ordinary -Passions and Appetites. As for example: I -take Sympathy, as also Magnetisme or attractive Power, -to be such agreeable Motions in one part or Creature, -as do cause a Fancy, love and desire to some other part -or Creature; and Antipathy, when these Motions are -disagreeable, and produce contrary effects, as dislike, -hate and aversion to some part or Creature. And as -there are many sorts of such motions, so there are -many sorts of Sympathyes and Antipathyes, or Attractions -and Aversions, made several manners or ways; -For in some subjects, Sympathy requires a certain distance; -as for example, in Iron and the Loadstone; for -if the Iron be too far off, the Loadstone cannot exercise -its power, when as in other subjects, there is no need -of any such certain distance, as betwixt the Needle and -the North-pole, as also the Weapon-salve; for the -Needle will turn it self towards the North, whether it -be near or far off from the North-pole; and so, be -the Weapon which inflicted the wound, never so far -from the wounded Person, as they say, yet it will nevertheless -do its effect: But yet there must withal be -some conjunction with the blood; for as your <i>Author</i> -mentions,<a name="FNanchor_3_125" id="FNanchor_3_125"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_125" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> the Weapon shall be in vain anointed -with the Unguent, unless it be made bloody, and the -same blood be first dried on the same Weapon. Likewise -the sounding of two eights when one is touched, -must be done within a certain distance: the same may -be said of all Infectious and catching Diseases amongst -Animals, where the Infection, be it the Infected Air, -or a Poysonous Vapour, or any thing else, must needs -touch the body, and enter either through the Mouth, -or Nostrils, or Ears, or Pores of the body; for though -the like Antipathies of Infectious Diseases, as of the -Plague, may be in several places far distant and remote -from each other at one and the same time, yet they -cannot infect particular Creatures, or Animals, without -coming near, or without the sense of Touch: For -example; the Plague may be in the <i>East Indies</i>, and in -this Kingdom, at one and the same time, and yet be -strangers to each other; for although all Men are of -Mankind, yet all have not Sympathy or Antipathy to -each other; the like of several Plagues, although they -be of the same kind of disease, yet, being in several places -at one time, they may not be a kin to each other, -nor one be produced by the other, except the Plague -be brought over out of an infected Country, into a -sound Country, by some means or other. And thus -some Sympathy and Antipathy is made by a close conjunction, -or corporeal uniting of parts, but not all; -neither is it required, that all Sympathy and Antipathy -must be mutual, or equally in both Parties, so that that -part or party, which has a Sympathetical affection or -inclination to the other, must needs receive the like -sympathetical affection from that part again; for -one man may have a sympathetical affection to another -man, when as this man hath an antipathetical aversion -to him; and the same may be, for ought we know, -betwixt Iron and the Loadstone, as also betwixt the -Needle and the North; for the Needle may have a -sympathy towards the North, but not again the North -towards the Needle; and so may the Iron have towards -the Loadstone, but not again the Loadstone towards -the Iron: Neither is Sympathy or Antipathy made by -the issuing out of any invisible rayes, for then the rays -betwixt the North and the Needle would have a great -way to reach: But a sympathetical inclination in a -Man towards another, is made either by sight, or -hearing; either present, or absent: the like of infectious -Diseases. I grant, that if both Parties do mutually -affect each other, and their motions be equally agreeable; -then the sympathy is the stronger, and will -last the longer, and then there is a Union, Likeness, or -Conformableness, of their Actions, Appetites, and -Passions; For this kind of Sympathy works no other -effects, but a conforming of the actions of one party, to -the actions of the other, as by way of Imitation, proceeding -from an internal sympathetical love and desire -to please; for Sympathy doth not produce an effect really -different from it self, or else the sympathy betwixt -Iron and the Loadstone would produce a third Creature -different from themselves, and so it would do in -all other Creatures. But as I mentioned above, there -are many sorts of attractions in Nature, and many several -and various attractions onely in one sort of Creatures, -nay, so many in one particular as not to be -numbred; for there are many Desires, Passions, and -Appetites, which draw or intice a man to something -or other, as for example, to Beauty, Novelty, Luxury, -Covetousness, and all kinds of Vertues and Vices; -and there are many particular objects in every one -of these, as for example, in Novelty. For there -are so many several desires to Novelty, as there are -Senses, and so many Novelties that satisfie those desires, -as a Novelty to the Ear, a Novelty to the Sight, to -Touch, Taste, and Smell; besides in every one of these, -there are many several objects; To mention onely -one example, for the novelty of Sight; I have seen an -Ape, drest like a Cavalier, and riding on Horse-back -with his sword by his side, draw a far greater multitude -of People after him, then a Loadstone of the same bigness -of the Ape would have drawn Iron; and as the -Ape turn'd, so did the People, just like as the Needle -turns to the North; and this is but one object in one -kind of attraction, <i>viz.</i> Novelty: but there be Millions -of objects besides. In like manner good cheer -draws abundance of People, as is evident, and needs -no Demonstration. Wherefore, as I said in the beginning, -Sympathy is nothing else but natural Passions -and Appetites, as Love, Desire, Fancy, Hunger, -Thirst, &c. and its effects are Concord, Unity, -Nourishment, and the like: But Antipathy is Dislike, -Hate, Fear, Anger, Revenge, Aversion, Jealousie, -&c. and its effects are Discord, Division, and the -like. And such an Antipathy is between a Wolf and a -Sheep, a Hound and a Hare, a Hawk and a Partridg, &c. -For this Antipathy is nothing else but fear in the -Sheep to run away from the Wolf, in the Hare to run -from the Hound, and in the Partridg to flie from the -Hawk; for Life has an Antipathy to that which is -named Death; and the Wolf's stomack hath a sympathy -to food, which causes him to draw neer, or run -after those Creatures he has a mind to feed on. But -you will say, some Creatures will fight, and kill each -other, not for Food, but onely out of an Antipathetical -nature. I answer: When as Creatures fight, and -endeavour to destroy each other, if it be not out of -necessity, as to preserve and defend themselves from -hurt or danger, then it is out of revenge, or anger, or -ambition, or jealousie, or custom of quarrelling, or -breeding. As for example: Cocks of the Game, -that are bred to fight with each other, and many other -Creatures, as Bucks, Staggs, and the like, as -also Birds, will fight as well as Men, and seek to destroy -each other through jealousie; when as, had they -no Females amongst them, they would perhaps live -quiet enough, rather as sympathetical Friends, then -antipathetical Foes; and all such Quarrels proceed from -a sympathy to their own interest. But you may ask me, -what the reason is, that some Creatures, as for example, -Mankind, some of them, will not onely like one sort of -meat better then another of equal goodness and nourishment, -but will like and prefer sometimes a worse sort -of meat before the best, to wit, such as hath neither -a good taste nor nourishment? I answer: This is nothing -else, but a particular, and most commonly an inconstant -Appetite; for after much eating of that they -like best, especially if they get a surfeit, their appetite is -chang'd to aversion; for then all their feeding motions -and parts have as much, if not more antipathy to those -meats, as before they had a sympathy to them. Again, -you may ask me the reason, why a Man seeing two -persons together, which are strangers to him, doth -affect one better then the other; nay, if one of these -Persons be deformed or ill-favoured, and the other -well-shaped and handsom; yet it may chance, that the -deformed Person shall be more acceptable in the affections -and eyes of the beholder, then he that is handsom? -I answer: There is no Creature so deformed, but hath -some agreeable and attractive parts, unless it be a Monster, -which is never loved, but for its rarity and novelty, -and Nature is many times pleased with changes, taking -delight in variety: and the proof that such a sympathetical -affection proceeds from some agreeableness -of Parts, is, that if those persons were vail'd, there would -not proceed such a partial choice or judgment from -any to them. You may ask me further, whether Passion -and Appetite are also the cause of the sympathy -which is in the Loadstone towards Iron, and in the -Needle towards the North? I answer, Yes: for it -is either for nourishment, or refreshment, or love and -desire of association, or the like, that the Loadstone -draws Iron, and the Needle turns towards the North. -The difference onely betwixt the sympathy in the Needle -towards the North, and betwixt the sympathy in -the Loadstone towards the Iron is, that the Needle -doth always turn towards the North, but the Loadstone -doth not always draw Iron: The reason is, because -the sympathy of the Needle towards the North -requires no certain distance, as I said in the beginning; -and the North-pole continuing constantly in the same -place, the Needle knows whither to turn; when as -the sympathy between the Loadstone and Iron requires -a certain distance, and when the Loadstone is not within -this compass or distance, it cannot perform its effect, -to wit, to draw the Iron, but the effect ceases, although -the cause remains in vigour. The same may be said of -the Flower that turns towards the Sun; for though -the Sun be out of sight, yet the Flower watches for the -return of the Sun, from which it receives benefit: Like -as faithful Servants watch and wait for their Master, or -hungry Beggers at a Rich man's door for relief; and so -doth the aforesaid Flower; nay, not the Flower onely, -but any thing that has freedom and liberty of motion, -will turn towards those Places or Creatures whence it -expects relief. Concerning ravenous Beasts that feed -on dead Carcasses, they, having more eager appetites -then food, make long flights into far distant Countries -to seek food to live on; but surely, I think, if they had -food enough at home, although not dead Carcasses, -they would not make such great Journies; or if a battel -were fought, and many slain, and they upon their journey -should meet with sufficient food, they would hardly -travel further before they had devoured that food -first: But many Birds travel for the temper of the Air, -as well as for food, witness Woodcocks, Cranes, -Swallows, Fieldfares, and the like; some for cold, some -for hot, and some for temperate Air. And as for such -Diseases as are produced by conceit and at distance, the -cause is, the fearfulness of the Patient, which produces -Irregularities in the Mind, and these occasion Irregularities -in the Body, which produce such a disease, as the -Mind did fearfully apprehend; when as without that -Passion and Irregularity, the Patient would, perhaps, -not fall sick of that disease, But to draw towards an -end, I'le answer briefly to your <i>Authors</i> alledged example<a name="FNanchor_4_126" id="FNanchor_4_126"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_126" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> -which he gives of Wine, that it is troubled -while the Vine flowreth: The reason, in my opinion, -may perhaps be, that the Wine being the effect of the -Vine, and proceeding from its stock as the producer, -has not so quite alter'd Nature, as not to be sensible at -all of the alteration of the Vine; For many effects do -retain the proprieties of their causes; for example, many -Children are generated, which have the same proprieties -of their Parents, who do often propagate some -or other vertuous or vicious qualities with their off-spring; -And this is rather a proof that there are sensitive -and rational motions, and sensitive and rational -knowledge in all Creatures, and so in Wine, according -to the nature or propriety of its Figure; for without motion, -sense and reason, no effect could be; nor no sympathy -or antipathy. But it is to be observed, that many -do mistake the true Causes, and ascribe an effect to -some cause, which is no more the cause of that same effect, -then a particular Creature is the cause of Nature; -and so they are apt to take the Fiddle for the hot -Bricks, as if the Fiddle did make the Ass dance, when as -it was the hot Bricks that did it; for several effects may -proceed from one cause, and one effect from several -causes; and so in the aforesaid example, the Wine -may perhaps be disturbed by the alteration of the -weather at the same time of the flowring of the Vines; -and so may Animals, as well as Vegetables, and other -Creatures, alter alike at one and the same point of time, -and yet none be the cause of each others alteration. And -thus, to shut up my discourse, I repeat again, that sympathy -and antipathy are nothing else but ordinary Passions -and Appetites amongst several Creatures, which -Passions are made by the rational animate Matter, and -the Appetites by the sensitive, both giving such or -such motions, to such or such Creatures; for cross -motions in Appetites and passions make Antipathy, and -agreeable motions in Appetites and Passions make Sympathy, -although the Creatures be different, wherein -these motions, Passions and Appetites are made; and as -without an object a Pattern cannot be, so without inherent -or natural Passions and Appetites there can be no -Sympathy or Antipathy: And there being also such -Sympathy betwixt your Ladiship and me, I think my -self the happiest Creature for it; and shall make it my -whole study to imitate your Ladiship, and conform all -my actions to the rule and pattern of yours, as becomes,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Friend, and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_123" id="Footnote_1_123"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_123"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of Sympathetical Mediums.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_124" id="Footnote_2_124"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_124"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> In the Plague-Grave.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_125" id="Footnote_3_125"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_125"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> In the Magnetick care of Wounds.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_126" id="Footnote_4_126"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_126"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Magnetick Power.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XVI" id="III_XVI">XVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>My opinion of Witches and Witchcraft, (of -whose Power and strange effects your <i>Author</i> -is pleased to relate many stories) in brief, is this; -My Sense and Reason doth inform me, that there is -Natural Witchcraft, as I may call it, which is Sympathy, -Antipathy, Magnetisme, and the like, which -are made by the sensitive and rational motions between -several Creatures, as by Imagination, Fancy, Love, -Aversion, and many the like; but these Motions, being -sometimes unusual and strange to us, we not knowing -their causes, (For what Creature knows all motions -in Nature, and their ways?) do stand amazed at -their working power; and by reason we cannot assign -any Natural cause for them, are apt to ascribe their effects -to the Devil; but that there should be any such devillish -Witchcraft, which is made by a Covenant and -Agreement with the Devil, by whose power Men do -enchaunt or bewitch other Creatures, I cannot readily -believe. Certainly, I dare say, that many a good, -old honest woman hath been condemned innocently, -and suffered death wrongfully, by the sentence of some -foolish and cruel Judges, meerly upon this suspition -of Witchcraft, when as really there hath been no such -thing; for many things are done by slights or juggling -Arts, wherein neither the Devil nor Witches are -Actors. And thus an Englishman whose name was -<i>Banks</i>, was like to be burnt beyond the Seas for a Witch, -as I have been inform'd, onely for making a Horse shew -tricks by Art; There have been also several others; -as one that could vomit up several kinds of Liquors and -other things: and another who did make a Drum beat -of it self. But all these were nothing but slights and -jugling tricks; as also the talking and walking Bell; and -the Brazen-Head which spake these words, <i>Time was, -Time is</i>, and <i>Time is past</i>, and so fell down; Which -may easily have been performed by speaking through a -Pipe conveighed into the said head: But such and the -like trifles will amaze many grave and wise men, when -they do not know the manner or way how they are -done, so as they are apt to judg them to be effected by -Witchcraft or Combination with the Devil. But, as -I said before, I believe there is Natural Magick; which -is, that the sensitive and rational Matter oft moves such -a way, as is unknown to us; and in the number of -these is also the bleeding of a murdered body at the presence -of the Murderer, which your <i>Author,</i> mentions;<a name="FNanchor_1_127" id="FNanchor_1_127"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_127" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -for the corporeal motions in the murthered body may -move so, as to work such effects, which are more then -ordinary; for the animal Figure, being not so quickly -dissolved, the animal motions are not so soon altered, -(for the dissolving of the Figure is nothing else but an -alteration of its Motions;) and this dissolution is not -done in an instant of time, but by degrees: But yet I -must confess, it is not a common action in Nature, for -Nature hath both common, and singular or particular -actions: As for example, Madness, natural Folly, and -many the like, are but in some particular persons; for -if those actions were general, and common, then all, -or most men would be either mad, or fools, but, though -there are too many already, yet all men are not so; and -so some murthered bodies may bleed or express some -alterations at the presence of the Murtherer, but I do -not believe, that all do so; for surely in many, not any -alteration will be perceived, and others will have the -same alterations without the presence of the Murtherer. -And thus you see, <i>Madam</i>, that this is done naturally, -without the help of the Devil; nay, your <i>Author</i> doth -himself confess it to be so; for, says he, <i>The act of the -Witch is plainly Natural; onely the stirring up of the -vertue or power in the Witch comes from Satan.</i> But I -cannot understand what your <i>Author</i> means, by the -departing of spiritual rays from the Witch into Man, -or any other animal, which she intends to kill or hurt; -nor how Spirits wander about in the Air, and have -their mansions there; for men may talk as well of impossibilities, -as of such things which are not composed of -Natural Matter: If man were an Incorporeal Spirit -himself, he might, perhaps, sooner conceive the essence -of a Spirit, as being of the same Nature; but as long as -he is material, and composed of Natural Matter, he -might as well pretend to know the Essence of God, as of -an Incorporeal Spirit. Truly, I must confess, I have had -some fancies oftentimes of such pure and subtil substances, -purer and subtiler then the Sky or Æthereal substance -is, whereof I have spoken in my Poetical -Works; but these substances, which I conceived within -my fancy, were material, and had bodies, though never -so small and subtil; for I was never able to conceive -a substance abstracted from all Matter, for even Fancy -it self is material, and all Thoughts and Conceptions -are made by the rational Matter, and so are those which -Philosophers call Animal Spirits, but a material Fancy -cannot produce immaterial effects, that is, Ideas of Incorporeal -Spirits: And this was the cause that in the -first impression of my <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, I named -the sensitive and rational Matter, sensitive and rational -Spirits, because of its subtilty, activity and agility; not -that I thought them to be immaterial, but material Spirits: -but since Spirits are commonly taken to be immaterial, -and Spirit and Body are counted opposite to one another, -to prevent a misapprehension in the thoughts of -my Readers, as if I meant Incorporeal Spirits, I altered this -expression in the last Edition, and call'd it onely sensitive -and rational Matter, or, which is all one, sensitive and -rational corporeal motions. You will say, perhaps, -That the divine Soul in Man is a Spirit: but I desire you -to call to mind what I oftentimes have told you, to wit, -that when I speak of the Soul of Man, I mean onely -the Natural, not the Divine Soul; which as she is -supernatural, so she acts also supernaturally; but all -the effects of the natural Soul, of which I discourse, -are natural, and not divine or supernatural. But to return -to Magnetisme; I am absolutely of opinion, that -it is naturally effected by natural means, without the concurrence -of Immaterial Spirits either good or bad, meerly -by natural corporeal sensitive and rational motions; -and, for the most part, there must be a due approach -between the Agent and the Patient, or otherwise the -effect will hardly follow, as you may see by the Loadstone -and Iron; Neither is the influence of the Stars -performed beyond a certain distance, that is, such a -distance as is beyond sight or their natural power to -work; for if their light comes to our Eyes, I know no -reason against it, but their effects may come to our -bodies. And as for infectious Diseases, they come by -a corporeal imitation, as by touch, either of the infected -air, drawn in by breath, or entring through the pores -of the Body, or of some things brought from infected -places, or else by hearing; but diseases, caused by -Conceit, have their beginning, as all alterations -have, from the sensitive and rational Motions, -which do not onely make the fear and conceit, but -also the disease; for as a fright will sometimes cure -diseases, so it will sometimes cause diseases; but as I -said, both fright, cure, and the disease, are made by -the rational and sensitive corporeal motions within the -body, and not by Supernatural Magick, as Satanical -Witchcraft, entering from without into the body by -spiritual rays. But having discoursed hereof in my former -Letter, I will not trouble you with an unnecessary -repetition thereof; I conclude therefore with what I -begun, <i>viz.</i> that I believe natural Magick to be natural -corporeal motions in natural bodies: Not that I -say, Nature in her self is a Magicianess, but it -may be called natural Magick or Witchcraft, meerly -in respect to our Ignorance; for though Nature is old, -yet she is not a Witch, but a grave, wise, methodical -Matron, ordering her Infinite family, which are her -several parts, with ease and facility, without needless -troubles and difficulties; for these are onely made -through the ignorance of her several parts or particular -Creatures, not understanding their Mistress, -Nature, and her actions and government, for which -they cannot be blamed; for how should a part understand -the Infinite body, when it doth not understand -it self; but Nature understands her parts better then -they do her. And so leaving Wise Nature, and the -Ignorance of her Particulars, I understand my self so -far that I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_127" id="Footnote_1_127"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_127"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Magnetick cure of wounds.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XVII" id="III_XVII">XVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am not of your <i>Authors</i><a name="FNanchor_1_128" id="FNanchor_1_128"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_128" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> opinion, That <i>Time -hath no relation to Motion, but that Time and Motion -are as unlike and different from each other as Finite -from Infinite, and that it hath its own essence or being Immoveable, -Unchangeable, Individable, and unmixed with -things, nay, that Time is plainly the same with Eternity.</i> -For, in my opinion, there can be no such thing as -Time in Nature, but what Man calls Time, is onely -the variation of natural motions; wherefore Time, -and the alteration of motion, is one and the same thing -under two different names; and as Matter, Figure, -and Motion, are inseparable, so is Time inseparably -united, or rather the same thing with them, and not -a thing subsisting by it self; and as long as Matter, -Motion and Figure have been existent, so long hath -Time; and as long as they last, so long doth Time. -But when I say, Time is the variation of motion, I -do not mean the motion of the Sun or Moon, which -makes Days, Months, Years, but the general motions -or actions of Nature, which are the ground of -Time; for were there no Motion, there would be -no Time; and since Matter is dividable, and in parts, -Time is so too; neither hath Time any other Relation -to Duration, then what Nature her self hath. Wherefore -your <i>Author</i> is mistaken, when he says, Motion -is made in Time, for Motion makes Time, or -rather is one and the same with Time; and Succession -is no more a stranger to Motion, then Motion -is to Nature, as being the action of Nature, which -is the Eternal servant of God. <i>But</i>, says he, <i>Certain -Fluxes of Formerlinesses and Laternesses, have respect -unto frail moveable things in their motions, wherewith -they hasten unto the appointed ends of their period, -and so unto their own death or destruction; but what -relation hath all that to Time: for therefore also -ought Time to run with all and every motion? Verily -so there should be as many times and durations as -there are motions.</i> I answer: To my Reason, there -are as many times and durations as there are motions; -for neither time nor duration can be separated -from motion, no more then motion can be separated -from them, being all one. But Time is not -Eternity, for Eternity hath no change, although -your <i>Author</i> makes Time and Eternity all one, and a -being or substance by it self: Yet I will rather believe -<i>Solomon</i>, then him, who says, that there is a -time to be merry, and a time to be sad; a time to -mourn, and a time to rejoyce, and so forth: making -so many divisions of Time as there are natural actions; -whenas your <i>Author</i> makes natural actions strangers to -Nature, dividing them from their substances: Which -seemeth very improbable in the opinion of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Friend, and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_128" id="Footnote_1_128"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_128"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In his Treatise of Time.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XVIII" id="III_XVIII">XVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Authors</i><a name="FNanchor_1_129" id="FNanchor_1_129"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_129" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> opinion is, That <i>a bright burning -Iron doth not burn a dead Carcass after an equal -manner as it doth a live one; For in live bodies</i>, saith -he, <i>it primarily hurts the sensitive Soul, the which therefore -being impatient, rages after a wonderful manner, doth -by degrees resolve and exasperate its own and vital liquors -into a sharp poyson, and then contracts the fibres of the -flesh, and turns them into an escharre, yea, into the way -of a coal; but a dead Carcass is burnt by bright burning -Iron, no otherwise, then if Wood, or if any other unsensitive -thing should be; that is, it burns by a proper action -of the fire, but not of the life.</i> To which opinion, I answer: -That my Reason cannot conceive any thing to -be without life, and so neither without sense; for whatsoever -hath self-motion, has sense and life; and that -self-motion is in every Creature, is sufficiently discoursed -of in my former Letters, and in my <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>; -for self-motion, sense, life, and reason, -are the grounds and principles of Nature, without -which no Creature could subsist. I do not say, That -there is no difference between the life of a dead Carcass, -and a live one, for there is a difference between the -lives of every Creature; but to differ in the manner of -life, and to have neither life nor sense at all, are quite -different things: But your <i>Author</i> affirms himself, that -all things have a certain sense of feeling, when he speaks -of Sympathy and Magnetisme, and yet he denies that -they have life: And others again, do grant life to some -Creatures, as to Vegetables, and not sense. Thus -they vary in their Opinions, and divide sense, life, and -motion, when all is but one and the same thing; for no -life is without sense and motion, nor no motion without -sense and life; nay, not without Reason; for the -chief Architect of all Creatures, is sensitive and rational -Matter. But the mistake is, that most men, do -not, or will not conceive, that there is a difference and -variety of the corporeal sensitive and rational motions -in every Creature; but they imagine, that if all Creatures -should have life, sense, and reason, they must of -necessity have all alike the same motions, without any -difference; and because they do not perceive the animal -motions in a Stone or Tree, they are apt to deny to -them all life, sense, and motion. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I -think no man will be so mad, or irrational, as to say a -Stone is an Animal, or an Animal is a Tree, because a -Stone and Tree have sense, life, and motion; for every -body knows, that their Natural figures are different, -and if their Natures be different, then they cannot -have the same Motions, for the corporeal motions -do make the nature of every particular Creature, and -their differences; and as the corporeal motions act, work, -or move, so is the nature of every figure, Wherefore, -nobody, I hope, will count me so senseless, that I believe -sense and life to be after the like manner in every -particular Creature or part of Nature; as for example, -that a Stone or Tree has animal motions, and doth see, -touch, taste, smell and hear by such sensitive organs as -an Animal doth; but, my opinion is, that all Sense is -not bound up to the sensitive organs of an Animal, nor -Reason to the kernel of a man's brain, or the orifice of -the stomack, or the fourth ventricle of the brain, or -onely to a mans body; for though we do not see all -Creatures move in that manner as Man or Animals do, -as to walk, run, leap, ride, &c. and perform exterior -acts by various local motions; nevertheless, we cannot -in reason say, they are void and destitute of all motion; -For what man knows the variety of motions in Nature: -Do not we see, that Nature is active in every thing, yea, -the least of her Creatures. For example; how some -things do unanimously conspire and agree, others antipathetically -flee from each other; and how some do -increase, others decrease; some dissolve, some consist, -and how all things are subject to perpetual changes -and alterations; and do you think all this is done without -motion, life, sense, and reason? I pray you consider, -<i>Madam</i>, that there are internal motions as well -as external, alterative as well as constitutive; and several -other sorts of motions not perceptible by our senses, -and therefore it is impossible that all Creatures should -move after one sort of motions. But you will say, Motion -may be granted, but not Life, Sense, and Reason. I -answer, I would fain know the reason why not; for I am -confident that no man can in truth affirm the contrary: -What is Life, but sensitive Motion? what is Reason, -but rational motion? and do you think, <i>Madam</i>, that -any thing can move it self without life, sense and reason? -I, for my part, cannot imagine it should; for it would -neither know why, whither, nor what way, or how -to move. But you may reply, Motion may be granted, -but not self-motion; and life, sense, and reason, do -consist in self-motion. I answer: this is impossible; -for not any thing in Nature can move naturally without -natural motion, and all natural motion is self-motion. If -you say it may be moved by another; My answer is, -first, that if a thing has no motion in it self, but is moved -by another which has self-motion, then it must give that -immovable body motion of its own, or else it could not -move, having no motion at all; for it must move by the -power of motion, which is certain; and then it must -move either by its own motion, or by a communicated -or imparted motion; if by a communicated motion, -then the self-moveable thing or body must transfer its -own motion into the immoveable, and lose so much of -its own motion as it gives away, which is impossible, as I -have declared heretofore at large, unless it do also transfer -its moving parts together with it, for motion cannot -be transfered without substance. But experience -and observation witnesseth the contrary. Next, I say, if it -were possible that one body did move another, then -most part of natural Creatures, which are counted immoveable -of themselves, or inanimate, and destitute of -self-motion, must be moved by a forced or violent, and -not by a natural motion; for all motion that proceeds -from an external agent or moving power, is not natural, -but forced, onely self-motion is natural; and -then one thing moving another in this manner, we must -at last proceed to such a thing which is not moved by -another, but hath motion in it self, and moves all others; -and, perhaps, since man, and the rest of animals -have self-motion, it might be said, that the motions of -all other inanimate Creatures, as they call them, doth -proceed from them; but man being so proud, ambitious, -and self-conceited, would soon exclude all other -animals, and adscribe this power onely to himself, especially -since he thinks himself onely endued with Reason, -and to have this prerogative above all the rest, -as to be the sole rational Creature in the World. Thus -you see, <i>Madam</i>, what confusion, absurdity, and -constrained work will follow from the opinion of denying -self-motion, and so consequently, life and sense -to natural Creatures. But I, having made too long a -digression, will return to your <i>Authors</i> discourse: And -as for that he says, <i>A dead Carcass burns by the proper -action of the fire</i>, I answer, That if the dissolving motions -of the fire be too strong for the consistent motions -of that body which fire works upon, then fire is the -cause of its alteration; but if the consistent motions of -the body be too strong for the dissolving motions of the -fire, then the fire can make no alteration in it. Again: -he says, <i>Calx vive, at long as it remains dry, it gnaws not -a dead Carcass; but it presently gnaws live flesh, and -makes an escharre; and a dead carcass is by lime wholly -resolved into a liquor, and is combibed, except the bone -and gristle thereof; but it doth not consume live flesh into a -liquor, but translates it into an escharre</i>. I will say no -more to this, but that I have fully enough declared -my opinion before, that the actions or motions of life -alter in that which is named a dead Carcass, from what -they were in that which is called a Living body; but -although the actions of Life alter, yet life is not gone or -annihilated; for life is life, and remains full the same, -but the actions or motions of life change and differ in -every figure; and this is the cause that the actions of -Fire, Time, and <i>Calx-vive</i>, have not the same effects -in a dead Carcass, as in a living Body; for the difference -of their figures, and their different motions, produce -different effects in them; and this is the cause, that one -and the same fire doth not burn or act upon all bodies -alike: for some it dissolves, and some not; and some it -hardens, and some it consumes; and some later, some -sooner: For put things of several natures into the same -Fire, and you will see how they will burn, or how -fire will act upon them after several manners; so that -fire cannot alter the actions of several bodies to its own -blas; and therefore, since a living and a dead Body (as -they call them) are not the same, (for the actions or -motions of life, by their change or alteration, have altered -the nature or figure of the body) the effects cannot -be the same; for a Carcass has neither the interior -nor exterior motions of that figure which it was before -it was a Carcass, and so the figure is quite alter'd -from what it was, by the change and alteration of the -motions. But to conclude, the motions of the exterior -Agent, and the motions of the Patient, do sometimes -joyn and unite, as in one action, or to one effect, -and sometimes the motions of the Agent are onely an -occasion, but not a co-workman in the production of -such or such an effect, as the motions of the Patient do -work; neither can the motions of the Agent work totally -and meerly of themselves, such or such effects, -without the assistance or concurrence of the motions of -the Patient, but the motions of the Patient can; and -there is nothing that can prove more evidently that -Matter moves it self, and that exterior agents or bodies -are onely an occasion to such or such a motion in another -body, then to see how several things put into one -and the same fire, do alter after several modes; which -shews, it is not the onely action of fire, but the interior -motions of the body thrown into the fire, which do alter -its exterior form or figure. And thus, I think I -have said enough to make my opinions clear, that they -may be the better understood: which is the onely aim -and desire of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your humble and</i></p> - -<p><i>faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_129" id="Footnote_1_129"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_129"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of the disease of the Stone, <i>Ch.</i> 9.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XIX" id="III_XIX">XIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> is not a Natural, but a Divine Philosopher, -for in many places he undertakes to -interpret the Scripture; wherein, to my judgment, -he expresseth very strange opinions; you will give me -leave at this present to note some few. First, in -one place,<a name="FNanchor_1_130" id="FNanchor_1_130"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_130" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> interpreting that passage of Scripture, -where it is said,<a name="FNanchor_2_131" id="FNanchor_2_131"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_131" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> That the <i>sons of God took to wives the -daughters of men</i>: He understands by the Sons of God, -those which came from the Posterity of <i>Adam</i>, begotten -of a Man and a Woman, having the true Image -of God: But by the Daughters of Men, he understands -Monsters; that is, those which through the -Devils mediation, were conceived in the womb of a -Junior Witch or Sorceress: For when Satan could -find no other ways to deprive all the race of Men of -the Image of God, and extinguish the Immortal mind -out of the flock of <i>Adams</i> Posterity, he stirr'd up detestable -copulations, from whence proceeded savage -Monsters, as Faunes, Satyrs, Sylphs, Gnomes, -Nymphs, Driades, Najades, Nereides, &c. which -generated their off-springs amongst themselves, and -their posterities again contracted their copulations amongst -themselves, and at length began Wedlocks -with Men; and from this copulation of Monsters and -Nymphs, they generated strong Gyants. Which Interpretation, -how it agrees with the Truth of Scripture, -I will leave to Divines to judg: But, for my part, I -cannot conceive, how, or by what means or ways, -those Monsters and Nymphs were produced or generated. -Next, his opinion is, That <i>Adam</i> did ravish -<i>Eve</i>, and defloured her by force, calling him the first -infringer of modesty, and deflourer of a Virgin; and -that therefore God let hair grow upon his chin, cheeks, -and lips, that he might be a Compere, Companion, -and like unto many four-footed Beasts, and might -bear before him the signature of the same; and that, as -he was lecherous after their manner, he might also -shew a rough countenance by his hairs; which whether -it be so, or not, I cannot tell, neither do I think -your <i>Author</i> can certainly know it himself; for the -Scripture makes no mention of it: But this I dare say, -that <i>Eves</i> Daughters prove rather the contrary, <i>viz.</i> -that their Grandmother did freely consent to their -Grandfather. Also he says, That God had purposed -to generate Man by the overshadowing of the Holy -Spirit, but Man perverted the Intent of God; for -had <i>Adam</i> not sinned, there had been no generation -by the copulation of a Man and Woman, but all the -off-springs had appear'd out of <i>Eve</i>, a Virgin, from -the Holy Spirit, as conceived from God, and born of -a woman, a virgin, To which, I answer, first, That -it is impossible to know the Designs and secret purposes -of God: Next, to make the Holy Spirit the common -Generator of all Man-kind, is more then the -Scripture expresses, and any man ought to say: Lastly, -it is absurd, in my opinion, to say, that frail and -mortal Men, can pervert the intent and designs of the -Great God; or that the Devil is able to prevent God's -Intent, (as his expression is in the same place.) But -your <i>Author</i> shews a great affection to the Female Sex, -when he says, that God doth love Women before -Men, and that he has given them a free gift of devotion -before men; when as others do lay all the fault -upon the Woman, that she did seduce the Man; however -in expressing his affection for Women, your -<i>Author</i> expresses a partiality in God. And, as for his -opinion, that God creates more Daughters then Males, -and that more Males are extinguished by Diseases, -Travels, Wars, Duels, Shipwracks, and the like: -Truly, I am of the same mind, that more Men are -kill'd by Travels, Wars, Duels, Shipwracks, &c. then -Women; for Women never undergo these dangers, -neither do so many kill themselves with intemperate -Drinking, as Men do; but yet I believe, that Death -is as general, and not more favourable to Women, then -he is to Men; for though Women be not slain in Wars -like Men, (although many are, by the cruelty of Men, -who not regarding the weakness of their sex, do inhumanely -kill them,) yet many do die in Child-bed, which -is a Punishment onely concerning the Female sex. But -to go on in your <i>Authors</i> Interpretations: His knowledg -of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, reaches -so far, as he doth not stick to describe exactly, -not onely how the blessed Virgin conceiv'd in the -womb, but first in the heart, or the sheath of the heart; -and then how the conception removed from the heart, -into the womb, and in what manner it was performed. -Certainly, <i>Madam</i>, I am amazed, when I see men so -conceited with their own perfections and abilities, (I -may rather say, with their imperfections and weaknesses) -as to make themselves God's privy Councilors, -and his Companions, and partakers of all the sacred -Mysteries, Designs, and hidden secrets of the Incomprehensible -and Infinite God. O the vain Presumption, -Pride, and Ambition of wretched Men! There are many -more such expressions in your <i>Authors</i> works, which, in -my opinion, do rather detract from the Greatness of the -Omnipotent God, then manifest his Glory: As for -example; That Man is the clothing of the Deity, and -the sheath of the Kingdom of God, and many the like: -which do not belong to God; for God is beyond all -expression, because he is Infinite; and when we name -God, we name an Unexpressible, and Incomprehensible -Being; and yet we think we honour God, when -we express him after the manner of corporeal Creatures. -Surely, the noblest Creature that ever is in -the World, is not able to be compared to the most -Glorious God, but whatsoever comparison is made, detracts -from his Glory: And this, in my opinion, is the -reason, that God forbad any likeness to be made of him, -either in Heaven, or upon Earth, because he exceeds -all that we might compare or liken to him. And as -men ought to have a care of such similizing expressions, -so they ought to be careful in making Interpretations of -the Scripture, and expressing more then the Scripture -informs; for what is beyond the Scripture, is Man's -own fancy; and to regulate the Word of God after -Man's fancy, at least to make his fancy equal with the -Word of God, is Irreligious. Wherefore, men ought -to submit, and not to pretend to the knowledg of God's -Counsels and Designs, above what he himself hath -been pleased to reveal: as for example, to describe of -what Figure God is, and to comment and descant upon -the Articles of Faith; as how Man was Created; and -what he did in the state of Innocence; how he did fall; -and what he did after his fall: and so upon the rest of -the Articles of our Creed, more then the Scripture expresses, -or is conformable to it. For if we do this, we -shall make a Romance of the holy Scripture, with our -Paraphrastical descriptions: which alas! is too common -already. The truth is, Natural Philosophers, should -onely contain themselves within the sphere of Nature, -and not trespass upon the Revelation of the Scripture, -but leave this Profession to those to whom it properly -belongs. I am confident, a Physician, or any other -man of a certain Profession, would not take it well, if -others, who are not professed in that Art, should take -upon them to practise the same: And I do wonder, why -every body is so forward to encroach upon the holy -Profession of Divines, which yet is a greater presumption, -then if they did it upon any other; for it contains -not onely a most hidden and mystical knowledg, as -treating of the Highest Subject, which is the most Glorious, -and Incomprehensible God, and the salvation of -our Souls; but it is also most dangerous, if not interpreted -according to the Holy Spirit, but to the byass of -man's fancy. Wherefore, <i>Madam</i>, I am afraid to -meddle with Divinity in the least thing, lest I incur the -hazard of offending the divine Truth, and spoil the excellent -Art of Philosophying; for a Philosophical Liberty, -and a Supernatural Faith, are two different -things, and suffer no co-mixture; as I have declared -sufficiently heretofore. And this you will find as much -truth, as that I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_130" id="Footnote_1_130"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_130"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The Position is demonstrated.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_131" id="Footnote_2_131"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_131"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Gen.</i> 6. 2.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XX" id="III_XX">XX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Although your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_1_132" id="FNanchor_1_132"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_132" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> is of the opinion of <i>Plato</i>, -in making <i>Three sorts of Atheists: One that believes -no Gods; Another, which indeed admits of -Gods, yet such as are uncarefull of us, and despisers of -small matters, and therefore also ignorant of us: And lastly, -a third sort, which although they believe the Gods to be -expert in the least matters, yet do suppose that they are -flexible and indulgent toward the smallest cold Prayers or -Petitions</i>: Yet I cannot approve of this distinction, for -I do understand but one sort of Atheists; that is, those -which believe no God at all; but those which believe -that there is a God, although they do not worship him -truly, nor live piously and religiously as they ought, -cannot, in truth, be called Atheists, or else there would -be innumerous sorts of Atheists; to wit, all those, that -are either no Christians, or not of this or that opinion -in Christian Religion, besides all them that live wickedly, -impiously and irreligiously; for to know, and be -convinced in his reason, that there is a God, and to -worship him truly, according to his holy Precepts and -Commands, are two several things: And as for the -first, that is, for the Rational knowledg of the Existence -of God, I cannot be perswaded to believe, there -is any man which has sense and reason, that doth not -acknowledg a God; nay, I am sure, there is no part of -Nature which is void and destitute of this knowledg of -the existence of an Infinite, Eternal, Immortal, and -Incomprehensible Deity; for every Creature, being -indued with sense and reason, and with sensitive and -rational knowledg, there can no knowledg be more -Universal then the knowledg of a God, as being the -root of all knowledg: And as all Creatures have a natural -knowledg of the Infinite God, so, it is probable, -they Worship, Adore, and Praise his Infinite Power -and Bounty, each after its own manner, and according -to its nature; for I cannot believe, God should -make so many kinds of Creatures, and not be worshipped -and adored but onely by Man: Nature is -God's Servant, and she knows God better then any -Particular Creature; but Nature is an Infinite Body, -consisting of Infinite Parts, and if she adores and -worships God, her Infinite Parts, which are Natural -Creatures, must of necessity do the like, each according -to the knowledg it hath: but Man in this particular -goes beyond others, as having not onely a natural, -but also a revealed knowledg of the most Holy -God; for he knows Gods Will, not onely by the light -of Nature, but also by revelation, and so more then -other Creatures do, whose knowledg of God is meerly -Natural. But this Revealed Knowledg makes most -men so presumptuous, that they will not be content -with it, but search more and more into the hidden -mysteries of the Incomprehensible Deity, and pretend -to know God as perfectly, almost, as themselves; -describing his Nature and Essence, his Attributes, -his Counsels, his Actions, according to the -revelation of God, (as they pretend) when as it is -according to their own Fancies. So proud and presumptuous -are many: But they shew thereby rather their -weaknesses and follies, then any truth; and all their -strict and narrow pryings into the secrets of God, are -rather unprofitable, vain and impious, then that they -should benefit either themselves, or their neighbour; -for do all we can, God will not be perfectly known -by any Creature: The truth is, it is a meer impossibility -for a finite Creature, to have a perfect Idea of -an Infinite Being, as God is; be his Reason never so -acute or sharp, yet he cannot penetrate what is Impenetrable, -nor comprehend what is Incomprehensible: -Wherefore, in my opinion, the best way is -humbly to adore what we cannot conceive, and believe -as much as God has been pleased to reveal, without -any further search; lest we diving too deep, be -swallowed up in the bottomless depth of his Infiniteness: -Which I wish every one may observe, for the -benefit of his own self, and of others, to spend his time -in more profitable Studies, then vainly to seek for what -cannot be found. And with this hearty wish I conclude, -resting,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_132" id="Footnote_1_132"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_132"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Image of the Mind.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXI" id="III_XXI">XXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> is so much for Spirits, that he doth -not stick to affirm,<a name="FNanchor_1_133" id="FNanchor_1_133"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_133" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That Bodies scarce make up -a moity or half part of the world; but Spirits, even -by themselves, have or possess their moity, and indeed the -whole world.</i> If he mean bodiless and incorporeal Spirits, -I cannot conceive how Spirits can take up any -place, for place belongs onely to body, or a corporeal -substance, and millions of immaterial Spirits, nay, -were their number infinite, cannot possess so much -place as a small Pins point, for Incorporeal Spirits possess -no place at all: which is the reason, that an Immaterial -and a Material Infinite cannot hinder, oppose, -or obstruct each other; and such an Infinite, Immaterial -Spirit is God alone. But as for Created Immaterial -Spirits, as they call them, it may be questioned whether -they be Immaterial, or not; for there may be material -Spirits as well as immaterial, that is, such pure, subtil -and agil substances as cannot be subject to any humane -sense, which may be purer and subtiller then the most -refined air, or purest light; I call them material spirits, -onely for distinctions sake, although it is more proper, -to call them material substances: But be it, that there -are Immaterial Spirits, yet they are not natural, but supernatural; -that is, not substantial parts of Nature; for -Nature is material, or corporeal, and so are all her -Creatures, and whatsoever is not material is no part of -Nature, neither doth it belong any ways to Nature: -Wherefore, all that is called Immaterial, is a Natural -Nothing, and an Immaterial Natural substance, in -my opinion, is <i>non</i>-sense: And if you contend with -me, that Created Spirits, as good and bad Angels, -as also the Immortal Mind of Man, are Immaterial, -then I say they are Supernatural; but if you say, they -are Natural, then I answer they are Material: and -thus I do not deny the existence of Immaterial Spirits, -but onely that they are not parts of Nature, but supernatural; -for there may be many things above Nature, -and so above a natural Understanding, and Knowledg, -which may nevertheless have their being and existence, -although they be not Natural, that is, parts -of Nature: Neither do I deny that those supernatural -Creatures may be amongst natural Creatures, that is, -have their subsistence amongst them, and in Nature; -but they are not so commixed with them, as the several -parts of Matter are, that is, they do not joyn to -the constitution of a material Creature; for no Immaterial -can make a Material, or contribute any thing to -the making or production of it; but such a co-mixture -would breed a meer confusion in Nature: wherefore, -it is quite another thing, to be in Nature, or to have -its subsistence amongst natural Creatures in a supernatural -manner or way, and to be a part of Nature. -I allow the first to Immaterial Spirits, but not the second, -<i>viz.</i> to be parts of Nature. But what Immaterial -Spirits are, both in their Essence or Nature, and -their Essential Properties, it being supernatural, and above -natural Reason, I cannot determine any thing -thereof. Neither dare I say, they are Spirits like as -God is, that is, of the same Essence or Nature, no -more then I dare say or think that God is of a humane -shape or figure, or that the Nature of God is as easie -to be known as any notion else whatsoever, and that we -may know as much of him as of any thing else in the -world. For if this were so, man would know God -as well as he knows himself, but God and his Attributes -are not so easily known as man may know himself -and his own natural Proprieties; for God and his Attributes -are not conceiveable or comprehensible by any -humane understanding, which is not onely material, -but also finite; for though the parts of Nature be infinite -in number, yet each is finite in it self, that is, in -its figure, and therefore no natural Creature is capable -to conceive what God is; for he being infinite, there -is also required an infinite capacity to conceive him; -Nay, Nature her self, although she is Infinite, yet -cannot possibly have an exact notion of God, by reason -she is Material, and God is Immaterial; and if the Infinite -servant of God is not able to conceive God, much -less will a finite part of Nature do it. Besides, the holy -Church doth openly confess and declare the Incomprehensibility -of God, when in the <i>Athanasian</i> Creed, -she expresses, that the Father is Incomprehensible, the -Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible, -and that there are not three, but one Incomprehensible -God: Therefore, if any one will prove the -contrary, to wit, that God is Comprehensible, or -(which is all one) that God is as easie to be known as -any Creature whatsoever, he surely is more then the -Church: But I shall never say or believe so, but rather -confess my ignorance, then betray my folly; and leave -things Divine to the Church; to which I submit, as I -ought, in all Duty: and as I do not meddle with any -Divine Mysteries, but subject my self, concerning my -Faith or Belief, and the regulating of my actions -for the obtaining of Eternal Life, wholly under the government -and doctrine of the Church, so, I hope, they -will also grant me leave to have my liberty concerning -the contemplation of Nature and natural things, that I -may discourse of them, with such freedom, as meer natural -Philosophers use, or at least ought, to do; and -thus I shall be both a good Christian, and a good Natural -Philosopher: Unto which, to make the number -perfect, I will add a third, which is, I shall be,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your real and faithful</i></p> - -<p><i>Friend and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_133" id="Footnote_1_133"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_133"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Magnetick cure of wounds.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXII" id="III_XXII">XXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Though I am loth (as I have often told you) to -imbarque my self in the discourse of such a subject, -as no body is able naturally to know, which -is the supernatural and divine Soul in Man; yet your -<i>Author</i> having, in my judgment, strange opinions, both -of the Essence, Figure, Seat and Production of the -Soul, and discoursing thereof, with such liberty and -freedom, as of any other natural Creature, I cannot -chuse but take some notice of his discourse, and make -some reflections upon it; which yet, shall rather express -my ignorance of the same subject, then in a positive answer, -declare my opinion thereof; for, in things divine, -I refer my self wholly to the Church, and submit onely -to their instructions, without any further search of natural -reason; and if I should chance to express more -then I ought to do, and commit some error, it being -out of ignorance rather then set purpose, I shall be ready -upon better information, to mend it, and willingly -subject my self under the censure and correction of the -holy Church, as counting it no disgrace to be ignorant -in the mysteries of Faith, since Faith is of things unknown, -but rather a duty required from every Layman -to believe simply the Word of God, as it is explained -and declared by the Orthodox Church, without -making Interpretations out of his own brain, and -according to his own fancy, which breeds but Schismes, -Heresies, Sects, and Confusions. But concerning -your <i>Author</i>, I perceive by him, first, that he makes -no distinction between the Natural or Rational Soul -or Mind of Man, and between the Divine or Supernatural -Soul, but takes them both as one, and distinguishes -onely the Immortal Soul from the sensitive Life -of Man, which he calls the Frail, Mortal, Sensitive -Soul. Next, all his knowledg of this Immortal Soul is -grounded upon Dreams and Visions, and therefore it -is no wonder, if his opinions be somewhat strange and -irregular. <i>I saw, in a Vision,</i> says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_134" id="FNanchor_1_134"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_134" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>my Mind in a -humane shape; but there was a light, whose whole homogeneal -body was actively seeing, a spiritual substance, -Chrystalline, shining with a proper splendor, or a splendor -of its own, but in another cloudy part it was rouled up as -it were in the husk of it self; which whether it had any -splendor of it self, I could not discern, by reason of the superlative -brightness of the Chrystal Spirit contain'd within.</i> -Whereupon he defines <i>the Soul</i> to be <i>a Spirit, beloved -of God, homogeneal, simple, immortal, created into -the Image of God, one onely Being, whereto death adds -nothing, or takes nothing from it, which may be natural -or proper to it in the Essence of its simplicity.</i> As for this -definition of the Soul, it may be true, for any thing I -know: but when your <i>Author</i> makes the divine Soul to -be a Light, I cannot conceive how that can agree; for -Light is a Natural and Visible Creature, and, in my -opinion, a corporeal substance; whereas the Soul is -immaterial and incorporeal: But be it, that Light is -not a substance, but a neutral Creature, according to -your <i>Author</i>; then, nevertheless the Immortal Soul -cannot be said to be a light, because she is a substance. -He may say,<a name="FNanchor_2_135" id="FNanchor_2_135"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_135" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> The Soul is an Incomprehensible Light. -But if the Soul be Incomprehensible, how then doth he -know that she is a light, and not onely a light, but a -glorious and splendorous light? You will say, By a -Dream, or Vision. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, to judg any thing -by a Dream, is a sign of a weak judgment. Nay, since -your <i>Author</i> calls the soul constantly a light; if it were -so, and that it were such a splendorous, bright and -shining light, as he says; then when the body dies, and -the soul leaves its Mansion, it would certainly be seen, -when it issues out of the body. But your <i>Author</i> calls -the Soul a <i>Spiritual Substance</i>, and yet he says, she has -<i>an homogeneal body, actively seeing and shining with a -proper splendor of her own</i>; which how it can agree, I -leave to you to judg; for I thought, an Immaterial spirit -and a body were too opposite things, and now I see, -your <i>Author</i> makes Material and Immaterial, Spiritual -and Corporeal, all one. But this is not enough, but -he allows it a Figure too, and that of a humane shape; -for says he, I <i>could never consider the Thingliness of the -Immortal Mind with an Individual existence, deprived -of all figure, neither but that it at least would answer to a -humane shape</i>; but the Scripture, as much as is known -to me, never doth express any such thing of the Immortal -Soul, and I should be loth to believe any more thereof -then it declares. The Apostles, although they -were conversant with Christ, and might have known -it better, yet were never so inquisitive into the nature -of the Soul, as our Modern divine Philosophers are; -for our Saviour, and they, regarded more the salvation -of Man's Soul, and gave holy and wise Instructions -rather, how to live piously and conformably to God's -Will, to gain eternal Life, then that they should discourse -either of the Essence or Figure, or Proprieties -of the Soul, and whether it was a light, or any thing -else, and such like needless questions, raised in after-times -onely by the curiosity of divine Philosophers, or -Philosophying Divines; For though Light is a glorious -Creature, yet Darkness is as well a Creature as -Light, and ought not therefore to be despised; for if it -be not so bright, and shining as Light, yet it is a grave -Matron-like Creature, and very useful: Neither is -the Earth, which is inwardly dark, to be despised, because -the Sun is bright. The like may be said of the -soul, and of the body; for the body is very useful to -the soul, how dark soever your <i>Author</i> believes it to be; -and if he had not seen light with his bodily eyes, he -could never have conceived the Soul to be a Light: -Wherefore your <i>Author</i> can have no more knowledg -of the divine soul then other men have, although he -has had more Dreams and Visions; nay, he himself -confesses, that the Soul is an Incomprehensible Light; -which if so, she cannot, be perfectly known, nor confined -to any certain figure; for a figure or shape belongs -onely to a corporeal substance, and not to an incorporeal: -and so, God being an Incomprehensible -Being, is excluded from all figure, when as yet your -<i>Author</i> doth not stick to affirm, that God is of a humane -figure too, as well as the humane Soul is; <i>For</i>, -says he, <i>Since God hath been pleased to adopt the Mind -alone into his own Image, it also seems to follow, that the -vast and unutterable God is of a humane Figure, and that -from an argument from the effect, if there be any force of -arguments in this subject.</i> Oh! the audacious curiosity -of Man! Is it not blasphemy to make the Infinite God -of a frail and humane shape, and to compare the most -Holy to a sinful Creature? Nay, is it not an absurdity, -to confine and inclose that Incomprehensible Being in a -finite figure? I dare not insist longer upon this discourse, -lest I defile my thoughts with the entertaining -of such a subject that derogates from the glory of the -Omnipotent Creator; Wherefore, I will hasten, as -much as I can, to the seat of the Soul, which, after relating -several opinions, your <i>Author</i> concludes to be the -orifice of the stomack, where the Immortal Soul is involved -and entertained in the radical Inn or Bride-bed -of the sensitive Soul or vital Light; which part of the -body is surely more honoured then all the rest: But I, -for my part, cannot conceive why the Soul should -not dwell in the parts of conception, as well, as -in the parts of digestion, except it be to prove her -a good Huswife; however, your <i>Author</i> allows her -to slide down sometimes: For, <i>The action of the -Mind</i>, says he, <i>being imprisoned in the Body, doth -always tend downwards</i>; but whether the Soul tend -more downwards then upwards, Contemplative Persons, -especially Scholars, and grave States-men, do -know best; certainly, I believe, they find the soul -more in their heads then in their heels, at least her -operations. But, to conclude, if the Soul be pure -and single of her self, she cannot mix with the Body, -because she needs no assistance; nor joyn with -the Body, though she lives in the Body, for she -needs no support; and if she be individable, she -cannot divide her self into several Parts of the Body; -but if the Soul spread over all the Body, then -she is bigger, or less, according as the Body is; and -if she be onely placed in some particular part, then -onely that one part is indued with a Soul, and the -rest is Soul-less; and if she move from place to -place, then some parts of the Body will be sometimes -indued with a Soul, sometimes not; and if any -one part requires not the subsistence of the Soul -within it, then perhaps all the Body might have -been able to spare her; neither might the Soul, -being able to subsist without the body, have had -need of it. Thus useless questions will trouble men's -brains, if they give their fancies leave to work. -I should add something of the Production of the -Soul; but being tyred with so tedious a discourse of -your <i>Author</i>, I am not able to write any more, -but repose my Pen, and in the mean while rest affectionately,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_134" id="Footnote_1_134"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_134"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Image of the Mind.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_135" id="Footnote_2_135"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_135"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Of the Spirit of Life.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXIII" id="III_XXIII">XXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Authors</i> comparison<a name="FNanchor_1_136" id="FNanchor_1_136"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_136" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> of the Sun, with the -immaterial or divine Soul in Man, makes me almost -of opinion, that the Sun is the Soul of this -World we inhabit, and that the fixed Stars, which are -counted Suns by some, may be souls to some other -worlds; for every one man has but one immaterial or -divine soul, which is said to be individable and simple -in its essence, and therefore unchangeable; and if the -Sun be like this immaterial soul, then the Moon may be -like the material soul. But as for the Production of this -immaterial and divine Soul in Man, whether it come -by an immediate Creation from God, or be derived by -a successive propagation from Parents upon their Children, -I cannot determine any thing, being supernatural, -and not belonging to my study; nevertheless, the -Propagation from Parents seems improbable to my -reason; for I am not capable to imagine, how an immaterial -soul, being individable, should beget another. -Some may say, by imprinting or sealing, <i>viz.</i> -that the soul doth print the Image of its own figure upon -the spirit of the seed; which if so, then first there will -onely be a production of the figure of the soul, but not -of the substance, and so the Child will have but the Image -of the soul, and not a real and substantial soul. -Secondly, Every Child of the same Parents would be -just alike, without any distinguishment; if not in body, -yet in the Faculties and Proprieties of their Minds or -Souls. Thirdly, There must be two prints of the two -souls of both Parents upon one Creature, to wit, the -Child; for both Parents do contribute alike to the Production -of the Child, and then the Child would either -have two souls, or both must be joyned as into one; -which how it can be, I am not able to conceive. Fourthly, -If the Parents print the Image of their souls upon -the Child, then the Childs soul bears not the Image of -God, but the Image of Man, to wit, his Parents. Lastly, -I cannot understand, how an immaterial substance -should make a print upon a corporeal substance, for -Printing is a corporeal action, and belongs onely to -bodies. Others may say, that the soul is from the Parents -transmitted into the Child, like as a beam of Light; -but then the souls of the Parents must part with some of -their own substance; for light is a substance dividable, -in my opinion; and if it were not, yet the soul is a substance, -and cannot be communicated without losing some -of his own substance, but that is impossible; for the -immaterial soul being individable, cannot be diminished -nor increased in its substance or Nature. Others again, -will have the soul produced by certain Ideas; but Ideas -being corporeal, cannot produce a substance Incorporeal -or Spiritual. Wherefore I cannot conceive how -the souls of the Parents, being individable in themselves, -and not immoveable out of their bodies until the -time of death, should commix so, as to produce a third -immaterial soul, like to their own. You will say, As -the Sun, which is the fountain of heat and light, heats -and enlightens, and produces other Creatures. But I -answer, The Sun doth not produce other Suns, at least -not to our knowledg. 'Tis true, there are various and -several manners and ways of Productions, but they are -all natural, that is, material, or corporeal; to wit, -Productions of some material beings, or corporeal substances; -but the immaterial soul not being in the number -of these, it is not probable, that she is produced by -the way of corporeal productions, but created and infused -from God, according to her nature, which is supernatural -and divine: But being the Image of God, -how she can be defiled with the impurity of sin, and suffer -eternal damnation for her wickedness, without any -prejudice to her Creator, I leave to the Church to inform -us thereof. Onely one question I will add, -Whether the Soul be subject to Sickness and Pain? To -which I answer: As for the supernatural and divine -Soul, although she be a substance, yet being not corporeal, -but spiritual, she can never suffer pain, sickness, -nor death; but as for the natural soul, to speak properly, -there is no such thing in Nature as pain, sickness, -or death; unless in respect to some Particular -Creatures composed of natural Matter; for what Man -calls Sickness, Pain, and Death, are nothing else but -the Motions of Nature; for though there is but one -onely Matter, that is, nothing but meer Matter in -Nature, without any co-mixture of either a spiritual -substance, or any thing else that is not Matter; yet this -meer Matter is of several degrees and parts, and is the -body of Nature; Besides, as there is but one onely -Matter, so there is also but one onely Motion in Nature, -as I may call it, that is, meer corporeal Motion, without -any rest or cessation, which is the soul of that Natural -body, both being infinite; but yet this onely corporeal -Motion is infinitely various in its degrees or manners, -and ways of moving; for it is nothing else but the action -of natural Matter, which action must needs be infinite, -being the action of an infinite body, making infinite -figures and parts. These motions and actions of -Nature, since they are so infinitely various, when men -chance to observe some of their variety, they call them -by some proper name, to make a distinguishment, especially -those motions which belong to the figure of their -own kind; and therefore when they will express the -motions of dissolution of their own figure, they call -them Death; when they will express the motions of -Production of their figure, they call them Conception -and Generation; when they will express the motions -proper for the Consistence, Continuance and Perfection -of their Figure, they call them Health; but when -they will express the motions contrary to these, they call -them Sickness, Pain, Death, and the like: and hence -comes also the difference between regular and irregular -motions; for all those Motions that belong to the particular -nature and consistence of any figure, they call -regular, and those which are contrary to them, they -call irregular. And thus you see, <i>Madam</i>, that there -is no such thing in Nature, as Death, Sickness, Pain, -Health, &c. but onely a variety and change of the -corporeal motions, and that those words express nothing -else but the variety of motions in Nature; for -men are apt to make more distinctions then Nature -doth: Nature knows of nothing else but of corporeal -figurative Motions, when as men make a thousand -distinctions of one thing, and confound and -entangle themselves so, with Beings, Non-beings, -and Neutral-beings, Corporeals and Incorporeals, -Substances and Accidents, or manners and modes of -Substances, new Creations, and Annihilations, and -the like, as neither they themselves, nor any body -else, is able to make any sense thereof; for -they are like the tricks and slights of Juglers, 'tis here, -'tis gone; and amongst those <i>Authors</i> which I have -read as yet, the most difficult to be understood is -this <i>Author</i> which I am now perusing, who runs -such divisions, and cuts Nature into so small Parts, -as the sight of my Reason is not sharp enough to -discern them. Wherefore I will leave them to those -that are more quick-sighted then I, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_136" id="Footnote_1_136"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_136"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of the seat of the Soul. <i>It.</i> Of the -Image of the Mind.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXIV" id="III_XXIV">XXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> relates,<a name="FNanchor_1_137" id="FNanchor_1_137"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_137" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> how by some the <i>Immortal Soul -is divided into two distinct parts; the Inferior or -more outward, which by a peculiar name is called the -Soul, and the other the Superior, the more inward, the -which is called the bottom of the Soul or Spirit, in which -Part the Image of God is specially contained; unto which -is no access for the Devil, because there is the Kingdom -of God</i>: and each part has distinct Acts, Proprieties, -and Faculties. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I wonder, how -some men dare discourse so boldly of the Soul, without -any ground either of Scripture or Reason, nay, with -such contradiction to themselves, or their own opinions; -For how can that be severed into parts, which -in its nature is Individable? and how can the Image -of God concern but one Part of the Soul, and not the -other? Certainly, if the Soul is the Image of God, -it is his Image wholly, and not partially, or in parts. -But your <i>Author</i> has other as strange and odd opinions -as these, some whereof I have mentioned in my former -Letters, the Souls being a Light, her Figure, her -Residence, and many the like: Amongst the rest, there -is one thing which your <i>Author</i> frequently makes mention -of;<a name="FNanchor_2_138" id="FNanchor_2_138"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_138" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> I know not what to call it, whether a thing, -or a being, or no-thing; for it is neither of them; not -a substance, nor an accident; neither a body, nor a -spirit; and this Monster (for I think this is its proper -name, since none other will fit it) is the Lacquey of the -Soul, to run upon all errands; for the Soul sitting in -her Princely Throne or Residence, which is the orifice -of the stomack, cannot be every where her self; neither -is it fit she should, as being a disgrace to her, to -perform all offices her self for want of servants, therefore -she sends out this most faithful and trusty officer, -(your <i>Author</i> calls him <i>Ideal Entity</i>) who being prepared -for his journey, readily performs all her commands, -as being not tied up to no commands of places, -times or dimensions, especially in Women with -Child he operates most powerfully; for sometime he -printed a Cherry on a Child, by a strong Idea of the -Mother; but this Ideal Entity or servant of the Soul, -hath troubled my brain more, then his Mistress the -Soul her self; for I could not, nor cannot as yet conceive, -how he might be able to be the Jack of all offices, -and do Journies and travel from one part of the -body to another, being no body nor substance himself, -nor tyed to any place, time, and dimension, and therefore -I will leave him. Your <i>Author</i> also speaks much -of the Inward and Outward Man; but since that belongs -to Divinity, I will declare nothing of it; onely this -I say, that, in my opinion, the Inward and Outward -man do not make a double Creature, neither properly, -nor improperly; properly, as to make two different -men; improperly, as we use to call that man -double, whose heart doth not agree with his words. -But by the Outward man I understand the sinful actions -of flesh and blood, and by the Inward man the -reformed actions of the Spirit, according to the Word -of God; and therefore the Outward and Inward man -make but one Man. Concerning the Natural Soul, -your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_3_139" id="FNanchor_3_139"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_139" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> speaks of her more to her disgrace then -to her honor; for he scorns to call her a substance, neither -doth he call her the Rational Soul, but he calls -her the Sensitive Soul, and makes the Divine Soul to -be the Rational Natural Soul, and the cause of all -natural actions; for he being a Divine Philosopher, -mixes Divine and Natural things together: But of the -Frail, Mortal, Sensitive Soul, as he names her, which -is onely the sensitive Life, his opinions are, that she is -neither a substance, nor an accident, but a Neutral -Creature, and a Vital Light, which hath not its like -in the whole World, but the light of a Candle; for -it is extinguished, and goes out like the flame of a Candle; -it is locally present, and entertained in a place, and -yet not comprehended in a place. Nevertheless, although -this sensitive soul is no substance, yet it has -the honor to be the Inn or Lodging-place of the Immortal -Soul or Mind; and these two souls being both -lights, do pierce each other; but the Mortal soul blunts -the Immortal soul with its cogitation of the corruption -of <i>Adam</i>. These opinions, <i>Madam</i>, I confess -really, I do not know what to make of them; for I -cannot imagine, how this Mortal soul, being no -substance, can contain the Immortal soul, which is a -substance; nor how they can pierce each other, and -the Mortal soul being substanceless, get the better -over an Immortal substance, and vitiate, corrupt, and -infect it; neither can I conceive, how that, which -in a manner is nothing already, can be made less -and annihilated. Wherefore, my opinion is, that -the Natural Soul, Life, and Body, are all substantial -parts of Infinite Nature, not subsisting by themselves -each apart, but inseparably united and co-mixed -both in their actions and substances; for not any -thing can and doth subsist of it self in Nature, but -God alone; and things supernatural may, for ought -I know: 'Tis true, there are several Degrees, several -particular Natures, several Actions or Motions, -and several Parts in Nature, but none subsists -single, and by it self, without reference to the -whole, and to one another. Your <i>Author</i> says, -the Vital Spirit sits in the Throne of the Outward -man as Vice Roy of the Soul, and acts by Commission -of the Soul; but it is impossible, that one -single part should be King of the whole Creature, -since Rational and sensitive Matter is divided into so -many parts, which have equal power and force of -action in their turns and severall imployments; for -though Nature is a Monarchess over all her Creatures, -yet in every particular Creature is a Republick, -and not a Monarchy; for no part of any -Creature has a sole supreme Power over the rest. -Moreover, your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_4_140" id="FNanchor_4_140"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_140" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> says, That an <i>Angel is -not a Light himself, nor has an Internal Light, natural -and proper to himself, but is the Glass of an uncreated -Light</i>: Which, to my apprehension, seems to -affirm, That Angels are the Looking-glasses of God; -a pretty Poetical Fancy, but not grounded on the Scripture: -for the Scripture doth not express any such thing -of them, but onely that they are<a name="FNanchor_5_141" id="FNanchor_5_141"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_141" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> <i>Ministring Spirits -sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of Salvation</i>: -Which, I think, is enough for us to know here, and -leave the rest until we come to enjoy their company in -Heaven. But it is not to be admired, that those, which -pretend to know the Nature and Secrets of God, should -not have likewise knowledg of Supernatural Creatures; -In which conceit I leave them, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your real and faithful</i></p> - -<p><i>Friend and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_137" id="Footnote_1_137"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_137"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Image of the Soul.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_138" id="Footnote_2_138"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_138"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Magnetick cure of wounds.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_139" id="Footnote_3_139"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_139"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Of the seat of the Soul.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_140" id="Footnote_4_140"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_140"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the Image of the Mind.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_141" id="Footnote_5_141"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_141"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Heb.</i> 11. 14.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXV" id="III_XXV">XXV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Reason and Intellect are two different things to -your <i>Author</i>;<a name="FNanchor_1_142" id="FNanchor_1_142"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_142" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> for <i>Intellect</i>, says he, <i>doth properly -belong to the Immortal Soul, as being a Formal -Light, and the very substance of the Soul it self, wherein -the Image of God onely consists; But Reason is an uncertain, -frail faculty of the Mortal Soul, and doth in -no ways belong, nor has any communion with the Intellect -of the Mind.</i> Which seems to me, as if your <i>Author</i> -did make some difference between the Divine, and the -Natural Soul in Man, although he doth not plainly -declare it in the same Terms; for that which I name -the Divine Soul, is to him the Immortal Mind, Intellect, -or Understanding, and the Seat of the Image -of God; but the Natural Soul he calls the Frail, Mortal, -and Rational Soul; and as Understanding is the -Essence of the Immortal, so Reason is to him the Essence -of the Mortal Soul; which Reason he attributes not only -to Man, but also to Brutes: For <i>Reason and Discourse</i>, -says he, <i>do not obscurely flourish and grow in brute -Beasts, for an aged Fox is more crafty then a younger one -by rational discourse</i>; and again, <i>That the Rational Part -of the Soul doth belong to brutes, is without doubt</i>: Wherein -he rightly dissents from those, which onely do attribute -a sensitive Soul to brutes; and Reason to none but -Man, whom therefore they call a Rational Creature, -and by this Rational Faculty do distinguish him from -the rest of Animals. And thus I perceive the difference -betwixt your <i>Authors</i> opinion, and theirs, is, That -other Philosophers commonly do make the Rational -soul, to be partly that which I call the supernatural and -divine Soul, as onely belonging to man, and bearing -the Image of God, not acknowledging any other Natural, -but a Sensitive soul in the rest of Animals, and -a Vegetative soul in Vegetables; and these three souls, -or faculties, operations, or degrees, (call them what -you will, for we shall not fall out about names,) concurr -and joyn together in Man; but the rest of all Creatures, -are void and destitute of Life, as well as of Soul, -and therefore called Unanimate; and thus they make -the natural rational soul, and the divine soul in man to -be all one thing, without any distinguishment; but your -<i>Author</i> makes a difference between the Mortal and Immortal -soul in Man; the Immortal he calls the Intellect -or Understanding, and the Mortal soul he calls Reason: -but to my judgment he also attributes to the immortal -soul, actions which are both natural, and supernatural, -adscribing that to the divine soul, which onely -belongs to the natural, and taking that from the natural, -which properly belongs to her. Besides, he slights and -despises the Rational soul so, as if she were almost of no -value with Man, making her no substance, but a mental -intricate and obscure Being, and so far from Truth, -as if there were no affinity betwixt Truth and Reason, but -that they disagree in their very roots, and that the most -refined Reason may be deceitful. But your <i>Author</i>, by -his leave, confounds Reason, and Reasoning, which -are two several and distinct things; for reasoning and -arguing differs as much from Reason, as doubtfulness -from certainty of knowledg, or a wavering mind -from a constant mind; for Reasoning is the discoursive, -and Reason the understanding part in Man, and therefore -I can find no great difference between Understanding -and Reason: Neither can I be perswaded, that -Reason should not remain with Man after this life, and -enter with him into Heaven, although your <i>Author</i> -speaks much against it; for if Man shall be the same -then, which he is now, in body, why not in soul also? -'Tis true, the Scripture says, he shall have a more glorious -body; but it doth not say, that some parts of the -body shall be cast away, or remain behind; and if not -of the body, why of the soul? Why shall Reason, -which is the chief part of the natural Soul, be wanting? -Your <i>Author</i> is much for Intellect or Understanding; -but I cannot imagine how Understanding can be without -Reason. Certainly, when he saw the Immortal -Soul in a Vision, to be a formal Light, how could -he discern what he saw, without Reason? How could -he distinguish between Light and Darkness, without -Reason? How could he know the Image of the -Mind to be the Image of God, without the distinguishment -of Reason? You will say, Truth informed him, -and not Reason. I answer, Reason shews the Truth. -You may reply, Truth requires no distinguishment or -judgment. I grant, that perfect Truth requires not -reasoning or arguing, as whether it be so, or not; but -yet it requires reason, as to confirm it to be so, or not -so; for Reason is the confirmation of Truth, and Reasoning -is but the Inquisition into Truth: Wherefore, -when our Souls shall be in the fulness of blessedness, -certainly, they shall not be so dull and stupid, but observe -distinctions between God, Angels, and sanctified -Souls; as also, that our glory is above our merit, and -that there is great difference between the Damned, and -the Blessed, and that God is an Eternal and Infinite Being, -and onely to be adored, admired, and loved, and -that we enjoy as much as can be enjoyed: All which -the Soul cannot know without the distinguishment of -Reason; otherwise we might say, the Souls in Heaven, -love, joy, admire and adore, but know not what, why, -or wherefore; For, shall the blessed Souls present continual -Praises without reason? Have they not reason to -praise God for their happiness, and shall they not remember -the Mercies of God, and the Merits of his -Son? For without remembrance of them, they cannot -give a true acknowledgment, although your <i>Author</i> -says there is no use of Memory or remembrance in -Heaven: but surely, I believe there is; for if there were -not memory in Heaven, the Penitent Thief upon the -Cross his Prayers had been in vain; for he desired our -Saviour to remember him when he did come into his -Kingdom: Wherefore if there be Understanding in -Heaven, there is also Reason; and if there be Reason, -there is Memory also: for all Souls in Heaven, as -well as on Earth, have reason to adore, love, and -praise God. But, <i>Madam</i>, my study is in natural Philosophy, -not in Theology; and therefore I'le refer you -to Divines, and leave your <i>Author</i> to his own fancy, -who by his singular Visions tells us more news of our -Souls, then our Saviour did after his Death and Resurrection: -Resting in the mean time,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_142" id="Footnote_1_142"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_142"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The hunting or searching out of Sciences. -<i>It.</i> Of the Image of the Mind.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXVI" id="III_XXVI">XXVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning those parts and chapters of your <i>Authors</i> -Works, which treat of Physick; before I -begin to examine them, I beg leave of you in this -present, to make some reflections first upon his Opinions -concerning the Nature of Health and Diseases: As -for <i>Health</i>, he is pleased to say,<a name="FNanchor_1_143" id="FNanchor_1_143"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_143" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>it consists not in a -just Temperature of the body, but in a sound and intire -Life; for otherwise, a Temperature of body is as yet in a -dead Carcass newly kill'd, where notwithstanding there is -now death, but not life, not health</i>: Also he says,<a name="FNanchor_2_144" id="FNanchor_2_144"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_144" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>That -no disease is in a dead carcass.</i> To which I answer, -That, in my opinion, Life is in a dead Carcass, as well -as in a living Animal, although not such a Life as that -Creature had before it became a Carcass, and the -Temperature of that Creature is altered with the alteration -of its particular life; for the temperature of that -particular life, which was before in the Animal, doth -not remain in the Carcass, in such a manner as it was -when it had the life of such or such an Animal; nevertheless, -a dead Carcass hath life, and such a temperature -of life, as is proper, and belonging to its own figure: -for there are as many different lives, as there be different -creatures, and each creature has its particular life -and soul, as partaking of sensitive and rational Matter. -And if a dead Carcass hath life, and such a temperature -of motions as belong to its own life, then there is no -question, but these motions may move sometimes irregularly -in a dead Carcass as well, as in any other Creature; -and since health and diseases are nothing else but -the regularity or irregularity of sensitive corporeal Motions, -a dead Carcass having Irregular motions, may -be said as well to have diseases, as a living body, as they -name it, although it is no proper or usual term for other -Creatures, but onely for Animals. However, if there -were no such thing as a disease (or term it what you -will, I will call it Irregularity of sensitive motions) in a -dead Carcass, How comes it that the infection of a disease -proceeds often from dead Carcasses into living Animals? -For, certainly, it is not meerly the odour or -stink of a dead body, for then all stinking Carcasses -would produce an Infection; wherefore this Infection -must necessarily be inherent in the Carcass, and proceed -from the Irregularity of its motions. Next I'le ask -you, Whether a Consumption be a disease, or not? -If it be, then a dead Carcass might be said to have a -disease, as well as a living body; and the Ægyptians -knew a soveraign remedy against this disease, which -would keep a dead Carcass intire and undissolved many -ages; but as I said above, a dead Carcass is not -that which it was being a living Animal, wherefore their -effects cannot be the same, having not the same causes. -Next, your <i>Author</i> is pleased to call, with <i>Hippocrates, -Nature the onely Physicianess of Diseases.</i> -I affirm it; and say moreover, that as she is the onely -Physicianess, so she is also the onely Destroyeress and -Murtheress of all particular Creatures, and their particular -lives; for she dissolves and transforms as well -as she frames and creates; and acts according to her -pleasure, either for the increase or decrease, augmentation -or destruction, sickness or health, life or death -of Particular Creatures. But concerning Diseases, -your <i>Authors</i> opinion is, That <i>a Disease is as Natural -as Health.</i> I answer; 'tis true, Diseases are natural; -but if we could find out the art of healing, as well as the -art of killing and destroying; and the art of uniting and -composing, as well as the art of separating and dividing, -it would be very beneficial to man; but this may -easier be wished for, then obtained; for Nature being -a corporeal substance, has infinite parts, as well as -an infinite body; and Art, which is onely the playing -action of Nature, and a particular Creature, can easier -divide and separate parts, then unite and make -parts; for Art cannot match, unite, and joyn parts so -as Nature doth; for Nature is not onely dividable -and composeable, being a corporeal substance, but -she is also full of curiosity and variety, being partly -self-moving: and there is great difference between -forced actions, and natural actions; for the one sort is -regular, the other irregular. But you may say, Irregularities -are as natural as Regularities. I grant it; but -Nature leaves the irregular part most commonly to -her daughter or creature Art, that is, she makes irregularities -for varieties sake, but she her self orders the regular -part, that is, she is more careful of her regular -actions; and thus Nature taking delight in variety suffers -irregularities; for otherwise, if there were onely -regularities, there could not be so much variety. Again -your <i>Author</i> says,<a name="FNanchor_3_145" id="FNanchor_3_145"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_145" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> That <i>a disease doth not consist but -in living bodies.</i> I answer, there is not any body that -has not life; for if life is general, then all figures or parts -have life; but though all bodies have life, yet all bodies -have not diseases; for diseases are but accidental to -bodies, and are nothing else but irregular motions in particular -Creatures, which may be not onely in Animals, -but generally in all Creatures; for there may be Irregularities -in all sorts of Creatures, which may cause untimely -dissolutions; but yet all dissolutions are not made -by irregular motions, for many creatures dissolve regularly, -but onely those which are untimely. In the same -place your <i>Author</i> mentions, That <i>a Disease consists -immediately in Life it self, but not in the dregs and filthinesses, -which are erroneous forreigners and strangers to the -life.</i> I grant, that a Disease is made by the motions of -Life, but not such a life as your <i>Author</i> describes, which -doth go out like the snuff of a Candle, or as one of <i>Lucian's</i> -Poetical Lights; but by the life of Nature, which -cannot go out without the destruction of Infinite Nature: -and as the Motions of Nature's life make diseases -or irregularities, so they make that which man names -dregs and filths; which dregs, filths, sickness, and -death, are nothing but changes of corporeal motions, -different from those motions or actions that are proper -to the health, perfection and consistence of such or -such a figure or creature. But, to conclude, there is -no such thing as corruption, sickness, or death, properly -in Nature, for they are made by natural actions, -and are onely varieties in Nature, but not obstructions -or destructions of Nature, or annihilations -of particular Creatures; and so is that we name Superfluities, -which bear onely a relation to a particular -Creature, which hath more Motion and Matter then -is proper for the nature of its figure. And thus much -of this subject for the present, from,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_143" id="Footnote_1_143"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_143"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Call'd the Authors answers.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_144" id="Footnote_2_144"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_144"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the subject of inhering of diseases.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_145" id="Footnote_3_145"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_145"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> The subject of inhering of diseases is in -the point of life. <i>It. Ch.</i> Of the knowledg of diseases.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXVII" id="III_XXVII">XXVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In my last, I remember, I told you of your <i>Authors</i> -opinion concerning the seat of Diseases, <i>viz.</i> -that Diseases are properly in living bodies, and -consist in the life it self; but when I consider his definition -of Life, and of a Disease, I cannot conceive -how they should consist together; for he describes<a name="FNanchor_1_146" id="FNanchor_1_146"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_146" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>a -Disease to be a real, material and substantial being, truly -subsisting in a body; but life to be a meer nothing, and</i> -<i>yet the immediate mansion of a disease, the inward subject, -yea, and workman of the same; and that with the life all -diseases depart into nothing.</i> Surely, <i>Madam</i>, it exceedeth -my understanding; for, first, I cannot conceive -how life, which is a meer Nothing, can be a -lodging to something? Next, how Nothing can depart -and die? and thirdly how Something can become -Nothing? I think your <i>Author</i> might call a dead -Carcass as well No-thing, as Life; and since he names -Diseases the Thieves of Life, they must needs be but -poor Thieves, because they steal No-thing. But your -<i>Author</i> compares Life to Light, and calls it an Extinguishable -Light, like the light of a Candle; which if so, -then the old saying is verified, That life goes out like the -snuff of a Candle. But I wonder, <i>Madam</i>, that grave -and wise men will seriously make use of a similising -old Proverb, or of a Poetical Fancy, in matter of natural -Philosophy; for I have observed, that <i>Homer, Lucian, -Ovid, Virgil, Horace,</i> &c. have been very serviceable -to great Philosophers, who have taken the -ground of their Fictions, and transferred them into Natural -Philosophy, as Immaterial substances, Non-beings, -and many the like; but they can neither do any -good nor hurt to Nature, but onely spoil Philosophical -Knowledg; and as Nature is ignorant of Immaterials -and Non-beings, so Art is ignorant of Nature; for -Mathematical Rules, Measures, and Demonstrations, -cannot rule, measure nor demonstrate Nature, no more, -then Chymical Divisions, Dissolutions and Extractions -(or rather distractions, nay, I may say destructions) -can divide, dissolve, extract, compose, and unite, -as Nature doth; Wherefore their Instruments, -Figures, Furnaces, Limbecks, and Engines, cannot -instruct them of the truth of Natures Principles; but -the best and readiest way to find out Nature, or rather -some truth of Nature, is sense and reason, which are -Parts of Natures active substance, and therefore the -truest informers of Nature; but the Ignorance of Nature -has caused Ignorance amongst Philosophers, and -the Ignorance of Philosophers hath caused numerous -Opinions, and numerous Opinions have caused various -Discourses and Disputes; which Discourses and -Disputes, are not Sense and Reason, but proceed from -Irregular Motions; and Truth is not found in Irregularities. -But to return to Life: it seems your <i>Author</i> -hath taken his opinion from <i>Lucian's</i> Kingdom of -Lights, the Lights being the Inhabitants thereof; and -when any was adjudged to die, his Light was put out, -which was his punishment: And thus this Heathenish -Fiction is become a Christian Verity; when as yet your -<i>Author</i> rayls much at those, that insist upon the Opinions -and Doctrine of Pagan Philosophers. Wherefore -I will leave this Poetical Fancy of Life, and turn to -Death, and see what opinion your <i>Author</i> hath of that. -First, concerning the cause or original of Death; <i>Neither -God</i>, says he,<a name="FNanchor_2_147" id="FNanchor_2_147"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_147" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> <i>nor the Evil Spirit, is the Creator of -Death, but Man onely, who made Death for himself; -Neither did Nature make death, but Man made death -natural.</i> Which if it be so, then Death being, to my opinion, -a natural Creature, as well as Life, Sickness, and -Health; Man, certainly, had great Power, as to be -the Creator of a natural Creature. But, I would fain -know the reason, why your <i>Author</i> is so unwilling to -make God the Author of Death, and Sickness, as well -as of Damnation? Doth it imply any Impiety or Irreligiousness? -Doth not God punish, as well as reward? -and is not death a punishment for our sin? You may -say, Death came from sin, but sin did not come from -God. Then some might ask from whence came sin? -You will say, From the Transgression of the Command -of God, as the eating of the Forbidden Fruit. But -from whence came this Transgression? It might be answer'd, -From the Perswasion of the Serpent. From -whence came this Perswasion? From his ill and malitious -nature to oppose God, and ruine the race of Mankind. -From whence came this ill Nature? From -his Fall. Whence came his Fall? From his Pride -and Ambition to be equal with God. From whence -came this Pride? From his Free-will. From whence -came his Free-will? From God. Thus, <i>Madam</i>, -if we should be too inquisitive into the actions of God, -we should commit Blasphemy, and make God Cruel, -as to be the Cause of Sin, and consequently of Damnation. -But although God is not the Author of Sin, yet -we may not stick to say, that he is the Author of the -Punishment of Sin, as an Act of his Divine Justice; -which Punishment, is Sickness, and Death; nay, I see -no reason, why not of Damnation too, as it is a due -punishment for the sins of the wicked; for though Man -effectively works his own punishment, yet Gods Justice -inflicts it: Like as a just Judg may be call'd the cause of -a Thief being hang'd. But these questions are too curious; -and some men will be as presumptuous as the Devil, -to enquire into Gods secret actions, although they -be sure that they cannot be known by any Creature. -Wherefore let us banish such vain thoughts, and onely -admire, adore, love, and praise God, and implore his -Mercy, to give us grace to shun the punishments for -our sins by the righteousness of our actions, and not endeavour -to know his secret designs. Next, I dissent -from your <i>Author</i>,<a name="FNanchor_3_148" id="FNanchor_3_148"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_148" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> That <i>Death and all dead things -do want roots whereby they may produce</i>: For death, -and dead things, in my opinion, are the most active -producers, at least they produce more numerously and -variously then those we name living things; for example, -a dead Horse will produce more several Animals, -besides other Creatures, then a living Horse can -do; but what <i>Archeus</i> and <i>Ideas</i> a dead Carcass hath, -I can tell no more, then what <i>Blas</i> or <i>Gas</i> it hath; onely -this I say, that it has animate Matter, which is the -onely <i>Archeus</i> or Master-workman, that produces all -things, creates all things, dissolves all things, and transforms -all things in Nature; but not out of Nothing, or -into Nothing, as to create new Creatures which were -not before in Nature, or to annihilate Creatures, and -to reduce them to nothing; but it creates and transforms -out of, and in the same Matter which has been from all -Eternity. Lastly, your <i>Author</i> is pleased to say, That -<i>he doth not behold a disease as an abstracted Quality; and -that Apoplexy, Leprosie, Dropsie, and Madness, as -they are Qualities in the abstract, are not diseases.</i> I -am of his mind, that a disease is a real and corporeal being, -and do not understand what he and others mean -by abstracted qualities; for Nature knows of no abstraction -of qualities from substances, and I doubt Man -can do no more then Nature doth: Besides, those abstractions -are needless, and to no purpose; for no Immaterial -quality will do any hurt, if it be no substance; -wherefore Apoplexy, Leprosie, Dropsie, and Madness, -are Corporeal beings, as well as the rest of Diseases, -and not abstracted Qualities; and I am sure, Persons -that are affected with those diseases will tell the same. -Wherefore leaving needless abstractions to fancies abstracted -from right sense and reason, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_146" id="Footnote_1_146"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_146"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the knowledg of diseases.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_147" id="Footnote_2_147"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_147"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Called the Position.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_148" id="Footnote_3_148"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_148"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the knowledg of diseases.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXVIII" id="III_XXVIII">XXVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am very much troubled to see your <i>Authors</i> Works -fill'd with so many spiteful reproaches and bitter -taunts against the Schools of Physicians, condemning -both their Theory and Practice; nay, that not -onely the Modern Schools of Physicians, but also -the two ancient and famous Physicians, <i>Galen</i>, and -<i>Paracelsus</i>, must sufficiently suffer by him; especially -<i>Galen</i>; for there is hardly a Chapter in all his Works, -which has not some accusations of blind errors, sloth, -and sluggishness, Ignorance, Covetousness, Cruelty, -and the like: Which I am very sorry for; not onely for -the sake of your <i>Author</i> himself, who herein doth betray -both his rashness, and weakness, in not bridling -his passions, and his too great presumption, reliance and -confidence in his own abilities, and extraordinary Gifts; -but also for the sake of the Fame and Repute of our -Modern Physicians; for without making now any difference -betwixt the <i>Galenists</i> and <i>Paracelsians</i>, and examining -which are the best, (for I think them both -excellent in their kinds, especially when joyned together) -I will onely say this in general, that the Art of -Physick has never flourish'd better then now, neither -has any age had more skilful, learned, and experienced -Physicians, then this present; because they have not -onely the knowledg and practise of those in ages Past, -but also their own experience joyned with it, which -cannot but add perfection to their Art; and I, for -my part, am so much for the old way of Practice, that -if I should be sick, I would desire rather such Physicians -which follow the same way, then those, that by -their new Inventions, perchance, cure one, and kill a -hundred. But your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_1_149" id="FNanchor_1_149"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_149" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> will have a Physician -to be like a Handycrafts man, who being call'd to a -work, promises that work, and stands to his promise; -and therefore, <i>It is a shame</i>, says he, <i>in a Physician, -being call'd to a sick man in the beginning of the disease, -and when his strength is yet remaining, to suffer the -same man to die.</i> This, in my opinion, is a very unreasonable -comparison, to liken a Handicrafts man to -a Physician, and the art of Curing to the art of Building, -or any the like, without regard of so many great -differences that are between them, which I am loth to -rehearse, for brevities sake, and are apparant enough -to every one that will consider them: but this I may -say, that it is not always for want of skill and industry -in a Physician, that the cure is not effected, but it lies -either in the Incureableness of the disease, or any other -external accidents that do hinder the success: Not but -that the best Physicians may err in a disease, or mistake -the Patients inward distemper by his outward temper, -or the interior temper by his outward distemper, or any -other ways; for they may easily err through the variation -of the disease, which may vary so suddenly and oft, -as it is impossible to apply so fast, and so many Medicines, -as the alteration requires, without certain death; -for the body is not able, oftentimes, to dispose and digest -several Medicines so fast, as the disease may vary, -and therefore what was good in this temper, may, perhaps, -be bad in the variation; insomuch, that one medicine -may in a minute prove a Cordial, and Poyson. -Nay, it may be that some Physicians do err through -their own ignorance and mistake, must we therefore condemn -all the skill, and accuse all the Schools of Negligence, -Cruelty, and Ignorance? God forbid: for -it would be a great Injustice. Let us rather praise them -for the good they do, and not rashly condemn them for -the evil they could not help: For we may as well condemn -those holy and industrious Divines, that cannot reform -wicked and perverse Sinners, as Physicians, because -they cannot restore every Patient to his former -health, the Profession of a Physician being very difficult; -for they can have but outward signs of inward -distempers. Besides, all men are not dissected after -they are dead, to inform Physicians of the true cause of -their death; nay, if they were, perchance they would -not give always a true information to the Physician, as -is evident by many examples; but oftentimes the blame -is laid upon the Physician, when as the fault is either -in Nature, or any other cause, which Art could not -mend. And if your <i>Author</i> had had such an extraordinary -Gift from God as to know more then all the rest -of Physicians, why did he not accordingly, and as -the Scripture speaks of Faith, shew his skill by his -Works and Cures? certainly, could he have restored -those that were born blind, lame, deaf and dumb, or -cured the spotted Plague, or Apoplexy after the third fit, -or the Consumption of Vital parts, or a Fever in the -Arteries, or dissolved a Stone too big to go through -the passage, and many the like; he would not onely -have been cried up for a rare Physician, but for a miracle -of the World, and worshipped as a Saint: But if -he could not effect more then the Schools can do, why -doth he inveigh so bitterly against them? Wherefore I -cannot commend him in so doing; but as I respect the -Art of Physick, as a singular Gift from God to Mankind, -so I respect and esteem also learned and skilful -Physicians, for their various Knowledg, industrious -Studies, careful Practice, and great Experiences, and -think every one is bound to do the like, they being -the onely supporters and restorers of humane life and -health: For though I must confess, with your <i>Author</i>, -that God is the onely giver of Good, yet God is not -pleased to work Miracles ordinarily, but has ordained -means for the restoring of health, which -the Art of Physick doth apply; and therefore those -Persons that are sick, do wisely to send for a Physician; -for Art, although it is but a particular Creature, and -the handmaid of Nature, yet she doth Nature oftentimes -very good service; and so do Physicians often -prolong their Patients lives. The like do Chirurgeons; -for if those Persons that have been wounded, had been -left to be cured onely by the Magnetick Medicine, I -believe, numbers that are alive would have been -dead, and numbers would die that are alive; insomuch, -as none would escape, but by miracle, especially -if dangerously hurt. Concerning the Coveteousness -of Physicians, although sickness is chargeable, -yet I think it is not Charitable to say or to think, -that Physitians regard more their Profit, then their Patients -health; for we might as well condemn Divines -for taking their Tithes and Stipends, as Physicians -for taking their Fees: but the holy Writ tells us, -that a Labourer is Worthy of his hire or reward; and, -for my part, I think those commit a great sin, which -repine at giving Rewards in any kind; for those that -deserve well by their endeavours, ought to have their -rewards; and such Meritorious Persons, I wish with -all my Soul, may prosper and thrive. Nevertheless, -as for those persons, which for want of means are not -able to reward their Physicians, I think Physicians will -not deal so unconscionably, as to neglect their health -and lives for want of their Fees, but expect the reward -from God, and be recompenced the better by those -that have Wealth enough to spare. And this good -opinion I have of them. So leaving them, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_149" id="Footnote_1_149"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_149"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In his Promises, <i>Column.</i> 3.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXIX" id="III_XXIX">XXIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM</i></p> - -<p>I am of your <i>Authors</i> mind, That <i>heat is not the -cause of digestion</i>; but I dissent from him, when he -says, That it is <i>the Ferment of the stomach that doth -cause it</i>: For, in my opinion, Digestion is onely made -by regular digestive motions, and ill digestion is caused -by irregular motions, and when those motions are weak, -then there is no digestion at all, but what was received, -remains unaltered; but when they are strong and -quick, then they make a speedy digestion. You may -ask me, what are digestive motions? I answer, They -are transchanging, or transforming motions: but since -there be many sorts of transchanging motions, digestive -motions are those, which transchange food into the -nourishment of the body, and dispose properly, fitly -and usefully of all the Parts of the food, as well of -those which are converted into nourishment, as of -those which are cast forth. For give me leave to tell -you, <i>Madam</i>, that some parts of natural Matter, do -force or cause other parts of Matter to move and work -according to their will, without any change or alteration -of their parts; as for example, Fire and Metal; -for Fire will cause Metal to flow, but it doth not readily -alter it from its nature of being Metal; neither doth Fire -alter its nature from being Fire. And again, some -parts of Matter will cause other parts to work and act to -their own will, by forcing these over-powred parts to -alter their own natural motions into the motions of the -victorious Party, and so transforming them wholly into -their own Figure; as for example, Fire will cause -Wood to move so as to take its figure, to wit, the -figure of Fire, that is, to change its own figurative motions -into the motions of Fire: and this latter kind of -moving or working is found in digestion; for the regular -digestive motions do turn all food received from -its own nature or figure, into the nourishment, figure, -or nature of the body, as into flesh, blood, bones, and -the like. But when several parts of Matter meet or joyn -with equal force and power, then their several natural -motions are either quite altered, or partly mixt: As for -example; some received things not agreeing with the -natural constitution of the body, the corporeal motions -of the received, and those of the receiver, do dispute or -oppose each other: for the motions of the received, not -willing to change their nature conformable to the desire -of the digestive motions, do resist, and then a War -begins, whereby the body suffers most; for it causes either -a sickness in the stomack, or a pain in the head, or -in the heart, or in the bowels, or the like: Nay, if the -received food gets an absolute victory, it dissolves and -alters oftentimes the whole body, it self remaining entire -and unaltered, as is evident in those that die of surfeits. -But most commonly these strifes and quarrels, if -violent, do alter and dissolve each others forms or natures. -And many times it is not the fault of the Received, -but of the Receiver; as for example, when the -digestive and transforming motions are either irregular, -or weak; for they being too weak, or too few, the -meat or food received is digested onely by halves; and -being irregular, it causes that which we call corruption. -But it may be observed, that the Received food is either -agreeable, or disagreeable, to the Receiver; if agreeable, -then there is a united consent of Parts, to act regularly -and perfectly in digestion; if disagreeable, then -the Received acts to the Ruine, that is, to the alteration -or dissolution of the Nature of the Receiver; but -if it be neutral, that is, neither perfectly agreeable, nor -perfectly disagreeable, but between both, then the receiver, -or rather the digestive Motions of the receiver, -use a double strength to alter and transform the received. -But you may ask me, <i>Madam</i>, what the reason -is, that many things received, after they are dissolved -into small parts, those parts will keep their former colour -and savour? I answer; The cause is, that either -the retentive Motions in the Parts of the received, are -too strong for the digestive and alterative Motions of -the receiver, or perchance, this colour and savour -is so proper to them, as not to be transchanged: but -you must observe, that those digestive, alterative and -transchanging motions, do not act or move all after one -and the same manner; for some do dissolve the natural -figure of the received, some disperse its dissolved parts -into the parts of the body, some place the dispersed -parts fitly and properly for the use, benefit, and consistence -of the body; for there is so much variety in this -one act of digestion, as no man is able to conceive; -and if there be such variety in one Particular natural -action, what variety will there not be in all Nature? -Wherefore, it is not, as I mentioned in the beginning, -either Ferment, or Heat, or any other thing, -that causes digestion; for if all the constitution and -nature of our body was grounded or did depend upon -Ferment, then Brewers and Bakers, and those that -deal with Ferments, would be the best Physicians. But -I would fain know the cause which makes Ferment? -You may say, saltness, and sowreness. But then I -ask, From whence comes saltness and sowreness? You -may say, From the Ferment. But then I shall be -as wise as before. The best way, perhaps, may be to -say, with your <i>Author</i>, that Ferment is a Primitive -Cause, and a beginning or Principle of other things, -and it self proceeds from nothing. But then it is beyond -my imagination, how that can be a Principle -of material things, which it self is nothing; that is, -neither a substance, nor an accident. Good Lord! -what a stir do men make about nothing! I am amazed -to see their strange Fancies and Conceptions -vented for the Truest Reasons: Wherefore I will -return to my simple opinion; and as I cannot conceive -any thing that is beyond Matter, or a Body; -so I believe, according to my reason, that there is -not any part in Nature, be it never so subtil or small, -but is a self-moving substance, or endued with self-motion; -and according to the regularity and irregularity -of these motions, all natural effects are produced, -either perfect, or imperfect; timely births, or untimely -and monstrous births; death, health, and diseases, -good and ill dispositions, natural and extravagant -Appetites and Passions, (I say natural, that is, -according to the nature of their figures;) Sympathy -and Antipathy, Peace and War, Rational and Phantastical -opinions. Nevertheless, all these motions, -whether regular or irregular, are natural; for regularity -and irregularity hath but a respect to particulars, -and to our conceptions, because those motions -which move not after the ordinary, common or usual -way or manner, we call Irregular. But the curiosity -and variety in Nature is unconceiveable by any particular -Creature; and so leaving it, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXX" id="III_XXX">XXX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> says,<a name="FNanchor_1_150" id="FNanchor_1_150"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_150" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> it is an ancient Truth, <i>That -whatsoever things, meats being digested and cast out -by vomit, are of a sowre taste and smell, yea, although -they were seasoned with much sugar.</i> But I do not assent -to this opinion; for I think that some Vomits have -no more taste then pure Water hath. Neither am I of -his mind, That <i>Digestion is hastened by sharpness or -tartness:</i> For do but try it by one simple experiment; -take any kind of flesh-meat, boyl or stew it with Vinegar, -or sowre wine, or with much salt; and you will -find, that it doth require a longer time, or rather more -motions to dissolve, then if you boyl it in fair water, -without such ingredients as are sowre, sharp, or salt; -also if you do but observe, you will find the dregs more -sandy, stony and hard, being drest with much salt, and -sharp wine, or vinegar, then when they are not mixt -with such contracting and fixing Ingredients. Wherefore, -if the Ferment of the stomack hath such a restringent -and contracting quality, certainly digestions will -be but slow and unprofitable; but Nature requires -expulsion as much as attraction, and dilation as much -as contraction, and digestion is a kind of dilation. -Wherefore, in my judgment; contracting tartness -and sharpness doth rather hinder digestion then further -it. Next I perceive, your <i>Author</i> inclines to the -opinion, <i>That Choler is not made by meat</i>:<a name="FNanchor_2_151" id="FNanchor_2_151"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_151" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> But I -would ask him, whether any humor be made of meat, -or whether blood, flesh, &c. are made and nourished -by meat? If they be not, then my answer is, That -we eat to no purpose; but if they be, then Choler is -made so too. But if he says, That some are made, and -some not; then I would ask, what that humor is made -of, that is not made by meat or food received into the -body? But we find that humors, blood, flesh, &c. -will be sometimes more, sometimes less, according either -to feeding, or to digestion, which digestion is a -contribution of food to every several part of the body -for its nourishment; and when there is a decay of those -parts, then it is caused either by fasting, or by irregular -digestion, or by extraordinary evacuation, or -by distempered matter, &c. all which, causes sickness, -paleness, leanness, weakness, and the like. Again: -your <i>Author</i> is against the opinion of the Schools, -<i>That the Gall is a receptacle of superfluous humors and -dregs</i>: for he says, <i>it has rather the constitution of a necessary -and vital bowel, and is the balsom of the liver and -blood.</i> Truly, it may be so, for any thing I know, or -it may be not; for your <i>Author</i> could but guess, not -assuredly know, unless he had been in a man as big as -the Whale in whose belly <i>Jonas</i> was three days, and -had observed the interior parts and motions of every -part for three years time, and yet he might perchance -have been as ignorant at the coming forth, as if -he never had been there; for Natures actions are not -onely curious, but very various; and not onely various, -but very obscure; in so much, as the most ingenious -Artists cannot trace her ways, or imitate her -actions; for Art being but a Creature, can do or know -no more then a Creature; and although she is an ingenious -Creature, which can and hath found out some -things profitable and useful for the life of others, yet -she is but a handmaid to Nature, and not her Mistress; -which your <i>Author</i>, in my opinion, too rashly affirms, -when he says,<a name="FNanchor_3_152" id="FNanchor_3_152"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_152" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> That <i>the Art of Chymistry is not -onely the Chambermaid and emulating Ape, but now and -then the Mistress of Nature</i>: For Art is an effect of -Nature, and to prefer the effect before the cause, is absurd. -But concerning Chymistry, I have spoken in another -place; I'le return to my former Discourse: and -I wonder much why your <i>Author</i> is so opposite to the -Schools, concerning the doctrine of the Gall's being a -receptacle for superfluities and dregs; for I think there -is not any Creature that has not places or receptacles for -superfluous matter, such as we call dregs; for even the -purest and hardest Mineral, as Gold, has its dross, although -in a less proportion then some other Creatures; -nay, I am perswaded, that even Light, which your -<i>Author</i> doth so much worship, may have some superfluous -matter, which may be named dregs; and since -Nature has made parts in all Creatures to receive and -discharge superfluous matter, (which receiving and discharging -is nothing else but a joyning and dividing of -parts to and from parts,) why may not the Gall be as -well for that use as any other part? But I pray mistake -me not, when I say <i>superfluous matter or dregs</i>; for I understand -by it, that which is not useful to the nourishment -or consistence of such or such a Creature; but to -speak properly, there is neither superfluity of matter nor -dregs in Nature. Moreover, your <i>Author</i> mentions -a <i>six-fold digestion</i>, and makes every digestion to be performed -by inbreathing or inspiration; For <i>in the first digestion</i>, -he says, <i>The spleen doth inspire a sowre Ferment -into the Meat: In the second, The Gall doth inspire a ferment, -or fermental blas into the slender entrails: In the -third, The Liver doth inspire a bloody ferment into the -veins of the Mensentery</i>, &c. I answer, first, I am confident -Nature has more ways then to work onely by Inspirations, -not onely in General, but in every Particular. Next, -I believe there are not onely six, but many more digestions -in an animal Creature; for not onely every sort of -food, but every bit that is eaten, may require a several -digestion, and every several part of the body works either -to expel, or preserve, or for both; so that there are -numerous several Motions in every Creature, and many -changes of motions in each particular part; but Nature -is in them all. And so leaving her, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_150" id="Footnote_1_150"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_150"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of a Six-fold digestion.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_151" id="Footnote_2_151"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_151"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> See <i>The passive deceiving of the Schools, -the humorists,</i> c. 1.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_152" id="Footnote_3_152"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_152"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Heat doth not digest efficiently.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXI" id="III_XXXI">XXXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i>, in opposition to the Schools, endeavouring -to prove that there are no humors in an -animal body, except blood, proves many humors -in himself. But I can see no reason, why Nature -should not make several humors, as well as several -Elements, Vegetables, Minerals, Animals, and -other Creatures; and that in several parts of the body, -and many several ways; for to mention but one sort of -other Creatures, <i>viz.</i> Vegetables, they are, as we -see, not onely produced many several ways, but in -many several grounds; either by sowing, setting, or -grafting, either in clayie, limy, sandy, chalky, dry, -or wet grounds: And why may not several humors be -produced as well of other Creatures and parts, as others -are produced of them? for all parts of Nature -are produced one from another, as being all of one and -the same Matter, onely the variation of corporeal motions -makes all the difference and variety between -them, which variety of motions is impossible to be -known by any particular Creature; for Nature can -do more then any Creature can conceive. Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, I should not be of such a mind, as to oppose -the Schools herein so eagerly as your <i>Author</i> -doth; but artificial actions make men to have erroneous -opinions of the actions of Nature, judging them -all according to the rule and measure of Art, when as -Art oft deludes men under the cover of truth, and makes -them many times believe falshood for truth; for Nature -is pleased with variety, and so doth make numerous -absurdities, doubts, opinions, disputations, objections, -and the like. Moreover, your <i>Author</i> is as -much against the radical moisture, as he is against the -four humors; saying, that according to this opinion of -the Schools, a fat belly, through much grease affording -more fuel to the radical moisture, must of necessity live -longer. But this, in my opinion, is onely a wilful -mistake; for I am confident, that the Schools do not understand -radical moisture to be gross, fat radical oyl, but -a thin oylie substance. Neither do they believe radical -heat to be a burning, fiery and consuming heat, but -such a degree of natural heat, as is comfortable, nourishing, -refreshing, and proper for the life of the animal -Creature: Wherefore radical heat and moisture -doth not onely consist in the Grease of the body; for a -lean body may have as much, and some of them more -Radical moisture, then fat bodies. But your <i>Author</i> -instead of this radical moisture, makes a nourishable -moisture, onely, as I suppose, out of a mind to contradict -the Schools; when as I do not perceive, that the -Schools mean by Radical moisture, any other then a -nourishable moisture, and therefore this distinction is -needless. Lastly, he condemns the Schools, for making -an affinity betwixt the bowels and the brain. But -he might as will condemn Politicians, for saying there -is an affinity betwixt Governors and Subjects, or betwixt -command and obedience; but as the actions of -Particulars, even from the meanest in a Commonwealth, -may chance to make a Publick disturbance, so -likewise in the Common-wealth of the body, one single -action in a particular part may cause a disturbance -of the whole Body, nay, a total ruine and dissolution -of the composed; which dissolution is called Death; and -yet these causes are neither Light, nor Blas, nor Gas, -no more then men are shining Suns, or flaming -Torches, or blazing Meteors, or azure Skies. Wherefore -leaving your <i>Author</i> to his contradicting humor, I -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXII" id="III_XXXII">XXXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I do verily believe, with the Schools, the <i>Purging of -the Brain</i>, against your <i>Author</i>;<a name="FNanchor_1_153" id="FNanchor_1_153"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_153" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> For I know no -reason, why all the parts of a man's body should not -stand in need of evacuation and Purging, as well as -some. 'Tis true, if the substance or nourishment received -were all useful, and onely enough for the maintenance, -subsistance and continuance of the Creature, -and no more, then there would be no need of such sort -of evacuation; but I believe the corporeal self-motions -in a body, discharge the superfluous matter out of every -part of the body, if the motions of the superfluous matter -be not too strong, and over-power the motions in -the parts of the body; but some parts do produce more -superfluities then others, by reason their property is more -to dilate, then to contract, and more to attract, then to retain -or fix; which parts are the brain, stomack, bowels, -bladder, gall, and the like: wherefore, as there -is nourishment in all parts of the body, so there are also -excrements in all parts, for there is no nourishment -without excrement. Next your <i>Author</i> says, That -<i>the nourishment of the solid parts is made with the transmutation -of the whole venal blood into nourishment, without -a separation of the pure from the impure.</i> But I pray -give me leave to ask, <i>Madam</i>, whether the solid Parts -are not Instruments for the nourishment of the Venal -blood? Truly, I cannot conceive, how blood should -be nourished, wanting those solid parts, and their particular -motions and imployments. Again: his opinion -is, <i>That the brain is nourished by a few and slender veins; -neither doth a passage or channel appear whereby a moist excrement -may derive, or a vapour enter.</i> And by reason -of the want of such a passage, in another place<a name="FNanchor_2_154" id="FNanchor_2_154"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_154" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> he is -pleased to affirm, <i>That nothing can fume up from the -stomack into the brain</i>, and therefore <i>Wine doth not make -drunk with fuming from the stomach into the head, but the -Winie spirit is immediately snatched into the arteries out of -the stomach without digestion, and so into the head, and there -breeds a confusion.</i> First, I am not of the opinion, that -all nourishment comes from the veins, or from one particular -part of the body, no more do Excrements; neither -do I believe that every passage in the body is visible -to Anatomists, for Natures works are too curious and -intricate for any particular Creature to find them out, -which is the cause that Anatomists and Chymists are so -oft mistaken in natural causes and effects; for certainly, -they sometimes believe great Errors for great Truths. -Next, as for Drunkenness, I believe that many, who -drink much Wine, are drunk before such time as the -Wine spirit can get into the Arteries; but if there be -Pores to the Brain, as it is most probable, the spirit of -Wine may more easily ascend and enter those Pores, -then the Pores of the Arteries, or the Mouth-veins, -and so make a circular journey to the Head. But as for -Excrements, whereof I spake in the beginning, as they -are made several manners or ways, and in several parts -of the body, so they are also discharged several ways -from several parts, and several ways from each particular -part, indeed so many several ways and manners, as -would puzzle the wisest man in the world, nay your <i>Authors -Interior keeper of the Brain</i>, to find them out. -Wherefore, to conclude, he is the best Physician, that -can tell how to discharge superfluity, and to retain useful -nourishments; or to restore by the application of proper -Medicines, decaying parts, or to put in order Irregular -motions; and not those that have Irregular opinions -of Immaterial causes: To which, I leave them, -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_153" id="Footnote_1_153"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_153"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Call'd <i>The Erring Watchman, or -Wandring Keeper</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_154" id="Footnote_2_154"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_154"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> call'd <i>The Spirit of Life</i>.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXIII" id="III_XXXIII">XXXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I do not approve of your <i>Authors</i> Doctrine, forbidding -Phlebotomy or blood-letting in Fevers, opposite -to the received Practice of the Schools; his -reason is, that he believes there can be no corruption -in the blood. <i>Corrupted blood</i>, says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_155" id="FNanchor_1_155"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_155" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>cannot be in the -veins, neither doth a state of ill juice consist in the veins; for -Gangrenes do teach, that nothing of Putrified matter can -long persist without a further contagion of it self.</i> Also he -says, <i>That the blood of the Veins is no otherwise distinguished -by its several colours and signs, then as wine is -troubled when the vine flourisheth.</i> To which I answer, -first, That I can see no reason why there should not be -as well corrupt blood, or an ill state of juice in the -veins, as ill humors in the body. Perchance he -will say, There is no corruption in the body. But -Ulcers do teach the contrary. He may reply, Ulcers -are not parts of the body. I answer, 'Tis true; -but yet they are evil Inhabitants in the body, and the -like may be in the Veins. But surely some men may -have corrupted parts of their bodies, and yet live a -great while; witness Ulcers in the Lungs, and other -parts. But your <i>Author</i> may say, When a part of the -body is corrupted, it is no longer an animal Part. I -grant it: but yet, as I said, that transformed part may -remain in the body some time without destruction of -the whole body; and so likewise, when some of the -blood, is transchanged from being blood, so as not to -be capable to be reduced again, it may nevertheless remain -in the veins without definition of the veins, or of -the whole body: Neither do I conceive any reason, -why corrupt blood should Gangrene in the veins, and -infect the adjoyning parts more then corrupted lungs -do. Next, as for the comparison of the various colours -and signs of the blood, with Wine being troubled -when the Vine is flourishing; I answer, That it doth -not prove any thing; for we speak of such colours, as -are signs of corrupted, and not such as are signs of troubled -blood: Besides, it is an unlike comparison; for -though Wine may become thick by much fermentation, -yet it doth not turn into water, as blood in some sick -and diseased persons will do. But corrupted blood may -be, not onely in the veins of sick, but also of healthy persons; -and the story says, that <i>Seneca</i>, when his veins -were cut, they would not bleed, although in a hot -Bath, by reason that which was in the veins, was rather -like a white jelly, then blood, and yet he was healthy, -though old; which proves, that it is not necessary for -the blood to be so pure and fluid as your <i>Author</i> will -have it. The truth is, the more fluid the blood is, the -weaker it is; like balsam, the more gummy it is, the -stronger it is: but veins, which are the mouth, to receive -or suck in juices, as also the stomack which digests -the meat that after is turned into blood, may -be defective either through weakness, superfluity, obstruction, -corruption, or evil and hurtful diet, or -through the disorders of other particular parts, which -may disturb all the parts in general, as skilful Physicians -have observed, and therefore apply remedies accordingly; -for if the defect proceeds from weakness, they -give strengthening remedies; if from superfluities, they -give evacuating remedies; if from evil diets, they prescribe -such a course of diet as shall be beneficial, and conducing -for the restoring of health to the whole body. -But your <i>Author</i>, as I perceive, believes the blood to -be the chief vital part of the body; which surely it is -not: for if it were, the least disturbance of the blood -would endanger the life of the whole body, and the -least diminution would cause a total dissolution of that -animal Creature which has blood: Not but that blood -is as necessary as breath for respiration, and food for -nourishment of the body; but too much blood is as -dangerous to the life of the animal body, as too great a -piece of food, which cannot be swallowed down, but -doth stick in the throat, and stop the breath, or so much -quantity as cannot be digested, for too great a fulness or -abounding makes a stoppage of the blood, or which is -worse, causes the veins to break, and an evil digestion, -makes a corruption, or at least such disorder as to -indanger the whole animal Figure. But some veins -breed more blood, and some less, and some better, and -some worse blood, some hotter, and some colder, some -grosser, and some purer, some thicker, and some thinner; -and some veins breed rather an evil juice or corrupt -matter then pure blood; the truth is, blood is bred somewhat -after the manner of Excrements, for the veins are -somewhat like the guts, wherein the excrements are digested. -But you will say, A man may live without excrements, -but not without blood. I answer: a man -can live no more without excrements and excremental -humors, then he can without blood: but yet I am not -of your <i>Authors</i> mind, that bleeding and purging are -destructive; for superfluities are as dangerous as scarcities, -nay more; like as an house filled with rubbish is -in more danger to sink or fall, then that which is empty; -and when a house is on fire, it is wisdom to take out -the Moveables, but a folly to let them increase the flame. -But your <i>Author</i> says, Blood-letting takes not onely -away the bad, but also the good blood, by which it diminishes -and impairs much the strength of the body. I -will answer by way of question, Whether in War men -would not venture the loss of some few friends, to gain -the victory, or save the whole body of the Army: or -whether the destroying of the enemies Army be not -more advantageous, then the loss of some few friends? -For although some good blood may issue out with the -bad, yet the veins have more time, room, and some -more power to get friendly juices from the several parts -of the body, which will be more obedient, trusty, and -true to the life and service of the whole body. But neither -Fevers, nor any other distempers, will be more afraid -of your <i>Authors</i> words, Stones, Spirits, as also -Rings, Beads, Bracelets, and the like toys, fitter for -Children to play withal, then for Physicians to use; then -an Army of men will be of their enemies Colours, Ensigns, -Feathers, Scarfs, and the like; knowing it must -be Swords, Pistols, Guns, Powder and Bullets, that -must do the business to destroy the enemy, and to gain -the victory: Wherefore in Diseases it must be Bleeding, -Purging, Vomiting, using of Clysters, and -the like, if any good shall be done. 'Tis true, they -must well be ordered, otherwise they will do more hurt -then good; for Diseases are like Enemies, which sometimes -take away our Armes for their own uses. But -your <i>Author</i> says again, <i>That the Matter of a Fever -floats not in the veins, nor sits nigh the heart.</i> I answer: -There are several sorts of Fevers; for all Fevers are not -produced after one and the same manner, or from -one and the same cause, as is very well known to wise -and experienced Physicians; but although some Fevers -are not in the blood, yet that doth not prove, that -the blood is never in a Fever; for sometimes the blood -is in a Fever, and not the solid parts; and sometimes -the fluid and moveable humors, and not the blood, or -solid parts; and sometimes the solid parts, and not -the blood, nor the liquid and moveable humors; and -sometimes they are all in a Fever; and sometimes onely -the radical parts, and neither the blood, humors, -nor solid parts: and this last kind of Fever, which is a -hectick Fever, in my opinion, is incureable; but the -others may be cureable, if there be not too many varieties -of distempers, or irregular motions. And as -for a Fever in the solid parts, Letting of blood, and -taking away the humor, may cure it; for the veins -being empty, suck the heat out of the solid parts, which -solid parts cannot draw out a distempered heat in the -veins, and the opening of the veins gives vent to some -of the interior heat to issue forth: Wherefore it is very -requisite, that in all sorts of Fevers, except Hectick-Fevers, -blood-letting should be used, not onely once, -but often; for 'tis better to live with a little blood, and -a little strength, which will soon be recovered, then -to die with too much, or too hot and distempered -blood. Also Purging, but especially Vomiting is -very good; for if the humors be in a Feaver, they -may infect the vital parts, as also the blood; but if they -be not in a Fever, yet the solid parts or blood may do -the same, and so make the contagion greater; for the -humors are as the moveables in a house, which ought -to be cast out if either they or the house should be on -fire; and if a disorder proceeds from the error of a particular -part, then care must be taken to rectifie that -part for the health of the whole: Wherefore Physicians -use in some cases Blood-letting, in some Purging, in -some Vomiting, in some Bathing, in some Sweating, in -some Cordials, especially after much evacuation, in -some they prescribe a good diet, and in some they mix -and prescribe partly one and partly the other, and in -some cases they are forced to use all these remedies; for -though great evacuations may cause weakness, yet -they often save the life; and there is no Patient, but had -rather lose some strength, then life; for life can gather -strength again; but all strong men are not always long -lived, nor all long-lived men very strong; for many -that are but weak, will live to a very old age. Lastly, -concerning what your <i>Author</i> says, that there is but one -Choler and Phlegme in Nature; I answer, That is -more then he knows: for all that is in Nature, is not -nor cannot be known by any Particular Creature; and -he might say, as well, the same of particular Metals, as -that there is but one sort of Gold or Silver, when as there -is great difference in the weight, purity, colour, and -gloss, of several parts of Gold and Silver; Neither is -all Gold found in one place; but some is found in Rocks, -some in Sand, some in Mines, some in Stones; and so -Silver, some is found in the bowels of the Earth, some in -the veins of Stones, and some in other Metals, as Lead, -and Iron, and some in Coals. And the like may be -said of Choler and Phlegme; for they may be several in -several places or parts of the body, and be of different -colours, tastes, odours, and degrees of heat or cold, -thinness or thickness, or the like; for though there is -but one Matter in Nature, yet this onely Matter by its -several actions or motions changes into several figures, -and so makes several sorts of Creatures, and different -particulars in every sort. And thus, <i>Madam</i>, I have -delivered unto you my opinion concerning the cure of -Fevers by Blood-letting: Which I submit to the correction -of your better judgment, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_155" id="Footnote_1_155"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_155"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In his Treatise of Fevers, <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXIV" id="III_XXXIV">XXXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> is not onely against Phlebotomy or -Blood-letting, but against all Purging Medicines, -which he condemns to <i>carry a hidden poyson -in them, and to be a cruel and stupid invention.</i> But certainly -he shall not have my assent; for if they be Poyson, -they are a very beneficial Poyson; and Physical Purgations, -in my opinion, are very necessary and profitable -for the prolonging of life, and taking away of diseases, -provided they be proper for those diseases in which they -are used; and so is Phlebotomy, Vomits, and the like: -but Medicines are often wrong applyed, and many -times the disease is so various, that it is as hard for a Physician -to hit right with several Medicines, as for a Gunner -or Shooter to kill with Powder and small Shot a Bird -flying in the Air; not that it is not possible to be done, -but it is not ordinary, or frequent: neither doth the -fault onely lie in the Gun, Powder, or Shot, but in -the swiftness of the flight of the Bird, or in the various -motion of the air, or in a hidden wind, or mist, or the -like; for the same Gunner may perhaps easily kill a Bird -sitting in a bush, or hopping upon the ground. The -like may be said of Diseases, Physicians, and Medicines; -for some diseases have such hidden alterations, by -the sudden changes of motions, that a wise Physician will -not, nor cannot venture to apply so many several medicines -so suddenly as the alteration requires; and shall -therefore Physicians be condemned? and not onely -condemned for what cannot be helped by reason of the -variety of irregular motions, but what cannot be helped -in Nature? For some diseases are so deadly, as no art can -cure them, when as otherwise Physicians with good -and proper medicines, have, and do as yet rescue more -people from death, then the Laws do from ruine. Nay, -I have known many that have been great enemies to -Physick, die in the flower of their age, when as others -which used themselves to Physick, have lived a very -long time. But you may say, Country-people and -Labourers, take little or no Physick, and yet grow -most commonly old, whereas on the contrary, Great -and rich Persons take much Physick, and do not live so -long as the common sort of men doth. I answer: It is -to be observed, first, that there are more Commons, -then Nobles, or Great and rich persons; and there is -not so much notice taken of the death of a mean, as -of a noble, great, or rich person; so that for want of -information or knowledg, one may easily be deceived -in the number of each sort of persons. Next, the Vulgar -sort use laborious exercises, and spare diet; when -as noble and rich persons are most commonly lazie and -luxurious, which breeds superfluities of humors, and -these again breed many distempers: For example, you -shall find few poor men troubled with the Gout, Stone, -Pox, and the like diseases, nor their Children with -Rickets; for all this cometh by luxury, and no doubt -but all other diseases are sooner bred with luxury, then -temperance; but whatsoever is superfluous, may, if not -be taken away, yet mediated with lenitive and laxative -medicines. But as for Physicians, surely never age -knew any better, in my opinion, then this present, and -yet most of them follow the rules of the Schools, which -are such as have been grounded upon Reason, Practice, -and Experience, for many ages: Wherefore those that -will wander from the Schools, and follow new and unknown -ways, are, in my opinion, not Orthodoxes, -but Hereticks in the Art of Physick. But to return to -your <i>Author</i>, give me leave, <i>Madam</i>, to consider what his -opinions are concerning the Purging of Choler; <i>Come -on</i>, says he to the Schools,<a name="FNanchor_1_156" id="FNanchor_1_156"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_156" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>Why doth that, your Choler -following with so swift an efflux, stink so horribly, -which but for one quarter of an hour before did not stink?</i> -To which it may be answered, That though humors -may not stink in themselves, yet the excrements mixt -with the humors may stink; also the very passing thorow -the excrements will cause a strong savour. But -your <i>Author</i> thinks, That <i>by passing through so suddenly, -the humors cannot borrow such a smell of stinking dung from -the Intestines.</i> Truly, 'tis easily said, but hardly proved, -and the contrary is manifest by putting clear, pure -water into a stinking vessel, which straightway is corrupted -with an ill smell. He talks also of <i>Vitriol dissolved in -Wine, which if it be taken, presently provokes vomit; but -if after drinking it, any one shall drink thereupon a draught -of Ale or Beer, or Water, &c. he indeed shall suffer many -stools, yet wholly without stink.</i> I answer: This expresses -Vitriol to be more poysonous, by taking away -the natural savour of the bowels, then Scammony, Coloquintida, -Manna, Cassia, Sena, Rhubarb, &c. -to all which your <i>Author</i> is a great enemy; and it is -well known to experienced Physicians, that Medicines -prepared by the art of fire are more poysonous and dangerous -then natural drugs; nay, I dare say, that many -Chymical Medicines, which are thought to be Cordials, -and have been given to Patients for that purpose, -have proved more poysonous then any Purging Physick. -Again your <i>Author</i> says, <i>It is worthy of Lamentation, -that Physicians would have loosening things draw -out one humor, and not another, by selection or choyce.</i> My -answer is, That natural drugs and simples are as wise in -their several operations, as Chymists in their artificial -distillations, extractions, sublimations, and the like; -but it has long been observed by Physicians, that one -simple will work more upon one part of the body, then -upon another; the like may be said of humors. But -give me leave to tell you, <i>Madam</i>, that if your <i>Author</i> -believes magnetick or attractive cures (as he doth, and -in whose behalf he makes very long discourses) he -doth in this opinion contradict himself. He may say, -perhaps, There is no such thing as what Physicians -name humors. But grant there be none, yet he cannot -deny that there are offensive juices, or moveable substances -made by evil, as irregular digestions, which -may be troublesom and hurtful to the nature of the body. -Or perchance he will say, There are such humors, -but they are beneficial and not offensive to the -nature of the body. I answer: Then he must make -an agreement with every part of the body, not to make -more of these humors then is useful for the body. Also he -mentions some few that took Purging Physick, and died. -Truly so they might have done without taking it: but -he doth not tell, how many have died for want of proper -and timely Purges. In truth, <i>Madam</i>, 'tis an easie -thing to find fault, but not so easie to mend it. And as -for what he speaks of the weighing of those humors and -excrements, which by purging were brought out of -some Princes body, and how much by the Schools rules -remained, and of the place which should maintain the -remainder; I onely say this, that all the several sorts of -juices, humors, or moveable substances in a body, do -not lie in one place, but are dispersed, and spread all -about and in several parts and places in the body; so -that the several Laxative medicines do but draw them -together, or open several parts, that they may have -freedom to travel with their chief Commanders, which -are the Purging medicines. But your <i>Author</i> says, -the Loadstone doth not draw rust. And I say, no -more do Purging drugs draw out pure Matter: for -it may be as natural for such medicines to draw or work -onely upon superfluities, that is, corrupted, or evil-affected -humors, juices or moveable substances, as for the -Loadstone to draw Iron; and so it may be the property -of Purges to draw onely the rust of the body, and not -the pure metal, which are good humors. But few do -consider or observe sufficiently the variety of Natures -actions, and the motions of particular natural Creatures, -which is the cause they have no better success in their -cures. And so leaving them to a more diligent inquisition -and search into Nature, and her actions, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_156" id="Footnote_1_156"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_156"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In his Treatise of Fevers, <i>c.</i> 5.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXV" id="III_XXXV">XXXV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I find your <i>Author</i> to be as great an enemy to Issues, -Cauteries, Clysters, and the like, as he is to Blood-letting -and Purging; especially to Issues, which he -counts to be blasphemous against the Creator, and -blames much the Schools for prescribing them. But -concerning Blood-letting and Purging, I have declared -my opinion in my former Letters; and if you desire -my judgment of Clysters and Issues, I must needs tell -you, that it is well known these many ages, that in such -diseases which lie in the guts, and cause pain in the head, -and stop the ureteres, Clysters have been very beneficial, -but wise Physicians do not prescribe them, unless -upon necessity: As for example; if the disease in the -Guts proceed from cold or wind, they prescribe a Sack-Clyster, -with oyl of Walnuts; and if the disease in the -guts proceed from a sharp or bitter humor, then they -prescribe Milk, or Posset, sweetned with Sugar: the -same if the guts be too full of excrements or slime. But -in case of diseases in the head or stomack, they prescribe -attractive Clysters, to wit, such as draw down from the -upper into the lower parts, wherein the Physical drugs -are; and if the guts be too dry, or dryer then their nature -requires, they prescribe moistening Clysters, such -as have not onely wetting, but slimy qualities. And -surely Clysters properly and timely applyed, are a safe, -speedy, easie and profitable medicine, and far more -safe then Chymical Salts, Tartars, Spirits, or the like. -Next concerning Issues and Cauteries, your <i>Author</i>, -I say, is so much against them, as he counts them a blasphemy; -for says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_157" id="FNanchor_1_157"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_157" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>I have beheld always an implicite -blasphemy in a Cautery, whereby they openly accuse the Creator -of insufficiency in framing the emunctories; for I have -bidden above a thousand Issues to be filled up with flesh.</i> -Also, <i>That which God hath made whole and entire, that -it might be very good, seems to the Schools, that it should be -better if it be kept wounded.</i> Truly, <i>Madam</i>, in my -opinion, it is no blasphemy at all, neither directly nor -indirectly, to make Issues, but a meer superstition to believe -the contrary, <i>viz.</i> that they are blasphemy, and -a great folly not to make them when need requires it to -the preservation of ones health. <i>God has made our body -whole and intire</i>, says your <i>Author</i>: by which he will -prove that no holes must be made in the body to let out -excrementious matter, and therefore he thinks that body -to be whole and intire which is without an Issue, -when as yet our bodies have numerous issues, which are -the pores of the skin, to let out sweat; and therefore if -he counts that body not to be whole and intire that has -Issues, then no humane body is intire. Certainly, no -Artificial Issue will make the body maimed, but it will -nevertheless continue whole and intire although it has -Issues. He says it is Blasphemy; But how will he -prove it? Surely not by the Scripture; and if not by -the Scripture, then it is a blasphemy according to his -own brain and fancy. 'Tis true, God gave no express -Command to make Issues; but according to your <i>Author</i>, -God did never create Diseases, and so there was -no need either to make such Issues in bodies as to let out -distempered Matter, or to give any command for them; -but we might as well say, we must not use any Physick, -because it is not so natural to man as food, and serves -not for the nourishment of the body, but onely to keep -off, or drive out diseases: Also no stone must be cut, -but man must rather indure torment and death. But -setting aside this superstitious doctrine of your <i>Author</i>, -it is evident enough, and needs no proof, that Cancers, -Fistulas, Wenns, Eating-evils, Madness, Fevers, -Consumptions, Rheumes, Pleurisies, and numerous -other diseases, are not better cured then by Issues, or -making of wounds, either by Lancets, Pen-knifes, -Scissers, Rasors, Corrosives, Causticks, Leeches, or the -like. And although your <i>Author</i> says, That <i>that Matter -which proceeds from, or out of an Issue, is made in the lips -of the wound, and not in the body; for it cannot possibly -drain or draw out any moisture, either from within or -between the skin and the flesh, having no passages</i>: Yet if -this were so, how come Fistulas, Cancers, and the -like diseases, to have passages from within the body -to the exterior parts, so, as to make a wound, out -of which much sharp and salt humor issues? which humor -certainly is not made in the lips of the wound, but -in the body: Also whence comes the humor that makes -the Gout? For though the swelling and inflammation -will sometimes appear exteriously, yet after some time -those tumors and humors retire back into the body from -whence they did flow; but he might as well say that -Pit-falls or Sluces do not drain Land from a superfluity -of Water, as that Issues do not drain the body of superfluous -humors. Wherefore I am absolutely of opinion, -that the Practice of the Schools is the best and -wisest Practice, as well in making Issues, letting blood, -Purging by Siege or Vomits, as any other means used -by them; for by Issues I have seen many cured, when -no other medicines would do any good with them; and -letting blood, I am confident, hath rescued more lives, -then the Universal Medicine, could Chymists find it -out, perchance would do. So also Clysters and Vomits, -skilfully applied, have done great benefits to the -life of men; for every part and member hath its peculiar -way to be purged and cleansed; for example, Clysters -principally cleanse the Guts, Purges the Stomack, -Vomits the Chest, Sneezing the Head, Bleeding the -Veins, and Issues drain the whole body of naughty humors: -All which remedies, properly and timely used, -keep the body from being choak'd with superfluities. -There are several other ways of cures besides for several -diseases, but I leave those to learned and skilful Physicians, -who know best how and when to use them to -the benefit and health of their Patients, although -your <i>Author</i> finds much fault with them, and blames -them for suffering men to die miserably; but God has -given power to Nature to make certain dissolutions, although -uncertain diseases, and uncertain remedies. -Neither hath she in her power to give Immortal Life -to particular Creatures, for this belongs to God alone, -and therefore no Universal Medicine will keep out -death, or prolong life further then its thread is spun, -which I doubt is but a Chymæra, and an impossible -thing, by reason there are not onely so many different -varieties in several diseases, but in one and the same -disease, as no Universal remedy would do any good. -But your <i>Author</i> is much pleased with Paradoxes, and -Paradoxes are not certain Truths: Wherefore it is -better, in my judgment, to follow the old approved -and practised way of the Schools, grounded upon Experience -and Reason, then his Paradoxical Opinions. -To which Schools, as your <i>Author</i> is a great Enemy, so -I am a great Friend, as well as,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_157" id="Footnote_1_157"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_157"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of Cauteries.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXVI" id="III_XXXVI">XXXVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I approve well of your <i>Authors</i> opinion,<a name="FNanchor_1_158" id="FNanchor_1_158"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_158" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> That <i>Drink -ought not to be forbidden in Fevers</i>; but yet I would -not allow so much as to drown and oppress the Patients -life, but onely so much as to refresh and moisten -him; and therefore the best way is to drink little and -often. But as for Wine, which your <i>Author</i> commends -in Fevers, I am utterly against it, unless the Fever -proceed from a cold or crude cause, otherwise cooling -Ptisans are most beneficial to those that are sick of a -continual Fever, which for the most part is a general -Fever throughout the whole body, one part infecting -the other, until they be all infected, like as in the Plague. -And to let you know the proof of it; when I was once -sick beyond the Seas, I sent for a Doctor of Physick -who was an Irish-man: and hearing of some that knew -him, and his practice, that he was not successful in his -Cures, but that his Patients most commonly died, I -asked him what he used to prescribe in such or such diseases? -where amongst the rest, as I remember, he told -me, That he allowed his Patients to drink Wine in a -Fever. I thought he was in a great error, and told -him my opinion, that though Wine might be profitable, -perhaps, to some few, yet for the most part it was -very hurtful and destructive, alledging another famous -Physician in <i>France</i>, Dr. <i>Davison</i>, who used in continual -Fevers, to prescribe onely cooling Ptisan, made -of a little Barley, and a great quantity of Water, so thin -as the Barley was hardly perceived, and a spoonfull of -syrup of Limmon put into a quart of the said Ptisan; -but in case of a Flux, he ordered some few seeds of -Pomegranats to be put into it, and this cold Ptisan was -to be the Patients onely drink: Besides, once in Twenty -four hours he prescribed a couple of potched Eggs, with -a little Verjuice, and to let the Patient blood, if he was -dry and hot; I mean dry exteriously, as from sweat; -and that either often or seldom, according as occasion -was found: Also he prescribed two grains of Laudanum -every night, but neither to give the Patient meat -nor drink two hours before and after: Which advice -and Practice of the mentioned Physician concerning -Fevers, with several others, I declared to this Irish -Doctor, and he observing this rule, cured many, and -so recovered his lost esteem and repute. But your <i>Author</i> -being all for Wine, and against cooling drinks, or -Julips, in hot Fevers, says, <i>That cooling means are more -like to death, to cessation from motion, and to defect; but -heat from moderate Wine is a mean like unto life.</i> To -which I answer, first, That cold, or cooling things, -are as active as hot or heating things; neither is death -more cold then hot, nor life more hot then cold; for -we see that Frost is as active and strong as burning heat; -and Water, Air, and Earth, are as full of life, as Fire; -and Vegetables, Minerals, and Elements, have life as -well as Animals: But we, feeling a Man's flesh cold -when he is dissolving from an Animal, think death is -cold; and seeing he was hot before the same alteration, -say, Life is hot: Also finding an animal, when it is dissolving, -to be without external local Motion, we say it -is dead; and when it hath as yet this local motion -before its alteration, we call it alive; which certainly -is not proper. Next I say, that a wise Man when -his house is fired, will fling or squirt water upon it, -to quench it, and take out all moveables lest they -should increase the flame; likewise he will make vent -for the flame to issue forth. But perchance your -<i>Author</i> may say, that Fevers are not hot. Truly, -in my opinion, he might say as well that Fire is -cold. Again, he may say, That although the effect -be hot, yet the cause is cold. I answer: That -in some diseases, the effects become so firmly rooted, -and so powerfull, that they must be more look'd -upon then the cause: for such variety there is in -Nature, that oftentimes, that which was now an -effect, turns to be a cause, and again a cause an effect: -For example; A cold cause often produces a -hot effect, and this hot effect becomes again a cause -of a cold effect: Which variation is not onely a -trouble, but a great obstruction to wise Physicians; -for Nature hath more varieties in diseases, then -Physicians have remedies, And as for drink, if Fevers -be neither hot, nor dry, nor require drink for -want of moisture; then I see no reason why drink -should be urged, and those Physicians blamed that -forbid it; for if thirst proceed from an evil digestion, -drink will rather weaken the stomack; for -heat and driness draw soon away the drink in the -stomack, and putting much into a weak stomack -doth rather hurt then good. But if necessity require -it, then I approve rather of raw and crude -Water, then of hot inflaming Wine. And so taking -my leave, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_158" id="Footnote_1_158"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_158"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of Fevers, <i>Ch.</i> 12.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXVII" id="III_XXXVII">XXXVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In your <i>Authors</i> Treatise of Fevers, I find one -Chapter<a name="FNanchor_1_159" id="FNanchor_1_159"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_159" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> whose Inscription is, <i>A Perfect Curing of -all Fevers</i>, wherein he declares the secrets of the -Cures of Fevers, consisting all in Chymical Medicines. -But considering, that if all Fevers could be cured -by such Medicines, then all Physicians would strive -to obtain them; I can hardly believe (by your <i>Authors</i> -favour) that any such perfect curing of all Fevers -can be effected, but that your <i>Authors</i> prescriptions, if -they should come to the tryal, might fail as well as any -other. Likewise he mentions a Medicine of <i>Paracelsus</i>, -Named <i>Diaceltesson</i>, or the <i>Coraline Secret</i>; which, -he says, cures radically the Gout no less then Fevers: -Which if so, I wonder why so many Great, Noble -and Rich Persons, groan so much under the pains of the -Gout; certainly it is not for want of cost to have them -prepared, nor for want of an ingenious and experienced -Chymist; for this age doth not want skilful workmen in -that Art, nor worthy and wise Physicians, which if -they knew such soveraign medicines, would soon apply -them to their Patients; but I suppose that they -finding their effects to be less then the cost and labour -bestowed upon them, forbear to use them. Moreover, -he mentions<a name="FNanchor_2_160" id="FNanchor_2_160"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_160" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> another remedy for most diseases, -by him call'd <i>Driff</i>, prepared also by the Art of -Chymistry; but I believe all those remedies will -not so often cure, as fail of cure, like as the Sympathetical -Powder; for if there were such soveraign -medicines that did never fail of a successful effect, certainly -men being curious, inquisitive, and searching, -would never leave till they had found them out. Also -amongst Vegetables, the herb <i>Chameleon</i> and <i>Arsmart</i> -are in great request with your <i>Author</i>; For, says he, -<i>they by their touching alone, do presently take away cruel -diseases, or at leastwise ease them.</i> Which if so, I wonder -that there is not more use made of them, and they -held in greater esteem then they are; Also that your -<i>Author</i> doth not declare the vertue of them, and the -manner and way how, and in what diseases to use -them, for the benefit of his neighbour, to which end, -he says, all his labours and actions are directed? But -again, your <i>Author</i> confirms, as an Eye-witness, <i>That -the bone of the arm of a Toad presently has taken away -the Tooth-ach at the first co-touching.</i> Which remedy, if -it was constant, few, in my opinion, would suffer such -cruel pains, and cause their teeth to be drawn out, especially -if sound. Likewise of the mineral <i>Electrum -or Amber</i> of <i>Paracelsus</i>, he affirms<a name="FNanchor_3_161" id="FNanchor_3_161"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_161" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> to have seen, that -<i>hung about the neck, it has freed those that were persecuted -by unclean spirits</i>, and that many simples have -done the like effects; but surely, <i>Madam</i>, I cannot be -perswaded that the Devil should be put away so easily; -for he being a Spirit, will not be chased by corporeal -means, but by spiritual, which is Faith, and Prayer; -and the cure of dispossessing the Devil belongs to Divines, -and not to Natural Philosophers or Physicians. -But though exterior remedies, as Amulets, Pomanders, -and the like, may perform sometimes such effects -as to cure or preserve from some diseases, yet they are -not ordinary and constant, but meerly by chance. But -there are more false remedies then true ones, and if one -remedy chance to work successfully with one distempered -person, it may fail of its success applyed to others -in the same kind of distemper; nay, it may cure perhaps -one and the same person of a distemper once, and in the -return of the same disease effect little or nothing; witness -those remedies that are applyed in Agues, Tooth-aches, -and the like, especially Amulets; for one -and the same disease in several persons, or in one and -the same person at several times, may vary and change -so often, and proceed from so different causes, and be -of so different tempers, and have such different motions, -as one and the same medicine can do no good: And -what would the skill of Physicians be, if one remedy -should cure all diseases? Why should they take so -much pains in studying the various causes, motions, and -tempers of diseases, if one medicine had a general power -over all? Nay, for what use should God have created -such a number of different simples, Vegetables, and -Minerals, if one could do all the business? Lastly, -your <i>Author</i> rehearses<a name="FNanchor_4_162" id="FNanchor_4_162"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_162" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> some strange examples of Child-bearing -Women, who having seen terrible and cruel -sights, as Executions of Malefactors, and dismembring -of their bodies, have brought forth monstrous births, -without heads, hands, arms, leggs, &c. according to the -objects they had seen. I must confess, <i>Madam</i>, that all -Creatures are not always formed perfect; for Nature -works irregularly sometimes, wherefore a Child may -be born defective in some member or other, or have -double members instead of one, and so may other animal -Creatures; but this is nevertheless natural, although -irregular to us: but to have a Child born perfect in the -womb, and the lost member to be taken off there, and -so brought forth defective, as your <i>Author</i> mentions, -cannot enter my belief; neither can your <i>Author</i> -himself give any reason, but he makes onely a bare relation -of it; for certainly, if it was true, that the member -was chopt, rent or pluckt off from the whole body of -the Child, it could not have been done without a violent -shock or motion of the Mother, which I am confident -would never have been able to endure it; for such a -great alteration in her body, would of necessity, besides -the death of the Child, have caused a total dissolution of -her own animal parts, by altering the natural animal -motions: But, as I said above, those births are caused -by irregular motions, and are not frequent and ordinary; -for if upon every strange sight, or cruel object, a Child-bearing-woman -should produce such effects, Monsters -would be more frequent then they are. In short, Nature -loves variety, and this is the cause of all strange and -unusual natural effects; and so leaving Nature to her -will and pleasure, my onely delight and pleasure is to be,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>[Your] faithful Friend, and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_159" id="Footnote_1_159"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_159"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 14.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_160" id="Footnote_2_160"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_160"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> In the <i>Ch.</i> named <i>Butler</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_161" id="Footnote_3_161"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_161"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Ch. Of the manner of entrance of things darted -into the body.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_162" id="Footnote_4_162"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_162"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of things injected into the body.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXVIII" id="III_XXXVIII">XXXVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> reproving the Schools, that they -forbid Salt to some diseased persons, as pernicious -to their health: <i>Good God</i>, says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_163" id="FNanchor_1_163"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_163" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>how unsavoury -are the Schools, and how unsavoury do they bid us to -be!</i> But I suppose the Schools do not absolutely forbid -all diseased persons to abstein from salt, but onely -not to use it excessively, or too frequently; for experience -proves, that salt meats have not onely increased, -but caused diseases, as the Stone, the Gout, Sciatica, -Fistula's, Cancers, sore Eyes, sore Throats, -and the like: I do not say, that those diseases are always -bred with the excess of salt diets; for diseases of -one and the same kind, may be bred variously; but -this hath been observed, that whosoever is affected -with such diseases, shall after a salt meal find himself -in more pain then before; wherefore a constant or -common salt diet cannot but be hurtful. Neither are -those persons that feed much on salt meats, or use strong -drinks, take number for number, so healthful or long-lived, -as those that are temperate and abstaining. Next, -your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_2_164" id="FNanchor_2_164"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_164" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> bewails <i>The shameful simplicity of those, -that give their Patients Leaf-Gold, Pearls, and bruised -or powder'd pretious Stones, as Cordials, in fainting fits, -and other distempers: For</i>, says he, <i>they may be dissolved, -but not altered; wherefore they cannot produce any -powerful effect to the health of the Patient.</i> Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, I am not of his mind; for were it that those -remedies or cordials could not be transchanged, yet -their vertues may nevertheless be very beneficial to the -sick: For example; a man that is assaulted by enemies, -or by chance is fallen into a deep Pit, or is ready to be -strangled, and in all not able to help himself, yet by -the help of another man, may be rescued and freed -from his danger, and from death, using such means -as are able to release him, which either by drawing his -Sword against his enemies, or by throwing a rope down -into the Pit, and haling him out, or by cutting the -rope by which he hung, may save him, and yet neither -the man, nor any of his Instruments, as Sword, Rope, -Knife, and the like, need to be transchanged. The -like may be said of the aforementioned medicines or remedies; -which if they be not transchangeable, yet -they may nevertheless do such operations, as by their -natural active qualities and proprieties to over-power the -irregular motions in the natural parts of the body of the -Patient; for many diseases proceed more from irregular -motions then irregular parts: and although there is no -motion without matter, yet one and the same matter -may have divers and various changes of motions, and -moving parts will either oppose or assist each other -without transchanging. And truly, <i>Madam</i>, I wonder -that your <i>Author</i> doth condemn such Cordials made -of Leaf-gold, Pearls, powdered precious Stones, or -the like, and yet verily believe, that Amber, Saphires, -Emeraulds, Beads, Bracelets, &c. outwardly applied -or worn, can cure more then when inwardly taken; -surely, if this be so, they cure more by Faith, then by -Reason. But it seems your <i>Author</i> regulates the actions -of Nature to the artificial actions of his Furnace, which -although sometimes they produce wonderful effects, yet -not such as Nature doth; for if they cure one, they -commonly kill ten; nay, the best of their Medicine is so -dangerous, as it ought not to be applied but in desperate -cases: Wherefore Wise Physicians must needs be -Provident and Cautious when they use them. And so -leaving them, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_163" id="Footnote_1_163"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_163"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of the disease of the Stone, <i>c.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_164" id="Footnote_2_164"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_164"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Of the reason or consideration of diet.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XXXIX" id="III_XXXIX">XXXIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I will not dispute your <i>Authors</i> opinion concerning -the Plague of Men, which he says,<a name="FNanchor_1_165" id="FNanchor_1_165"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_165" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>doth not infect -Beasts, neither doth the plague of Beasts infect Men</i>; -but rather believe it to be so: for I have observed that -Beasts infect onely each other, to wit, those of their own -kind, as Men do infect other Men. For example: the -Plague amongst Horses continues in their own kind, and -so doth the Plague amongst Sheep; and for any thing -we know, there may be a plague amongst Vegetables, -as well as amongst Animals, and they may not onely -infect each other but also those Animals that do feed -on those infectious Vegetables: so that Infections may -be caused several ways; either by inbreathing and attracting -or sucking in the Poyson of the Plague, or by eating -and converting it into the substance of the body; for -some kinds of poyson are so powerful, as to work onely -by way of inbreathing. Also some sorts of Air may be -full of infection, and infect many Men, Beasts, Birds, -Vegetables, and the like; for Infections are variously -produced, Internally as well as Externally, amongst -several particular Creatures; for as the Plague may be -made internally, or within the body of a particular -Creature, without any exterior infection entring from -without into the body, so an external Infection again -may enter many several ways into the body. And -thus there be many contagious diseases caused meerly -by the internal motions of the body, as by fright, terror, -conceit, fancy, imagination, and the like, and -many by the taking of poysonous matter from without -into the body; but all are made by the natural motions or -actions of animate matter, by which all is made that is -in Nature, and nothing is new, as <i>Solomon</i> says; but -what is thought or seems to be new, is onely the variation -of the Motions of this old Matter, which is Nature. -And this is the reason that not every Age, Nation, -or Creature, has always the like diseases; for as -all the actions of Nature vary, so also do diseases. But -to speak of the Plague, although I am of opinion, that -the Plague of Beasts doth not infect Men, unless they -be eaten; nor the plague of Men, Beasts; yet Magistrates -do wisely in some places, that in the beginning of -the plague of Men, they command Dogs and Cats to -be kill'd, by reason, as your <i>Author</i> saith, <i>The skins and -flesh of Brutes may be defiled with our Plague, and they -may be pestiferous contagions unto us.</i> I will add one -thing more, which doth concern the Poyson of Measels, -whereof your <i>Author</i> is saying,<a name="FNanchor_2_166" id="FNanchor_2_166"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_166" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> That <i>it is onely proper -to humane kind.</i> What kind of Measles he means, I -know not; but certainly Hogs are often affected with -that disease, as is vulgarly known; but whether they -be different diseases in their kinds, and proceed from -different motions, I will let others inquire. And so I -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_165" id="Footnote_1_165"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_165"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In the Plague-grave, <i>ch.</i> 17.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_166" id="Footnote_2_166"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_166"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> Call'd, <i>The Lunar Tribute</i>.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XL" id="III_XL">XL.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning the disease of the Stone, your <i>Author</i> -seems to be of an opinion, That the stone in the -Bladder, and the stone in the Kidnies, are not -made after one and the same manner: For, says he,<a name="FNanchor_1_167" id="FNanchor_1_167"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_167" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -<i>The Bladder and the same Urine in number procreates a -duelech of another condition, then that which is made in -the Kidney.</i> And truly, <i>Madam</i>, it may be so; for -there are several ways or modes in irregularities, as -well as regularities, and not every kind is alike, no not -every Particular, but there is some difference between -them: Wherefore, it may very well be, that the corporeal -motions that make the stone in the Kidneys, are -not just alike to those that make the stone in the Bladder; -and as each sort of stone is different, so their particular -causes ought to be different; but this is to be observed, -that generally all diseases which produce hardness, are -made by contracting, condensing and retenting motions, -and therefore the remedies of them must be dilating, -rarifying and dissolving. Next your <i>Author</i> says, -<i>The Stone is not bred by heat, but heat is rather an effect -of the stone; neither is a certain muscilage, or a slimy, snivelly -Phlegme the cause or matter of the stone, but the -stone is the cause of the phlegme.</i> But, in my judgment, -it seems more probable, that a slimy matter is more proper -for a stone to be made of, then that a stone should -make slime, except it be in its dissolution; that is, when -the stone, as in its generation or production it did change -from a slimy or liquid substance to a stone by condensing -and contracting motions, doth, by dilating and -rarifying motions, dissolve again into such a liquid and -slimy body. I will not say always, to wit, that the -stone must needs be resolved into a slimy matter, but -oftentimes it may be so. Neither can I absolutely affirm -that either heat or cold onely is the cause of a -stone; for some may be produced by hot, and some by -cold contractions and densations, there being as many -several sorts of stones as there are of other Creatures: -But this is to be well noted, that as some sorts of hot -contractions do make stones, so some sorts of hot dilations -do dissolve them: The like of cold contractions -and dilations. Again: your <i>Author</i> speaking of the -womb wherein the stone is made; <i>Every generated -thing or being</i>, says he, <i>must of necessity have a certain -place or womb where it is produced; for there must needs -be places wherein things may be made before they are bred.</i> -I answer: As there is not any body without place, nor -any place without body, so the womb is not the place -of the body generated, neither before nor after its generation, -no more then a man can be said to be in -a room when he is not there, but every body carries -its place along with it. Moreover, concerning the -voiding of bloody Urine, which happens sometimes -in the disease of the Stone, my opinion is, That it -doth not always proceed from the Stone, but many -times from the breaking or voluntary opening of some -Veins. But as for the cure of the disease of the Stone -your <i>Author,</i><a name="FNanchor_2_168" id="FNanchor_2_168"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_168" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> is pleased to affirm, <i>That no disease is incurable</i>, -and so neither the disease of the Stone, <i>For he -himself has cured many of the Stone to which they had -been obedient for some years.</i> Indeed, <i>Madam</i>, I fear -his words are more cheerful then effectual; however -it may be possible, if the Kidneys be no ways impaired, -or the Bladder hurt; but if there be some such imperfection -in either or both, then it is as much, in my -opinion, as to say, Man can do more then Nature -doth: Neither can I believe, that then any of your <i>Authors</i> -Chymical preparations, as <i>Aroph, Ludus, Alkahest</i>, -and the like, if they were to be had, would do -any good, no nor <i>Daucus</i>, or wild Carrot-seed, if -the disease be as yet curable, will prove an effectual -remedy for it, although your <i>Author</i> is pleased to relate -an example of a man, to whom it did much good; for -I can affirm the contrary by other the like Examples, -that it never did any good to those that used it; nor the -liquor of the Birch-tree, whose venue and efficacy I -do not believe to be so great as your <i>Author</i> describes:<a name="FNanchor_3_169" id="FNanchor_3_169"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_169" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> -But for the stoppage of Urine, Marsh-mallow and oyl -of Almonds, which he despises, I approve to be good, -and better then any of his Unknown, Chymical Secrets; -for those Chymical Medicines, as he himself confesses, -are hard to be had, especially <i>Alkahest</i>, which -is onely to be obtained by a Particular favour from -Heaven, and is rather a supernatural Gift, then a natural -remedy. But your <i>Author</i> doth wisely, to commend -such remedies as can never, or with great difficulty be -obtained, and then to say that no disease is incurable. -And so leaving him to his unknown secrets, and those -to them that will use them, I am resolved to adhere to -the Practice of the Schools, which I am confident will -be more beneficial to the health of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your real and faithful</i></p> - -<p><i>Friend and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_167" id="Footnote_1_167"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_167"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of the Stone, <i>ch.</i> 6. See the <i>ch.</i> -called, <i>A Numero-Critical Paradox of supplies</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_168" id="Footnote_2_168"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_168"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 7.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_169" id="Footnote_3_169"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_169"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 8.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XLI" id="III_XLI">XLI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> speaking of the <i>Gout</i>, and of that kind -of Gout which is called <i>Hereditary</i>, says, <i>It consists -immediately in the Spirit of Life.</i> First, as for -that which is called an Hereditary Disease, propagated -from Parents upon their Children; my opinion is, That -it is nothing else but the same actions of the animate -matter, producing the same effect in the Child as they -did in the Parent: For example; the same motions -which made the Gout in the Parent, may make the -same disease in the Child; but every Child has not his -Parents diseases, and many Children have such diseases -as their Parents never had; neither is any disease tied -to a particular Family by Generation, but they proceed -from irregular motions, and are generally in all Mankind; -and therefore properly there is no such thing as -an hereditary propagation of diseases; for one and the -same kind of disease may be made in different persons, -never a kin to one another, by the like motions; but because -Children have such a neer relation to their Parents -by Generation, if they chance to have the same diseases -with their Parents, men are apt to conclude it comes -by inheritance; but we may as well say, that all diseases -are hereditary; for there is not any disease in Nature -but is produced by the actions of Nature's substance; -and if we receive life and all our bodily substance -by Generation from our Parents, we may be said to receive -diseases too; for diseases are inherent in the matter -or substance of Nature, which every Creature is a -part of, and are real beings made by the corporeal motions -of the animate matter, although irregular to us; -for as this matter moves, so is Life or Death, Sickness -or Health, and all natural effects; and we consisting of -the same natural matter, are naturally subject as well to -diseases as to health, according as the Matter moves. -Thus all diseases are hereditary in Nature; nay, the -Scripture it self confirms it, informing us, that diseases, -as well as death, are by an hereditary propagation derived -from <i>Adam</i> upon all Posterity. But as for the -Gout, your <i>Authors</i> doctrine is,<a name="FNanchor_1_170" id="FNanchor_1_170"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_170" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That Life is not -a body, nor proper to a body, nor the off-spring of corporeal -Proprieties</i>,<a name="FNanchor_2_171" id="FNanchor_2_171"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_171" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> but a <i>meer No-thing</i>; and that <i>the -Spirit of Life is a real being, to wit, the arterial blood -resolved by the Ferment of the heart into salt air, and enlightned -by life</i>,<a name="FNanchor_3_172" id="FNanchor_3_172"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_172" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> and that the Gout doth immediately -consist in this spirit of life. All which how it doth agree, -I cannot conceive; for that a real being should -be enlightned by Nothing, and be a spirit of Nothing, -is not imaginable, nor how the Gout should inhabit -in the spirit of life; for then it would follow, that a -Child, as soon as it is brought forth into the world, -would be troubled with the Gout, if it be as natural to -him as life, or have its habitation in the Spirit of Life. -Also your <i>Author</i> is speaking of <i>an Appoplexy in the -head, which takes away all sense and motion.</i> But surely, -in my opinion, it is impossible that all sense and motion -should be out of the head; onely that sense and -motion, which is proper to the head, and to the nature -of that Creature, is altered to some other sensitive -and rational motions, which are proper to some other -figure; for there is no part or particle of matter that has -not motion and sense. I pray consider, <i>Madam</i>, is -there any thing in Nature that is without motion? Perchance -you will say, Minerals; but that is proved otherwise; -as for example, by the sympathetical motion between -the Loadstone and Iron, and between the Needle -and the North, as also by the operation of Mercury, -and several others; Wherefore there is no doubt, -but all kinds, sorts and particulars of Creatures have -their natural motions, although they are not all visible -to us, but not such motions as are made by Gas, or Blas, -or Ideas, &c. but corporeal sensitive and rational motions, -which are the actions of Natural Matter. You -may say, Some are of opinion, that Sympathy and Antipathy -are not Corporeal motions. Truly, whosoever -says so, speaks no reason; for Sympathy and Antipathy -are nothing else but the actions of bodies, and -are made in bodies; the Sympathy betwixt Iron and -the Loadstone is in bodies; the Sympathy between the -Needle and the North is in bodies; the Sympathy of -the Magnetic powder is in bodies. The truth is, -there is no motion without a body, nor no body -without motion. Neither doth Sympathy and Antipathy -work at distance by the power of Immaterial -Spirits, or rays, issuing out of their bodies, but by -agreeable or disagreeable corporeal motions; for if -the motions be agreeable, there is Sympathy; if disagreeable, -there is Antipathy; and if they be equally -found in two bodies, then there is a mutual Sympathy -or Antipathy; but if in one body onely, and not -in the other, there is but Sympathy or Antipathy -on one side, or in one Creature. Lastly, concerning -<i>swoonings or fainting fits</i>, your <i>Authors</i> opinion is, that -they <i>proceed from the stomack</i>: Which I can hardly -believe; for many will swoon upon the sight of some -object, others at a sound, or report, others at the -smell of some disagreeable odour, others at the taste of -some or other thing that is not agreeable to their nature, -and so forth: also some will swoon at the apprehension -or conceit of something, and some by a -disorder or irregularity of motions in exterior parts. -Wherefore, my opinion is, that swoonings may proceed -from any part of the body, and not onely from -the stomack. But, <i>Madam</i>, I being no Physicianess -may perhaps be in an error, and therefore I -will leave this discourse to those that are thorowly -learned and practised in this Art, and rest satisfied -that I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_170" id="Footnote_1_170"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_170"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Of the disease of the Stone, <i>c.</i> 9.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_171" id="Footnote_2_171"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_171"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Of the subject of inhering of diseases in the point of life.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_172" id="Footnote_3_172"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_172"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Of the Spirit of Life.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XLII" id="III_XLII">XLII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i><a name="FNanchor_1_173" id="FNanchor_1_173"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_173" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> is inquiring whether some cures of -diseases may be effected by bare co-touchings; and -I am of his opinion, they may; for co-touchings -of some exterior objects may cause alterations of some -particular motions in some particular parts of matter, -without either transferring their own motions into those -parts, (for that this is impossible, I have heretofore declared) -or without any corporeal departing from their -own parts of matter into them, and alterations may be -produced both in the motions and figures of the affected -parts: but these cures are not so frequent as those that -are made by the entring of medicines into the diseased -parts, and either expel the malignant matter, or rectifie -the irregular and disordered motions, or strengthen -the weak, or reduce the straying, or work any other -ways according to the nature and propriety of their -own substance, and the disposition of the distempered -parts: Nevertheless, those cures which are performed exteriously, -as to heal inward affects by an outward bare -co-touching, are all made by natural motions in natural -substances, and not by <i>Non</i>-beings, substancelesse Ideas, -or spiritual Rays; for those that will cure diseases -by <i>Non</i>-beings, will effect little or nothing; for a disease -is corporeal or material, and so must the remedies -be, there being no cure made but by a conflict of the remedy -with the disease; and certainly, if a <i>non</i>-being -fight against a being, or a corporeal disease, I doubt it -will do no great effect; for the being will be too -strong for the <i>non</i>-being: Wherefore my constant opinion -is, that all cures whatsoever, are perfected by the -power of corporeal motions, working upon the affected -parts either interiously or exteriously, either by applying -external remedies to external wounds, or by curing -internal distempers, either by medicines taken internally, -or by bare external co-touchings. And such a remedy, -I suppose, has been that which your <i>Author</i> speaks -of, a stone of a certain Irish-man, which by a -meer external contact hath cured all kinds of diseases, -either by touching outwardly the affected parts, or by -licking it but with the tip of the Tongue, if the disease -was Internal: But if the vertue of the Stone was such, as -your <i>Author</i> describes, certainly, what man soever -he was that possessed such a jewel, I say, he was rather -of the nature of the Devil, then of man, that would not -divulge it to the general benefit of all mankind; and I -wonder much, that your <i>Author</i>, who otherwise pretends -such extraordinary Devotion, Piety, and Religiousness, -as also Charity, <i>viz.</i> that all his works he -has written, are for the benefit of his neighbour, and to -detect the errors of the Schools meerly for the good of -man, doth yet plead his cause, saying, That <i>secrets, -as they are most difficultly prepared, so they ought to remain -in secret forever in the possession of the Privy Councel</i>, -what Privy Counsels he means, I know not; but -certainly some are more difficult to be spoken to, or any -thing to be obtained from, then the preparation of a -Physical Arcanum. However, a general good or benefit -ought not to be concealed or kept in privy Councels, -but to be divulged and publickly made known, that -all sorts of People, of what condition, degree, or Nation -soever, might partake of the general blessing and -bounty of God. But, <i>Madam</i>, you may be sure, that -many, who pretend to know Physical secrets, most -commonly know the least, as being for the most part of -the rank of them that deceive the simple with strange -tales which exceed truth; and to make themselves more -authentical, they use to rail at others, and to condemn -their skill, onely to magnifie their own: I say, many, -<i>Madam</i>, as I have observed, are of that nature, especially -those, that have but a superficial knowledg in the -Art of Physick; for those that are thorowly learned, and -sufficiently practised in it, scorn to do the like; which -I wish may prosper and thrive by their skill. And so -I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_173" id="Footnote_1_173"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_173"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> In the <i>ch.</i> call'd <i>Butler</i>.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XLIII" id="III_XLIII">XLIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your <i>Author</i> is pleased to relate a story<a name="FNanchor_1_174" id="FNanchor_1_174"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_174" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> of one that -died suddenly, and being dissected, there was not -the least sign of decay or disorder found in his body. -But I cannot add to those that wonder, when no -sign of distemper is found in a man's body after he is -dead; because I do not believe, that the subtillest, learnedst, -and most practised Anatomist, can exactly tell -all the Interior Government or motions, or can find out -all obscure and invisible passages in a mans body; for -concerning the motions, they are all altered in death, -or rather in the dissolution of the animal figure; and although -the exterior animal figure or shape doth not alter -so soon, yet the animal motions may alter in a moment -of time; which sudden alteration may cause a sudden -death, and so the motions being invisible, the cause -of death cannot be perceived; for no body can find -that which is not to be found, to wit, animal motions -in a dead man; for Nature hath altered these motions -from being animal motions to some other kind of motions, -she being as various in dissolutions, as in productions, -indeed so various, that her ways cannot be traced -or known thorowly and perfectly, but onely by piece-meals, -as the saying is, that is, but partly: Wherefore -man can onely know that which is visible, or subject -to his senses; and yet our senses do not always inform -us truly, but the alterations of grosser parts are -more easily known, then the alterations of subtil corporeal -motions, either in general, or in particular; neither -are the invisible passages to be known in a dead -Carcass, much less in a living body. But, I pray, -mistake me not, when I say, that the animal motions -are not subject to our exterior senses; for I do not mean -all exterior animal motions, nor all interior animal motions; -for though you do see no interior motion in an -animal body, yet you may feel some, as the motion of -the Heart, the motion of the Pulse, the motion of -the Lungs, and the like; but the most part of the interior -animal motions are not subject to our exterior senses; -nay, no man, he may be as observing as he will, -can possibly know by his exterior senses all the several -and various interior motions in his own body, nor all the -exterior motions of his exterior parts: and thus it remains -still, that neither the subtillest motions and parts -of matter, nor the obscure passages in several Creatures, -can be known but by several parts; for what one part is -ignorant of, another part is knowing, and what one -part is knowing, another part is ignorant thereof; so -that unless all the Parts of Infinite Matter were joyned -into one Creature, there can never be in one particular -Creature a perfect knowledg of all things in Nature. -Wherefore I shall never aspire to any such knowledg, -but be content with that little particular knowledg, Nature -has been pleased to give me, the chief of which is, -that I know my self, and especially that I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_174" id="Footnote_1_174"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_174"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 61. called, <i>The Preface</i>.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XLIV" id="III_XLIV">XLIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I perceive you are desirous to know the cause, <i>Why -a man is more weak at the latter end of a disease then at -the beginning, and is a longer time recovering health, -then loosing health</i>; as also <i>the reason of relapses and intermissions?</i> -First, as for weakness and strength, my -opinion is, they are caused by the regular and irregular -motions in several parts, each striving to over-power -the other in their conflict; and when a man recovers -from a disease, although the regular motions -have conquered the irregular, and subdued them to -their obedience, yet they are not so quite obedient as -they ought, which causes weakness: Neither do the -regular motions use so much force in Peace, as in -War; for though animate matter cannot lose force, -yet it doth not always use force; neither can the parts -of Nature act beyond their natural power, but they -do act within their natural power; neither do they -commonly act to the utmost of their power. And as -for Health, why it is sooner lost then recovered; I -answer, That it is easier to make disorders then to -rectifie them: as for example, in a Common-wealth, -the ruines of War are not so suddenly repaired, as -made. But concerning Relapses and Intermissions of -diseases, Intermissions are like truces or cessations from -War for a time; and Relapses are like new stirs or tumults -of Rebellion; for Rebels are not so apt to settle in -peace as to renew the war upon slight occasions; and if -the regular motions of the body be stronger, they reduce -them again unto obedience. But diseases are -occasioned many several ways; for some are made by -a home Rebellion, and others by forreign enemies, and -some by natural and regular dissolutions, and their -cures are as different; but the chief Magistrates or Governors -of the animal body, which are the regular motions -of the parts of the body, want most commonly -the assistance of forreign Parts, which are Medicines, -Diets, and the like; and if there be factions amongst -these chief Magistrates, or motions of the parts of the -body, then the whole body suffers a ruine. But since -there would be no variety in Nature, nor no difference -between Natures several parts or Creatures, if her -actions were never different, but always agreeing and -constant, a war or rebellion in Nature cannot be avoided: -But, mistake me not, for I do not mean a -war or rebellion in the nature or substance of Matter, -but between the several parts of Matter, which are the -several Creatures, and their several Motions; for -Matter being always one and the same in its nature, has -nothing to war withal; and surely it will not quarrel -with its own Nature. Next you desire to know, that -if Nature be in a Perpetual motion, <i>Whence comes a duration -of some things, and a Tiredness, Weariness, Sluggishness, -or Faintness?</i> I answer, first, That in some -bodies, the Retentive motions are stronger then the -dissolving motions; as for example, Gold, and Quicksilver -or Mercury; the separating and dissolving motions -of Fire have onely power to melt and rarifie them -for a time, but cannot alter their nature: so a Hammer, -or such like instrument, when used, may beat Gold, -and make it thin as a Cobweb, or as dust, but cannot -alter its interior nature: But yet this doth not prove it -to be either without motion, or to be altogether unalterable, -and not subject to any dissolution; but onely -that its retentive motions are too strong for the dissolving -motions of the Fire, which by force work upon -the Gold; and we might as well say, that Sand, or an -Earthen Vessel, or Glass, or Stone, or any thing else, -is unalterable, and will last eternally, if not disturbed. But -some of Natures actions are as industrious to keep their -figures, as others are to dissolve, or alter them; and -therefore Retentive motions are more strong and active -in some figures, then dissolving motions are in others, -or producing motions in other Figures. Next, as for -Tiredness, or Faintness of motions, there is no such -thing as tiredness or faintness in Nature, for Nature -cannot be tired, nor grow faint, or sick, nor be pained, -nor die, nor be any ways defective; for all this is onely -caused through the change and variety of the corporeal -motions of Nature, and her several parts; neither -do irregular motions prove any defect in Nature, but -a prudence in Natures actions, in making varieties and -alterations of Figures; for without such motions or -actions, there could not be such varieties and alterations -in Nature as there are: neither is slackness of some motions -a defect, for Nature is too wise to use her utmost -force in her ordinary works; and though Nature is infinite, -yet it is not necessary she should use an infinite -force and power in any particular act. Lastly, you -desire my opinion, <i>Whether there be motion in a dead -animal Creature.</i> To which, I answer: I have declared -heretofore, that there is no such thing as death -in Nature, but what is commonly named death, is -but an alteration or change of corporeal motions, and -the death of an animal is nothing else but the dissolving -motions of its figure; for when a man is dying, the -motions which did formerly work to the consistence -of his figure do now work to the dissolution of his figure, -and to the production of some other figures, -changing and transforming every part thereof; but -though the figure of that dead animal is dissolved, yet -the parts of that dissolved figure remain still in Nature -although they be infinitely changed, and will do so -eternally, as long as Nature lasts by the Will of God; -for nothing can be lost or annihilated in Nature. And -this is all, <i>Madam</i>, that I can answer to your questions, -wherein, I hope, I have obeyed your commands, -according to the duty of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="III_XLV" id="III_XLV">XLV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I have thus far discharged my duty, that according -to your commands, I have given you my judgment -of the works of those four famous Philosophers of -our age, which you did send me to peruse, and have -withal made reflexions upon some of their opinions in -Natural Philosophy, especially those, wherein I did -find them dissent from the Ground and Principles of -my own Philosophy. And since by your leave I am -now publishing all those Letters which I have hitherto -written to you concerning those aforesaid Authors, and -their Works, I am confident I shall not escape the censures -of their followers; But, I shall desire them, -that they will be pleased to do me this Justice, and to -examine first my opinions well, without any partiality -or wilful misinterpretation of my sence, before they pass -their censure: Next, I desire them to consider, That -I have no skill in School-learning, and therefore for -want of terms of Art may easily chance to slip, or at -least, not express my opinions so clearly as my readers -expected; However, I have done my endeavour, and -to my sense and reason they seem clear and plain enough, -especially as I have expressed them in those -Letters I have sent you; for concerning my other Work, -called <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, I must confess, that it -might have been done more exactly and perspicuously, -had I been better skilled in such words and expressions -as are usual in the Schools of Philosophers; and therefore, -if I be but capable to learn names and terms of Art, -(although I find my self very untoward to learn, and -do despair of proving a Scholar) I will yet endeavour -to rectifie that work, and make it more intelligible; for -my greatest ambition is to express my conceptions so, -that my Readers may understand them: For which I -would not spare any labour or pains, but be as industrious -as those that gain their living by their work; -and I pray to God, that Nature may give me a capacity -to do it. But as for those that will censure my -works out of spite and malice, rather then according to -justice, let them do their worst; for if God do but bless -them, I need not to fear the power of Nature, much -less of a part of Nature, as Man. Nay, if I have -but your Ladiships approbation, it will satisfie me; for -I know you are so wise and just in your judgment, that -I may safely rely upon it: For which I shall constantly -and unfeignedly remain as long as I live,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships most faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h2><a name="SECT_IV" id="SECT_IV">SECT. IV.</a></h2> - - -<h3>I.</h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I perceive, you take great delight in -the study of Natural Philosophy, -since you have not onely sent me -some Authors to peruse, and give -my judgment of their opinions, but -are very studious your self in the -reading of Philosophical Works: -and truly, I think you cannot spend your time more -honourably, profitably, and delightfully, then in the -study of Nature, as to consider how Variously, -Curiously, and Wisely, she acts in her Creatures; -for if the particular knowledg of a mans self be commendable, -much more is the knowledg of the general -actions of Nature, which doth lead us to the knowledg -of our selves. The truth is, by the help of Philosophy -our minds are raised above our selves, into the -knowledg of the Causes of all natural effects. But -leaving the commending of this noble study, you are -pleased to desire my opinion of a very difficult and intricate -argument in Natural Philosophy, to wit, of -Generation, or Natural Production. I must beg leave to -tell you, first, that some (though foolishly) believe, it is not -fit for Women to argue upon so subtil a Mystery: Next, -there have been so many learned and experienced Philosophers, -Physicians, and Anatomists, which have -treated of this subject, that it might be thought a great -presumption for me, to argue with them, having neither -the learning nor experience by practice which they -had: Lastly, There are so many several ways and -manners of Productions in Nature, as it is impossible -for a single Creature to know them all: For there -are Infinite variations made by self-motion in Infinite -Matter, producing several Figures, which are several -Creatures in that same Matter. But you would fain -know, how Nature, which is Infinite Matter, acts -by self-motion? Truly, <i>Madam</i>, you may as well -ask any one part of your body, how every other part -of your body acts, as to ask me, who am but a small -part of Infinite Matter, how Nature works. But yet, -I cannot say, that Nature is so obscure, as her Creatures -are utterly ignorant; for as there are two of the -outward sensitive organs in animal bodies, which are -more intelligible then the rest, to wit, the Ear, and the -Eye; so in Infinite Matter, which is the body of Nature, -there are two parts, which are more understanding -or knowing then the rest, to wit, the Rational and -Sensitive part of Infinite Matter; for though it be true, -That Nature, by self-division, made by self-motion into -self-figures, which are self-parts, causes a self-obscurity to -each part, motion, and figure; nevertheless, Nature -being infinitely wise and knowing, its infinite natural -wisdom and knowledg is divided amongst those infinite -parts of the infinite body: and the two most intelligible -parts, as I said, are the sensitive and rational -parts in Nature, which are divided, being infinite, -into every Figure or Creature; I cannot say equally -divided, no more, then I can say, all creatures are of -equal shapes, sizes, properties, strengths, quantities, -qualities, constitutions, semblances, appetites, passions, -capacities, forms, natures, and the like; for Nature -delights in variety, as humane sense and reason -may well perceive: for seldom any two creatures are -just alike, although of one kind or sort, but every -creature doth vary more or less. Wherefore it is not -probable, that the production or generation of all or -most Creatures, should be after one and the same manner -or way, for else all Creatures would be just alike -without any difference. But this is to be observed, -that though Nature delights in variety, yet she doth -not delight in confusion, but, as it is the propriety of -Nature to work variously, so she works also wisely; -which is the reason, that the rational and sensitive parts -of Nature, which are the designing and architectonical -parts, keep the species of every kind of Creatures -by the way of Translation in Generation, or natural -Production; for whatsoever is transferred, works according -to the nature of that figure or figures from -whence it was transferred, But mistake me not; for I -do not mean always according to their exterior Figure, -but according to their interior Nature; for different -motions in one and the same parts of matter, make different -figures, wherefore much more in several parts -of matter and changes of motion; But, as I said, -Translation is the chief means to keep or maintain the -species of every kind of Creatures, which Translation -in natural production or generation, is of the -purest and subtilest substances, to wit, the sensitive -and rational, which are the designing and architectonical -parts of Nature. You may ask me, <i>Madam</i>, -what this wise and ingenious Matter is. I answer: -It is so pure, subtil, and self-active, as our humane -shares of sense and reason cannot readily or perfectly -perceive it; for by that little part of knowledg that a humane -creature hath, it may more readily perceive the -strong action then the purer substance; for the strongest -action of the purest substance is more perceivable -then the matter or substance it self; which is the cause, -that most men are apt to believe the motion, and -to deny the matter, by reason of its subtilty; for -surely the sensitive and rational matter is so pure and -subtil, as not to be expressed by humane sense and reason. -As for the rational matter, it is so pure, fine, -and subtil, that it may be as far beyond lucent matter, as -lucent matter is beyond gross vapours, or thick clouds; -and the sensitive matter seems not much less pure: also -there is very pure inanimate matter, but not subtil and -active of it self; for as there are degrees in the animate, -so there are also degrees in the inanimate matter; so -that the purest degree of inanimate matter comes next -to the animate, not in motion, but in the purity of its -own degree; for it cannot change its nature so, as to -become animate, yet it may be so pure in its own nature, -as not to be perceptible by our grosser senses. -But concerning the two degrees of animate Matter, to -wit, the sensitive and rational, I say that the sensitive -is much more acute then Vitriol, Aqua-fortis, Fire, -or the like; and the rational much more subtil and -active then Quicksilver, or Light, so as I cannot find a -comparison fit to express them, onely that this sensitive -and rational self-moving Matter is the life and soul of -Nature; But by reason this Matter is not subject to our -gross senses, although our senses are subject to it, as being -made, subsisting and acting through the power of -its actions, we are not apt to believe it, no more then a -simple Country-wench will believe, that Air is a substance, -if she neither hear, see, smell, taste, or touch it, -although Air touches and surrounds her: But yet the -effects of this animate matter prove that there is such a -matter; onely, as I said before, this self-moving matter -causing a self-division as well as a general action, is the -cause of a self-obscurity, which obscurity causes doubts, -disputes, and inconstancies in humane opinions, although -not so much obscurity, as to make all Creatures blind-fold, -for surely there is no Creature but perceives more -or less. But to conclude, The Rational degree of Matter -is the most intelligible, and the wisest part of Nature, -and the Sensitive is the most laborious and provident -part in Nature, both which are the Creators of all -Creatures in Infinite Matter; and if you intend to know -more of this Rational and Sensitive Matter, you may -consult my Book of Philosophy, to which I refer you. -And so taking my leave for the present, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_II" id="IV_II">II.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I understand by your last, that you have read the Book -of that most learned and famous Physician and Anatomist, -Dr. <i>Harvey</i>, which treats of Generation; and -in the reading of it, you have mark'd several scruples, -which you have framed into several questions concerning -that subject, to which you desire my answer. Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, I am loth to imbarque my self in this difficult -argument, not onely for the reasons I have given -you heretofore, but also that I do not find my self able -enough to give you such a satisfactory answer as perhaps -you do expect. But since your Commands are -so powerful with me, that I can hardly resist them, and -your Nature so good that you easily pardon any thing -that is amiss, I will venture upon it according to the -strength of my Natural Reason, and endeavour to give -you my opinion as well and as clearly as I can. Your -first question is; <i>Whether the action of one or more producers -be the onely cause of Natural Production or Generation, -without imparting or transferring any of their -own substance or Matter.</i> I answer: The sole co-action -of the Producers may make a change of exterior forms -or figures, but not produce another Creature; for if -there were not substance or matter, as well as action, -both transferred together, there would not be new -Creatures made out of old Matter, but every production -would require new Matter, which is impossible, if -there be but one Matter, and that infinite; and certainly, -humane sense and reason may well perceive, that -there can be but one Matter, for several kinds of Matter -would make a confusion; and thus if new Creatures -were made onely by substanceless motion, it would not -onely be an infinite trouble to Nature, to create something -out of nothing perpetually, but, as I said, it -would make a confusion amongst all Nature's works, -which are her several Parts or Creatures. But by reason -there is but one Matter, which is Infinite and Eternal, -and this Matter has self-motion in it, both Matter -and Motion must of necessity transmigrate, or be transferred -together without any separation, as being but one -thing, to wit, Corporeal Motion. 'Tis true, one -part of animate or self-moving Matter, may without -Translation move, or rather occasion other parts to -move; but one Creature cannot naturally produce another -without the transferring of its corporeal motions. -But it is well to be observed, that there is great -difference between the actions of Nature; for all actions -are not generating, but some are patterning, and -some transforming, and the like; and as for the transforming -action, that may be without translation, as -being nothing else but a change of motions in one and -the same part or parts of Matter, to wit, when the same -parts of Matter do change into several figures, and return -into the same figures again. Also the action of -Patterning is without Translation; for to pattern out, -is nothing else but to imitate, and to make a figure in -its own substance or parts of Matter like another figure. -But in generation every producer doth transfer -both Matter and Motion, that is, Corporeal Motion -into the produced; and if there be more producers then -one, they all do contribute to the produced; and if one -Creature produces many Creatures, those many Creatures -do partake more or less of their producer. But -you may say, If the producer transfers its own Matter, -or rather its own corporeal motions into the produced, -many productions will soon dissolve the producer, and -he will become a sacrifice to his off-spring. I answer; -That doth not follow: for as one or more Creatures -contribute to one or more other Creatures, so other -Creatures do contribute to them, although not after -one and the same manner or way, but after divers manners -or ways; but all manners and ways must be by -translation to repair and assist; for no Creature can subsist -alone and of it self, but all Creatures traffick and -commerce from and to each other, and must of necessity -do so, since they are all parts of the same Matter: -Neither can Motion subsist without Matter, nor quit -Matter, nor act without Matter, no more, then an -Artificer can work without materials, and without self-motion -Matter would be dead and useless; Wherefore -Matter and Motion must upon necessity not onely be -inseparable, but be one body, to wit, corporeal motion; -which motion by dividing and composing its several -parts, and acting variously, is the cause of all Production, -Generation, Metamorphosing, or any other -thing that is done in Nature. But if, according to your -<i>Author</i>, the sole action be the cause of Generation -without transferring of substance, then Matter is useless, -and of none or little effect; which, in my opinion, -is not probable.</p> - -<p>Your second question is, <i>Whether the Production or -Generation of animals is as the Conceptions of the Brain, -which the Learned say are Immaterial?</i> I answer: The -Conceptions of the Brain, in my opinion, are not Immaterial, -but Corporeal; for though the corporeal -motions of the brain, or the matter of its conceptions, -is invisible to humane Creatures, and that when the -brain is dissected, there is no such matter found, yet that -doth not prove, that there is no Matter, because it is -not so gross a substance as to be perceptible by our exterior -senses: Neither will your <i>Authors</i> example hold, -that as a builder erects a house according to his conception -in the brain, the same happens in all other natural -productions or generations; for, in my opinion, the -house is materially made in the brain, which is the conception -of the builder, although not of such gross materials, -as Stone, Brick, Wood, and the like, yet of -such matter as is the Rational Matter, that is, the house -when it is conceived in the brain, is made by the rational -corporeal figurative motions of their own substance -or degree of Matter; But if all Animals should -be produced by meer fancies, and a Man and a -Woman should beget by fancying themselves together -in copulation, then the produced would be a true Platonick -Child; But if a Woman being from her Husband -should be so got with Child, the question is, whether -the Husband would own the Child; and if amorous -Lovers (which are more contagious for appetite -and fancy then Married persons) should produce -Children by Immaterial contagions, there would be -more Children then Parents to own them.</p> - -<p>Your third question is, <i>Whether Animals may not be -produced, as many Diseases are, by contagion?</i> I answer: -Although contagions may be made at a distance, by -perception; yet those diseases are not begotten by immaterial -motions, but by the rational and sensitive corporeal -motions, which work such diseases in the body of a -Creature, by the association of parts, like as the same -disease is made in another body: Neither are diseases -always produced after one and the same manner, but -after divers manners; whereas animals are produced -as animals, that is, after one natural and proper way; -for although all the effects in particular be not alike, yet -the general way or manner to produce those effects is the -same: As for example; there is no other way to produce -a fruitful Egg, but by a Cock and a Hen; But a -Contagious disease, as the small-Pox, or the like, may be -produced by the way of Surfeits or by Conceit, which -may cause the sensitive corporeal parts, through the -irregular motions of the rational corporeal parts, to work -and produce such a disease, or any other ways. But -neither a disease, nor no creature else can be produced -without matter, by substanceless motion; for wheresoever -is motion, there is also matter, matter and motion -being but one thing.</p> - -<p>Your fourth question is, <i>Whether an Animal Creature -is perfectly shaped or formed at the first Conception?</i> -I answer: If the Creature be composed of many and -different parts, my opinion is, it cannot be. You -may say, That if it hath not all his parts produced at -there will be required many acts of generation -to beget or produce every part, otherwise the producers -would not be the Parents of the produced in whole, -but in part. I answer: The Producer is the designer, -architect, and founder of the whole Creature produced; -for the sensitive and rational corporeal motions, which -are transferred from the producer or producers, joyn to -build the produced like to the producer in specie, but -the transferred parts may be invisible and insensible to -humane Creatures, both through their purity and little -quantity, until the produced is framed to some visible -degree; for a stately building may proceed from -a small beginning, neither can humane sense tell what -manner of building is designed at the first foundation. -But you may say, That many Eggs may be made by -one act of the producers, to wit, the Cock and the Hen, -and those many Eggs may be laid at several times, as also -hatched at several times, and become Chickens at several -times. I answer; It may well and easily be so: for -the rational and sensitive parts or corporeal motions -which were transferred in one act, designed many produced -through that one act; for those transferred corporeal -motions, although they have not a sufficient -quantity of themselves to make all the produced in their -perfect shapes at once, yet they are the chief designer, -architect and founder of all that are to be produced; for -the corporeal motions which are transferred, joyn with -those they are transferred to, and being associates, work -to one design, the sensitive being the architect, the rational -the designer, which together with the inanimate -parts of matter, can never want materials, neither -can the materials want labourers; for the degrees of -matter are inseparable, and do make but one body or -substance. Again you may say, That some parts of -Matter may produce another Creature not like to the -producer in its species, as for example, Monsters. I -answer, That is possible to be done, but yet it is not -usual; for Monsters are not commonly born, but -those corporeal motions which dwell in one species, -work according to the nature of the same species; -and when the parts of Matter are transferred from -Creature to Creature, that is, are separated from some -parts, and joyned to other parts of the same species, and -the same nature; those transferred parts of matter, although -invisible in quantity, by reason of their purity -and subtilty, begin the work of the produced according -to its natural species, and the labourers in other parts of -matter work to the same end; just as it is in the artificial -building of a house, where the house is first designed by -the Architect, or Master, and then the labourers work -not after their own fancy, (else it would not be the -same house that was designed, nor any uniformity in it) -but according to the architects or surveyors design; so -those parts of matter or corporeal motions that are transferred -from the producer, are like the architect, but the -labourers or workmen are the assisting and adjoyning -parts of matter. But you will say, How comes it, that many -creatures may be made by one or two? I answer: As -one owner or two partners may be the cause of many -buildings, so few or more transferred rational and sensitive -corporeal motions may make and produce as many -creatures as they can get materials and labourers; -for if they get one, they get the other, by reason the -degrees of matter, <i>viz.</i> animate and inanimate, are inseparably -mixt, and make but one body or substance; -and the proof of it is, that all animals are not constant in -the number of their off-spring, but sometimes produce -more, and sometimes fewer, and sometimes their off-spring -is less, and sometimes larger, according to the -quantity of matter. Again you may say, That in some -Creatures there is no passage to receive the transferred -matter into the place of the architecture. I answer: -That all passages are not visible to humane sense; and -some humane Creatures have not a sufficient humane -reason to conceive, that most of Natures works are not -so gross as to be subject to their exterior senses; but as for -such parts and passages, whether exterior or interior, -visible or invisible, as also for copulation, conception, -formation, nourishment, and the like in Generation, -I leave you to Physicians and Anatomists. And to -conclude this question, we may observe, that not any -animal Creatures shape dissolveth in one instant of -time, but by degrees; why should we believe then, -that Animals are generated or produced in their perfect -shape in one instant of time, and by one act of Nature? -But sense and reason knows by observation, that an -animal Creature requires more time to be generated, -then to be dissolved, like as an house is sooner and with -less pains pull'd down, then built up.</p> - -<p>Your Fifth question is, <i>Whether Animals are not -generated by the way of Metamorphosing?</i> To which -I answer, That it is not possible that a third Creature -can be made without translation of corporeal motions; -and since Metamorphosing is onely a change of motions -in the same parts of Matter, without any translation -of corporeal motions, no animal Creature can be produced -or generated by the way of Metamorphosing.</p> - -<p>Your Sixth question is, <i>Whether a whole may be made -out of a part?</i> I answer: There is no whole in Nature, -except you will call Nature her self a whole; for -all Creatures are but parts of Infinite Matter.</p> - -<p>Your Seventh question is, <i>Whether all Animals, as -also Vegetables, are made or generated by the way of Eggs?</i> -I have said heretofore, That it is not probable, that different -sorts, nay, different kinds of Creatures, should -all have but one manner or way of production; for -why should not Nature make different ways of productions, -as well as different Creatures? And as for -Vegetables, if all their Seeds be likened unto Eggs, then -Eggs may very well be likened to Seeds; which if so, -then a Peas-cod is the Hen, and the Peas in the Cod -is the cluster of Eggs: the like of ears of Corn. And -those animals that produce but one creature or seed at a -time, may be like the kernel of a Nut, when the shell is -broke, the creature comes forth. But how this will agree -with your <i>Author</i>, who says, that the creature in -the shell must make its own passage, I cannot tell; for -if the Nut be not broken by some external means or occasion, -the kernel is not like to get forth. And as for -humane Eggs, I know not what to answer; for it is -said, that the first Woman was made of a mans ribb; but -whether that ribb was an egg, I cannot tell. And why -may not Minerals and Elements be produced by the -way of Eggs as well as Vegetables and Animals? Nay, -why may not the whole World be likened unto an -Egg? Which if so, the two Poles are the two ends -the Egg; and for the Elements, the Yolk is the Fire, -the White, the Water; the Film, the Air; and the -Shell it self will very well serve for the Earth: But then -it must first be broken, and pounded into one lump or -solid mass, and so sink or swim into the midst of the -liquid parts, as to the Center; and as for the several -foetuses in this great Egg, they are the several Creatures -in it. Or it might be said, that the Chaos was an Egg, -and the Universe, the Chicken. But leaving this similizing, it -is like, that some studious Men may by long -study upon one part of the body, conceive and believe -that all other parts are like that one part; like as those -that have gazed long upon the Sun, all they see for a -time, are Suns to them; or like as those which having -heard much of Hobgoblins, all they see are Hobgoblins, -their fancies making such things. But, <i>Madam</i>, -to make a conclusion also of this question, I repeat -what I said before, that all Creatures have -not one way of production; and as they have not all -one way of production, so they have neither one instant -of time either for perfection or dissolution, but -their perfection and dissolution is made by degrees.</p> - -<p>Your Eighth question is, <i>Whether it may not be, -that the sensitive and rational corporeal motions in an -Egg do pattern out the figure of the Hen and Cock, whilest -the Hen sits upon the Egg, and so bring forth Chickens by -the way of patterning?</i> I answer: The action of patterning, -is not the action of Generation; for as I said -heretofore, the actions of Nature are different, and -Generation must needs be performed by the way of -translation, which translation is not required in the -action of Patterning; but according as the Producers -are, which transfer their own matter into the produced, -so is the produced concerning its species; which -is plainly proved by common examples; for if Pheasants, -or Turky, or Goose-eggs, be laid under an ordinary -Hen, or an ordinary Hens-egg be laid under -a Pheasant, Turky, or Goose, the Chickens of those -Eggs will never be of any other species then of those -that produced the Egg; for an ordinary Hen, if she -sit upon Pheasants, Turky, or Goose-eggs, doth not -hatch Chickens of her own species, but the Chickens -will be of the species either of the Pheasant, or Turky, -or Goose, which did at first produce the Egg; which -proves, that in Generation, or Natural production, -there is not onely required the action of the Producers, -but also a Transferring of some of their own parts to -form the produced. But you may say, What doth -the sitting Hen contribute then to the production of -the Chicken? I answer: The sitting Hen doth onely -assist the Egg in the production of the Chicken, as -the Ground doth the Seed.</p> - -<p>Your Ninth question is, <i>Concerning the Soul of a -particular Animal Creature, as whether it be wholly of it -self and subsists wholly in and by it self?</i> But you must -give me leave first to ask you what Soul you mean, whether -the Divine, or the Natural Soul, for there is great -difference betwixt them, although not the least that -ever I heard, rightly examined and distinguished; and -if you mean the Divine Soul, I shall desire you to excuse -me, for that belongs to Divines, and not to Natural -Philosophers; neither am I so presumptuous as to intrench -upon their sacred order. But as for the Natural -Soul, the Learned have divided it into three parts, -to wit, the Vegetative, Sensitive, and Rational Soul; -and according to these three Souls, made three kinds of -lives, as the Vegetative, Sensitive, and Rational Life. -But they might as well say, there are infinite bodies, -lives, and souls, as three; for in Nature there is but -one life, soul, and body, consisting all of one Matter, -which is corporeal Nature. But yet by reason this life -and soul is material, it is divided into numerous parts, -which make numerous lives and souls in every particular -Creature; for each particular part of the rational -self-moving Matter, is each particular soul in each particular -Creature, but all those parts considered in general, -make but one soul of Nature; and as this self-moving -Rational Matter hath power to unite its parts, -so it hath ability or power to divide its united parts. And -thus the rational soul of every particular Creature is -composed of parts, (I mean parts of a material substance; -for whatsoever is substanceless and incorporeal, -belongs not to Nature, but is Supernatural;) for by -reason the Infinite and Onely matter is by self-motion -divided into self-parts, not any Creature can have a -soul without parts; neither can the souls of Creatures -subsist without commerce of other rational parts, no -more then one body can subsist without the assistance of -other bodies; for all parts belong to one body, which -is Nature: nay, if any thing could subsist of it self, it -were a God, and not a Creature: Wherefore not any -Creature can challenge a soul absolutely to himself, unless -Man, who hath a divine soul, which no other -Creature hath. But that which makes so many confusions -and disputes amongst learned men is, that they -conceive, first, there is no rational soul but onely in -man; next, that this rational soul in every man is -individable. But if the rational soul is material, as -certainly to all sense and reason it is, then it must not -onely be in all material Creatures, but be dividable too; -for all that is material or corporeal hath parts, and is dividable, -and therefore there is no such thing in any one -Creature as one intire soul; nay, we might as well say, -there is but one Creature in Nature, as say, there is but -one individable natural soul in one Creature.</p> - -<p>Your Tenth question is, <i>Whether Souls are producible, -or can be produced?</i> I answer: in my opinion, -they are producible, by reason all parts in Nature are -so. But mistake me not; for I do not mean that any -one part is produced out of Nothing, or out of new -matter; but one Creature is produced by another, by -the dividing and uniting, joyning and disjoyning of the -several parts of Matter, and not by substanceless Motion -out of new Matter. And because there is not any -thing in Nature, that has an absolute subsistence of it self, -each Creature is a producer, as well as a produced, -in some kind or other; for no part of Nature can subsist -single, and without reference and assistance of each -other, or else every single part would not onely be a -whole of it self, but be as a God without controle; and -though one part is not another part, yet one part belongs -to another part, and all parts to one whole, and -that whole to all the parts, which whole is one corporeal -Nature. And thus, as I said before, productions -of one or more creatures, by one or more producers, -without matter, meerly by immaterial motions, are impossible, -to wit, that something should be made or -produced out of nothing; for if this were so, there would -consequently be an annihilation or turning into nothing, -and those creatures, which produce others by the way -of immaterial motions, would rather be as a God, then -a part of Nature, or Natural Matter. Besides, it -would be an endless labour, and more trouble to create -particular Creatures out of nothing, then a World -at once; whereas now it is easie for Nature to create -by production and transmigration; and therefore -it is not probable, that any one Creature hath a -particular life, soul, or body to it self, as subsisting -by it self, and as it were precised from the rest, having -its own subsistence without the assistance of -any other; nor is it probable, that any one Creature -is new, for all that is, was, and shall be, till the -Omnipotent God disposes Nature otherwise.</p> - -<p>As for the rest of your questions, as whether the Sun -be the cause of all motions, and of all natural productions; -and whether the life of a Creature be onely in the -blood, or whether it have its beginning from the -blood, or whether the blood be the chief architect of an -animal, or be the seat of the soul; sense and reason, in my -opinion, doth plainly contradict them; for concerning -the blood, if it were the seat of the Soul, then in the -circulation of the blood, if the Soul hath a brain, it -would become very dizzie by its turning round; but -perchance some may think the Soul to be a Sun, and the -Blood the Zodiack, and the body the Globe of the -Earth, which the Soul surrounds in such time as the -Blood is flowing about. And so leaving those similizing -Fancies, I'le add no more, but repeat what I said in the -beginning, that I rely upon the goodness of your -Nature, from which I hope for pardon, if I have not -so exactly and solidly answered your desire; for the argument -of this discourse being so difficult, may easily -lead me into an error, which your better judgment will -soon correct; and in so doing you will add to those favours -for which I am already,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships most obliged Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_III" id="IV_III">III.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>You thought verily, I had mistaken my self in my -last, concerning the Rational Souls of every -particular Creature, because I said, all Creatures -had numerous Souls; and not onely so, but every particular -Creature had numerous Souls. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, -I did not mistake my self, for I am of the same -opinion still; for though there is but one Soul in infinite -Nature, yet that soul being dividable into parts, -every part is a soul in every single creature, were the -parts no bigger in quantity then an atome. But you -ask whether Nature hath Infinite souls? I answer: -That Infinite Nature is but one Infinite body, divided -into Infinite parts, which we call Creatures; and -therefore it may as well be said, That Nature is composed -of Infinite Creatures or Parts, as she is divided -into Infinite Creatures or Parts; for Nature being -Material, is dividable, and composable. The same -may be said of Nature's Soul, which is the Rational -part of the onely infinite Matter, as also of Nature's -Life, which is the sensitive part of the onely Infinite -self-moving Matter; and of the Inanimate part of the -onely Infinite Matter, which I call the body for distinction -sake, as having no self-motion in its own -nature, for Infinite Material Nature hath an Infinite -Material Soul, Life, and Body. But, <i>Madam</i>, -I desire you to observe what I said already, <i>viz.</i> -that the parts of Nature are as apt to divide, as to unite; -for the chief actions of Nature are to divide, and to -unite; which division is the cause, that it may well be -said, every particular Creature hath numerous souls; -for every part of rational Matter is a particular Soul, -and every part of the sensitive Matter is a particular Life; -all which, mixed with the Inanimate Matter, though -they be Infinite in parts, yet they make but one Infinite -whole, which is Infinite Nature; and thus the -Infinite division into Infinite parts is the cause, that every -particular Creature hath numerous Souls, and the -transmigration of parts from, and to parts, is the reason, -that not any Creature can challenge a single soul, or -souls to it self; the same for life. But most men are unwilling -to believe, that Rational Souls are material, -and that this rational Matter is dividable in Nature; -when as humane sense and reason may well perceive, -that Nature is active, and full of variety; and action, -and variety cannot be without motion, division, and -composition: but the reason that variety, division, and -composition, runs not into confusion, is, that first there -is but one kind of Matter; next, that the division and -composition of parts doth ballance each other into a union -in the whole. But, to conclude, those Creatures -which have their rational parts most united, are -the wisest; and those that have their rational parts most -divided, are the wittiest; and those that have much -of this rational matter, are much knowing; and those -which have less of this rational matter, are less knowing; and -there is no Creature that hath not some; for -like as all the parts of a humane body are indued with -life, and soul; so are all the parts of Infinite Nature; -and though some parts of Matter are not animate in -themselves, yet there is no part that is not mixt with the -animate matter; so that all parts of Nature are moving, -and moved. And thus, hoping I have cleared my -self in this point, to your better understanding, I take -my leave, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_IV" id="IV_IV">IV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In the Works of that most famous Philosopher -and Mathematician of our age <i>Gal.</i> which you -thought worth my reading, I find, he discourses -much of upwards and downwards, backwards and forwards; -but to tell you really, I do not understand what -he means by those words, for, in my opinion, there is -properly no such thing as upwards, downwards, backwards, -or forwards in Nature, for all this is nothing -else but natural corporeal motions, to which in respect -of some particulars we do attribute such or such names; -for if we conceive a Circle, I pray where is upwards -and downwards, backwards and forwards? Certainly, -it is, in my opinion, just like that, they name Rest, -Place, Space, Time, &c. when as Nature her self -knows of no such things, but all these are onely -the several and various motions of the onely Matter. -You will say, How can Rest be a motion? I answer: -Rest is a word which expresses rather mans ignorance -then his knowledg; for when he sees, that a particular -Creature has not any external local motion perceptible -by his sight, he says it resteth, and this rest he calls a -cessation from motion, when as yet there is no such -thing as cessation from motion in Nature; for motion -is the action of natural Matter, and its Nature is to -move perpetually; so that it is more probable for motion -to be annihilated, then to cease. But you may say, -It is a cessation from some particular motion. I answer: -You may rather call it an alteration of a particular motion, -then a cessation; for though a particular motion -doth not move in that same manner as it did before, -nevertheless it is still there, and not onely there, -but still moving; onely it is not moving after the same -manner as it did move heretofore, but has changed -from such a kind of motion to another kind of motion, -and being still moving it cannot be said to cease: -Wherefore what is commonly called cessation from motion, -is onely a change of some particular motion, and -is a mistake of change for rest. Next, I find in the -same <i>Author</i> a long discourse of circular and strait motions; -to wit, <i>That they are simple motions, and that -all others are composed out of them, and are mixt motions; -Also, That the Circular Motion is perfect, and the Right -imperfect; and that all the parts of the world, if moveable -of their own nature, it is impossible, that their motions -should be Right, or any other then Circular: That -a Circular motion is never to be gotten naturally, without -a preceding right motion: That a Right motion cannot -naturally be perpetual: That a Right motion is impossible -in the World well ordered:</i> and the like. First, -I cannot conceive why natural Matter should use the -Circle-figure more then any other in the motions of -her Creatures; for Nature, which is Infinite Matter, -is not bound to one particular motion, or to move in a -Circle more then any other figure, but she moves -more variously then any one part of hers can conceive; -Wherefore it is not requisite that the natural motions -of natural bodies should be onely Circular. Next, -I do not understand, why a Circular Motion cannot -be gotten naturally without a precedent right motion; -for, in my opinion, corporeal motions may be round -or circular, without being or moving straight before; -and if a straight line doth make a circle, then an imperfect -figure makes a perfect; but, in my opinion, a circle -may as well make a straight line, as a strait line a circle; -except it be like a Gordian knot, that it cannot be dissolved, -or that Nature may make some corporeal motions -as constant as she makes others inconstant, for her -motions are not alike in continuance and alteration. And -as for right motion, that naturally it cannot be perpetual; -my opinion is, that it cannot be, if Nature be finite; -but if Nature be infinite, it may be: But the circular -motion is more proper for a finite, then an infinite, -because a circle-figure is perfect and circumscribed, and -a straight line is infinite, or at least producible in infinite; -and there may be other worlds in infinite Nature, -besides these round Globes perceptible by our sight, -which may have other figures; for though it be proper -for Globes or Spherical bodies to move round, -yet that doth not prove, that Infinite Matter moves -round, or that all worlds must be of a Globous figure; -for there may be as different Worlds, as other -Creatures. He says, That a Right motion is impossible -in the World well ordered; But I cannot conceive -a Right motion to be less orderly then a Circular in -Nature, except it be in some Particulars; but oftentimes -that, which is well ordered in some cases, seems -to some mens understandings and perceptions ill ordered -in other cases; for man, as a part, most commonly -considers but the Particulars, not the Generals, like as -every one in a Commonwealth considers more himself -and his Family, then the Publick. Lastly, Concerning -the simplicity of Motions, as that onely circular -and straight motions are simple motions, because they -are made by simple Lines; I know not what they mean -by simple Lines; for the same Lines which make straight -and circular figures, may make as well other figures as -those; but, in my opinion, all motions may be called -simple, in regard of their own nature; for they are nothing -else but the sensitive and rational part of Matter, -which in its own nature is pure, and simple, and moves -according to the Nature of each Figure, either swiftly -or slowly, or in this or that sort of motion; but the -most simple, purest and subtillest part is the rational -part of matter, which though it be mixed with the sensitive -and inanimate in one body, yet it can and doth -move figuratively in its own matter, without the help -or assistance of any other. But I desire you to remember, -<i>Madam</i>, that in the compositions and divisions of -the parts of Nature, there is as much unity and agreement -as there is discord and disagreement; for in Infinite, -there is no such thing, as most, and least; neither is there -any such thing as more perfect, or less perfect in -Matter. And as for Irregularities, properly there -is none in Nature, for Nature is Regular; but that, -which Man (who is but a small part of Nature, -and therefore but partly knowing) names Irregularities, -or Imperfections, is onely a change and alteration -of motions; for a part can know the variety -of motions in Nature no more, then Finite can know -Infinite, or the bare exterior shape and figure of a -mans body can know the whole body, or the head -can know the mind; for Infinite natural knowledg -is incorporeal; and being corporeal, it is dividable; and -being dividable, it cannot be confined to one part -onely; for there is no such thing as an absolute determination -or subsistence in parts without relation or -dependance upon one another. And since Matter is -Infinite, and acts wisely, and all for the best, it may -be as well for the best of Nature, when parts are divided -antipathetically, as when they are united -sympathetically: Also Matter being Infinite, it cannot -be perfect, neither can a part be called perfect, as -being a part. But mistake me not, <i>Madam;</i> for -when I say, there is no perfection in Nature, as I -do in my <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>,<a name="FNanchor_1_175" id="FNanchor_1_175"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_175" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> I mean by Perfection, -a finiteness, absoluteness, or compleatness of -figure; and in this sense I say Nature has no perfection -by reason it is Infinite; but yet I do not deny, -but that there is a perfection in the nature or -essence of Infinite Matter; for Matter is perfect Matter; -that is, pure and simple in its own substance or -nature, as meer Matter, without any mixture or addition -of some thing that is not Matter, or that is -between Matter and no Matter; and material motions -are perfect motions although Infinite: just as a -line may be called a perfect line, although it be endless, -and Gold, or other Mettal, may be called perfect -Gold, or perfect Metal, although it be but apart, -And thus it may be said of Infinite Nature, or Infinite -Matter, without any contradiction, that it is both -perfect, and not perfect; perfect in its nature or substance, -not perfect in its exterior figure. But you -may say, If Infinite Matter be not perfect, it is imperfect, -and what is imperfect, wants something. I -answer, That doth not follow: for we cannot say, -that what is not perfect, must of necessity be imperfect, -because there is something else, which it may -be, to wit, Infinite; for as imperfection is beneath -perfection, so perfection is beneath Infinite; and -though Infinite Matter be not perfect in its figure, yet -it is not imperfect, but Infinite; for Perfection and -Imperfection belongs onely to Particulars, and not to Infinite. -And thus much for the present. I conclude, -and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>most obliged Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_175" id="Footnote_1_175"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_175"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 14.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_V" id="IV_V">V.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>The <i>Author</i>, mentioned in my former Letter, -says, <i>That Quietness is the degree of Infinite -slowness, and that a moveable body passing -from quietness, passes through all the degrees of slowness -without staying in any.</i> But I cannot conceive that all -the Parts of Matter should be necessitated to move by -degrees; for though there be degrees in Nature, yet -Nature doth not in all her actions move by degrees. -You may say, for example, from one to twenty, there -are eighteen degrees between One, and Twenty; and all -these degrees are included in the last degree, which -is twenty. I answer; That may be: but yet there is -no progress made through all those degrees; for when -a body doth move strong at one time, and the next -time after moves weak; I cannot conceive how any -degrees should really be made between. You may -say, by Imagination. But this Imagination of degrees, -is like the conception of Space and Place, when -as yet there is no such thing as Place or Space by it self; -for all is but one body, and Motion is the action of -this same body, which is corporeal Nature; and because -a particular body can and doth move after various -manners, according to the change of its corporeal -motion, this variety of motions man call's Place, Space, -Time, Degrees, &c. considering them by themselves, -and giving them peculiar names, as if they could -be parted from body, or at least be conceived without -body; for the Conception or Imagination it self is -corporeal, and so are they nothing else but corporeal -motions. But it seems as if this same <i>Author</i> conceived -also motion to be a thing by it self, and that motion -begets motion, when he says, That a body by moving -grows stronger in motion by degrees, when as yet -the strength was in the matter of the body eternally; -for Nature was always a grave Matron, never a sucking -Infant: and though parts by dissolving and composing -may lose and get acquaintance of each other, yet -no part can be otherwise in its nature, then ever it was; -Wherefore change of corporeal motions is not losing -nor getting strength or swiftness; for Nature doth -not lose force, although she doth not use force in all -her various actions; neither can any natural body get -more strength than by nature it hath, although it may -get the assistance of other bodies joyned to it. But -swiftness and slowness are according to the several figurative -actions of self-moving matter; which several actions -or motions of Nature, and their alterations, cannot -be found out by any particular Creature: as for example, -the motions of Lead, and the motions of Wood, -unless Man knew their several causes; for Wood, in -some cases, may move slower then Lead; and Lead, in -other cases, slower then Wood. Again: the same -<i>Author</i> says, <i>That an heavy moveable body descending, -gets force enough to bring it back again to as much height.</i> -But I think, it might as well be said, That a Man walking -a mile, gets as much strength as to walk back that mile; -when 'tis likely, that having walked ten miles, he may -not have so much strength as to walk back again one -mile; neither is he necessitated to walk back, except some -other more powerful body do force him back: for -though Nature is self-moving, yet every part has not an -absolute power, for many parts may over-power fewer; -also several corporeal motions may cross and oppose as -well as assist each other; for if there were not opposition, -as well as agreement and assistance amongst Nature's -parts, there would not be such variety in Nature as -there is. Moreover, he makes mention of a <i>Line, with a -weight hung to its end, which being removed from the perpendicular, -presently falls to the same again.</i> To which, I -answer: That it is the appetite and desire of the Line, not -to move by constraint, or any forced exterior motion; -but that which forces the Line to move from the Perpendicular, -doth not give it motion, but is onely an -occasion that it moves in such a way; neither doth the -line get that motion from any other exterior body, but -it is the lines own motion; for if the motion of the hand, -or any other exterior body, should give the line that -motion, I pray, from which doth it receive the motion -to tend to its former state? Wherefore, when the Line -moves backwards or forwards, it is not, that the Line -gets what it had not before, that is, a new corporeal -motion, but it uses its own motion; onely, as I said, -that exterior body is the occasion that it moves after such -a manner or way, and therefore this motion of the line, -although it is the lines own motion, yet in respect of the -exterior body that causes it to move that way, it may -be called a forced, or rather an occasioned motion. And -thus no body can get motion from another body, except -it get matter too; for all that motion that a body has, -proceeds from the self-moving part of matter, and motion -and matter are but one thing; neither is there any -inanimate part of matter in Nature, which is not co-mixed -with the animate, and consequently, there is no -part which is not moving, or moved; the Animate -part of matter is the onely self-moving part, and the -Inanimate the moved: not that the animate matter doth -give away its own motion to the inanimate, and that -the inanimate becomes self-moving; but the animate, -by reason of the close conjunction and commixture, -works together with the inanimate, or causes the inanimate -to work with it; and thus the inanimate remains -as simple in its own nature, as the animate doth in its -nature, although they are mixt; for those mixtures -do not alter the simplicity of each others Nature. But -having discoursed of this subject in my former Letters, -I take my leave, and rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_VI" id="IV_VI">VI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>It seems, my former Letter concerning Motion, has -given you occasion to propound this following question -to me, to wit, <i>When I throw a bowl, or strike a -ball with my hand; whether the motion, by which the -bowl or ball is moved, be the hands, or the balls own -motion? or whether it be transferred out of my hand into -the ball?</i> To which I return this short answer: That -the motion by which (for example) the bowl is moved, -is the bowls own motion, and not the hands that threw -it: for the hand cannot transfer its own motion, which -hath a material being, out of it self into the bowl, or -any other thing it handles, touches, or moves; or else -if it did, the hand would in a short time become weak -and useless, by losing so much substance, unless new -motions were as fast created, as expended. You'll say, -perhaps, that the hand and the bowl may exchange -motions, as that the bowls own motion doth enter into -the hand, and supply that motion which went out -of the hand into the bowl, by a close joyning or touch, -for in all things moving and moved, must be a joyning -of the mover to the moved, either immediate, or -by the means of another body. I answer: That this -is more probable, then that the hand should give out, -or impart motion to the bowl, and receive none from -the bowl; but by reason motion cannot be transferred -without matter, as being both inseparably united, and -but one thing; I cannot think it probable, that any of -the animate or self-moving matter in the hand, quits the -hand, and enters into the bowl; nor that the animate -matter, which is in the bowl, leaves the bowl, and enters -into the hand, because that self-moving substance -is not readily prepared for so sudden a Translation or -Transmigration. You may say, It may as easily be -done as food is received into an animal body and excrement -discharged, or as air is taken in, and breath -sent out, by the way of respiration; and that all Creatures -are not onely produced from each other, but -do subsist by each other, and act by each others assistance. -I answer: It is very true, that all Creatures -have more power and strength by a joyned assistance, -then if every part were single, and subsisted of it self. But -as some parts do assist each other, so on the other side, -some parts do resist each other; for though there be a -unity in the nature of Infinite Matter, yet there are -divisions also in the Infinite parts of Infinite Matter, -which causes Antipathy as much as Sympathy; but -they being equal in assistance as well as in resistance, it -causes a conformity in the whole nature of Infinite Matter; -for if there were not contrary, or rather, I may -say, different effects proceeding from the onely cause, -which is the onely matter, there could not possibly be -any, or at least, so much variety in Nature, as humane -sense and reason perceives there is. But to return -to our first argument: You may say, that motion may -be transferred out of one body into another, without -transferring any of the Matter. I answer: That is -impossible, unless motion were that which some call -No-thing, but how No-thing can be transferred, I -cannot imagine: Indeed no sense and reason in Nature -can conceive that which is No-thing; for how should it -conceive that which is not in Nature to be found. You'll -say, perhaps, It is a substanceless thing, or an incorporeal, -immaterial being or form. I answer: In my -opinion, it is a meer contradiction, to say, a substanceless -thing, form, or being, for surely in Nature it cannot -be. But if it be not possible that motion can be -divided from matter, you may say, that body from -whence the motion is transferred, would become less in -bulk and weight, and weaker with every act of motion; -and those bodies into which corporeal motion or self-moving -matter was received, would grow bigger, heavier, -and stronger. To which, I answer: That this -is the reason, which denies that there can be a translation -of motion out of the moving body into the moved; for -questionless, the one would grow less, and the other -bigger, that by loosing so much substance, this by receiving. -Nay if it were possible, as it is not, that -motion could be transferred without matter, the body -out of which it goes, would nevertheless grow weaker; -for the strength lies in the motion, unless you believe, -this motion which is transferred to have been useless in -the mover, and onely useful to the moved; or else it -would be superfluous in the moved, except you say, it -became to be annihilated after it was transferr'd and had -done its effect; but if so, then there would be a perpetual -and infinite creation and annihilation of substanceless -motion, and how there could be a creation and annihilation -of nothing, my reason cannot conceive, neither -is it possible, unless Nature had more power then -God, to create Nothing, and to annihilate Nothing. -The truth is, it is more probable for sense and reason to -believe a Creation of Something out of Nothing, then -a Creation of Nothing out of Nothing. Wherefore -it cannot in sense and reason be, that the motion of the -hand is transferr'd into the bowl. But yet I do not say, -that the motion of the hand doth not contribute to the -motion of the bowl; for though the bowl hath its own -natural motion in itself, (for Nature and her creatures -know of no rest, but are in a perpetual motion, though -not always exterior and local, yet they have their proper -and certain motions, which are not so easily perceived -by our grosser senses) nevertheless the motion of -the bowl would not move by such an exterior local motion, -did not the motion of the hand, or any other exterior -moving body give it occasion to move that way; -Wherefore the motion of the hand may very well be -said to be the cause of that exterior local motion of the -bowl, but not to be the same motion by which the bowl -moves. Neither is it requisite, that the hand should -quit its own motion, because it uses it in stirring up, or -putting on the motion of the bowl; for it is one thing -to use, and another to quit; as for example, it is one -thing to offer his life for his friends service, another to -imploy it, and another to quit or lose it. But, <i>Madam</i>, -there may be infinite questions or exceptions, and -infinite answers made upon one truth; but the wisest -and most probable way is, to rely upon sense and reason, -and not to trouble the mind, thoughts, and actions -of life, with improbabilities, or rather impossibilities, -which sense and reason knows not of, nor cannot -conceive. You may say, A Man hath sometimes improbable, -or impossible Fancies, Imaginations, or Chymæra's, -in his mind, which are No-things. I answer, That -those Fancies and Imaginations are not No-things, but -as perfectly imbodied as any other Creatures; but by -reason, they are not so grossly imbodied, as those creatures -that are composed of more sensitive and inanimate -matter, man thinks or believes them to be no bodies; -but were they substanceless figures, he could not have -them in his mind or thoughts: The truth is, the purity -of reason is not so perspicuous and plain to sense, as -sense is to reason, the sensitive matter being a grosser -substance then the rational. And thus, <i>Madam</i>, -I have answered your proposed question, according to -the ability of my Reason, which I leave to your better -examination, and rest in the mean while,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_VII" id="IV_VII">VII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Having made some mention in my former Letter -of the Receiving of Food, and discharging of -Excrements, as also of Respiration, which consists -in the sucking in of air, and sending out of breath -in an animal body; you desire to know, <i>Whether Respiration -be common to all animal Creatures?</i> Truly, I -have not the experience, as to tell you really, whether -all animals respire, or not; for my life being, for the -most part, solitary and contemplative, but not active, I -please my self more with the motions of my thoughts, -then of my senses; and therefore I shall give you an -answer according to the conceivement of my reason -onely, which is, That I believe, all animals require Respiration; -not onely those, which live in the air, but -those also, which live in waters, and within the earth; -but they do not respire all after one and the same manner; -for the matter which they imbreath, is not every -where the same, nor have they all the same organs, or -parts, nor the same motions. As for example: Some -Creatures require a more thin and rarer substance for -their imbreathing or inspiring, then others, and some -a more thick and grosser substance then others, according -to their several Natures; for as there are several -kinds of Creatures, according to their several habitations -or places they live in, so they have each a distinct -and several sort of matter or substance for their inspiration. -As for example: Some live in the Air, some -upon the face of the Earth, some in the bowels -Earth, and some in Waters. There is some report of -a Salamander, who lives in the Fire; but it being not -certainly known, deserves not our speculation. And, -as in my opinion, all animal Creatures require Respiration, -so I do verily believe, that also all other kinds -of Creatures, besides animals, have some certain manner -of imbreathing and transpiring, <i>viz.</i> Vegetables, -Minerals, and Elements, although not after the same -way as Animals, yet in a way peculiar and proper to -the nature of their own kind. For example: Take away -the earth from Vegetables, and they will die, as -being, in my opinion, stifled or smothered, in the same -manner, as when the Air is taken away from some Animals. -Also, take Minerals out of the bowels of the -Earth, and though we cannot say, they die, or are -dead, because we have not as yet found out the alterative -motions of Minerals, as well as of Vegetables, or -Animals, yet we know that they are dead from production -and increase, for not any Metal increases being -out of the Earth. And as for Elements, it is manifest -that Fire will die for want of vent; but the rest of the -Elements, if we could come to know the matter, manner, -and ways of their Vital Breathing, we might -kill or revive them as we do Fire. And therefore all -Creatures, to my Reason, require a certain matter and -manner of inspiration and expiration, which is nothing -else but an adjoyning and disjoyning of parts to -and from parts; for not any natural part or creature -can subsist single, and by it self, but requires assistance -from others, as this, and the rest of my opinions in -Natural Philosophy, desire the assistance of your favour, -or else they will die, to the grief of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_VIII" id="IV_VIII">VIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Th'other day I met with the Work of that Learned -<i>Author</i> Dr. <i>Ch.</i> which treats of Natural Philosophy; -and amongst the rest, in the Chapter -of Place, I found that he blames <i>Aristotle</i> for saying, -there are none but corporeal dimensions, Length, -Breadth, and Depth in Nature, making besides these -corporeal, other incorporeal dimensions which he attributes -to <i>Vacuum</i>. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, an incorporeal -dimension or extension, seems, in my opinion, a meer -contradiction; for I cannot conceive how nothing can -have a dimension or extension, having nothing to be -extended or measured. His words are these: <i>Imagine -we therefore, that God should please to annihilate the -whole stock or mass of Elements, and all concretions resulting -therefrom, that is, all corporeal substances now -contained within the ambit or concave of the lowest Heaven, -or Lunar sphear; and having thus imagined, can -we conceive that all the vast space or region circumscribed -by the concave superfice of the Lunar sphere, would not -remain the same in all its dimensions, after as before the -reduction of all bodies included therein to nothing?</i> To -which, I answer: That, in my opinion, he makes -Nature Supernatural; for although God's Power may -make Vacuum, yet Nature cannot; for God's and Nature's -Power are not to be compared, neither is God's invisible -Power perceptible by Natures parts; but according -to Natural Perception, it is impossible to conceive a -Vacuum, for we cannot imagine a Vacuum, but we -must think of a body, as your <i>Author</i> of the Circle of -the Moon; neither could he think of space but from -one side of the Circle to the other, so that in his mind he -brings two sides together, and yet will have them distant; -but the motions of his thoughts being subtiler and -swifter then his senses, skip from side to side without -touching the middle parts, like as a Squirrel from bough -to bough, or an Ape from one table to another; without -touching the ground, onely cutting the air. Next, -he says, That an absolute Vacuum, is neither an Accident, -nor a Body, nor yet Nothing, but Something, because -it has a being; which opinion seems to me like that -of the divine Soul; but I suppose Vacuum is not the -divine Soul, nor the divine Soul, Vacuum; or else -it could not be sensible of the blessed happiness in -Heaven, or the Torments in Hell. Again he says, -<i>Let us screw our supposition one pin higher, and farther -imagine, that God, after the annihilation of this -vast machine, the Universe, should create another in -all respects equal to this, and in the same part of space -wherein this now consists: First, we must conceive, that -as the spaces were immense before God created the -world, so also must they eternally persist of infinite extent, -if he shall please at any time to destroy it; next, -that these immense spaces are absolutely immoveable.</i> -By this opinion, it seems, that Gods Power cannot so -easily make or annihilate Vacuum, as a substance; -because he believes it to be before all Matter, and -to remain after all Matter, which is to be eternal; -but I cannot conceive, why Matter, or fulness of body, -should not as well be Infinite and Eternal, as his -Conceived Vacuum; for if Vacuum can have an eternal -and infinite being, why may not fulness of body, or -Matter? But he calls Vacuum Immovable, which in -my opinion is to make it a God; for God is onely Immoveable -and Unalterable, and this is more Glorious -then to be dependant upon God; wherefore to believe -Matter to be Eternal, but yet dependent upon God, is -a more humble opinion, then his opinion of Vacuum; -for if Vacuum be not created, and shall not be -annihilated, but is Uncreated, Immaterial, Immoveable, -Infinite, and Eternal, it is a God; but if it -be created, God being not a Creator of Nothing, -nor an annihilator of Nothing, but of Something, -he cannot be a Creator of Vacuum; for Vacuum is -a pure Nothing. But leaving Nothing to those that -can make something of it, I will add no more, but -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_IX" id="IV_IX">IX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>That Learned <i>Author</i>, of whom I made mention -in my last, is pleased to say in his Chapter of -Time, that Time is the <i>Twin-brother to Space</i>; -but if Space be as much as Vacuum, then I say, they -are Twin-nothings; for there can be no such thing as an -empty or immaterial space, but that which man calls -space, is onely a distance betwixt several corporeal -parts, and time is onely the variation of corporeal motions; -for were there no body, there could not be any -space, and were there no corporeal motion, there -could not be any time. As for Time, considered in -General, it is nothing else but the corporeal motions -in Nature, and Particular times are the Particular -corporeal motions; but Duration is onely a continuance, -or continued subsistence of the same parts, caused -by the consistent motions of those parts; Neither are -Time, Duration, Place, Space, Magnitude, &c. dependents -upon corporeal motions, but they are all one -and the same thing; Neither was Time before, nor -can be after corporeal motion, for none can be without -the other, being all one: And as for Eternity, it -is one fixed instant, without a flux, or motion. Concerning -his argument of Divisibility of Parts, my opinion -is, That there is no Part in Nature Individable, no -not that so small a part, which the Epicureans name an -Atome; neither is Matter separable from Matter, nor -Parts from Parts in General, but onely in Particulars; -for though parts can be separated from parts, by self-motion, -yet upon necessity they must joyn to parts, so -as there can never be a single part by it self. But -hereof, as also of Place, Space, Time, Motion, Figure, -Magnitude, &c. I have sufficiently discoursed in -my former Letters, as also in my Book of Philosophy; -and as for my opinion of Atoms, their figures and motions, -(if any such things there be) I will refer you to -my Book of Poems, out of which give me leave to repeat -these following lines, containing the ground of my -opinion of Atomes:<a name="FNanchor_1_176" id="FNanchor_1_176"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_176" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p> - - -<p> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>All Creatures, howsoe're they may be nam'd,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Are of</i> long, square, flat, <i>or</i> sharp <i>Atoms fram'd.</i></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Thus several figures several tempers make,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>But what is mixt, doth of the four partake.</i></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>The onely cause, why things do live and die,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>'S according as the mixed Atomes lie.</i></span><br /> -<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Thus life, and death, and young, and old,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Are as the several Atoms hold:</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Wit, understanding in the brain</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Are as the several atomes reign:</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>And dispositions, good, or ill,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Are as the several atomes still;</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>And every Passion, which doth rise,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Is as each several atome lies.</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Thus sickness, health, and peace, and war,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em;"><i>Are as the several atomes are.</i></span><br /> -</p> - -<p>If you desire to know more, you may read my mentioned -Book of Poems whose first Edition was printed -in the year, 1653. And so taking my leave of you, I -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_176" id="Footnote_1_176"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_176"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Pag.</i> 7. in the second Impression. <i>Pag.</i> 9. -<i>Pag.</i> 22. <i>Pag.</i> 24.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_X" id="IV_X">X.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I received the Book of your new <i>Author</i> that treats of -Natural Philosophy, which I perceive is but lately -come forth; but although it be new, yet there are no -new opinions in it; for the <i>Author</i> doth follow the opinions -of some old Philosophers, and argues after the accustomed -Scholastical way, with hard, intricate, and nonsensical -words: Wherefore I shall not take so much -pains as to read it quite over, but onely pick out here -and there some few discourses, which I shall think most -convenient for the clearing of my own opinion; in the -number of which, is, first, that of Matter, whereof the -<i>Author</i> is pleased to proclaim the opinion that holds -Matter to be Infinite, not onely absurd, but also impious. -Truly, <i>Madam</i>, it is easily said, but hardly -proved; and not to trouble you with unnecessary repetitions, -I hope you do remember as yet what I have -written to you in the beginning concerning the infiniteness -of Nature, or natural Matter, where I have proved -that it implies no impiety, absurdity, or contradiction -at all, to believe that Matter is Infinite; for your -<i>Authors</i> argument, concluding from the finiteness of particular -Creatures to Nature her self, is of no force; for -though no part of Nature is Infinite in bulk, figure, or -quantity, nevertheless, all the parts of Infinite Nature -are Infinite in number, which infinite number of parts -must needs make up one Infinite body in bulk, or quantity; -for as a finite body or substance is dividable into -finite parts, so an Infinite body, as Nature, or natural -Matter, must of necessity be dividable into infinite -parts in number, and yet each part must also be finite in -its exterior figure, as I have proved in the beginning by -the example of a heap of grains of corn. Certainly, -<i>Madam</i>, I see no reason, but since, according to your -<i>Author</i>, God, as the prime Cause, Agent, and Producer -of all things, and the action by which he produced -all things, is Infinite; the Matter out of which he -produced all particular Creatures may be Infinite also. -Neither doth it, to my sense and reason, imply any contradiction -or impiety; for it derogates nothing from -the Glory and Omnipotency of God, but God is still -the God of Nature, and Nature is his Servant, although -Infinite, depending wholly upon the will and pleasure -of the All-powerful God: Neither do these two Infinites -obstruct each other; for Nature is corporeal, and -God is a supernatural and spiritual Infinite Being, and -although Nature has an Infinite power, yet she has -but an Infinite Natural power, whereas Gods Omnipotency -is infinitely extended beyond Nature. But -your <i>Author</i> is pleased to refute that argument, which -concludes from the effect to the cause, and proves Matter -to be infinite, because God as the Cause is Infinite, -saying, that this Rule doth onely hold in Univocal -things, (by which, I suppose, he understands things of -the same kind and nature) and not in opposites. Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, by this he limits God's power, as if -God were not able to work beyond Nature, and Natural -Reason or Understanding; and measures Gods -actions according to the rules of Logick; which whether -it be not more impious, you may judg your self. -And as for opposites, God and Nature are not opposites, -except you will call opposites those which bear a -certain relation to one another, as a Cause, and its Effect; -a Parent, and a Child; a Master, and a Servant; and -the like. Nay, I wonder how your <i>Author</i> can limit -Gods action, when as he confesses himself, that -the Creation of the World is an Infinite action. God -acted finitely, says he, by an Infinite action; which, -in my opinion, is meer non-sense, and as much as to say, -a man can act weakly by a strong action, basely by an -honest action, cowardly by a stout action. The truth -is, God being Infinite, cannot work finitely; for, as -his Essence, so his Actions cannot have any limitation, -and therefore it is most probable, that God made Nature -Infinite; for though each part of Nature is finite -in its own figure, yet considered in general, they are -Infinite, as well in number, as duration, except God -be pleased to destroy them; nay, every particular may -in a certain sense be said Infinite, to wit, Infinite in time -or duration; for if Nature be Infinite and Eternal, and -there be no annihilation or perishing in Nature, but a -perpetual successive change and alteration of natural -figures, then no part of Nature can perish or be annihilated; -and if no part of Nature perishes, then it lasts -infinitely in Nature, that is, in the substance of natural -Matter; for though the corporeal motions, which -make the figures, do change, yet the ground of the -figure, which is natural matter, never changes. The -same may be said of corporeal motions: for though -motions change and vary infinite ways, yet none is lost -in Nature, but some motions are repeated again: As -for example; the natural motions in an Animal Creature, -although they are altered in the dissolution of the -figure, yet they may be repeated again by piece-meals -in other Creatures; like as a Commonwealth, or -united body in society, if it should be dissolved or -dispersed, the particulars which did constitute this -Commonwealth or society, may joyn to the making of -another society; and thus the natural motions of a body -do not perish when the figure of the body dissolves, -but joyn with other motions to the forming and producing -of some other figures. But to return to your -<i>Author</i>. I perceive his discourse is grounded upon a false -supposition, which appears by his way of arguing from -the course of the Starrs and Planets, to prove the finiteness -of Nature; for by reason the Stars and Planets -rowl about, and turn to the same point again, each -within a certain compass of time, he concludes Nature -or Natural Matter to be finite too. And so he -takes a part for the whole, to wit, this visible World -for all Nature, when as this World is onely a part of -Nature, or Natural Matter, and there may be more, -and Infinite worlds besides; Wherefore his conclusion -must needs be false, since it is built upon a false -ground. Moreover, he is as much against the Eternity -of Matter, as he is against Infiniteness; concluding -likewise from the parts to the whole; For, <i>says -he</i>, since the parts of Nature are subject to a beginning -and ending, the whole must be so too. But he -is much mistaken, when he attributes a beginning -and ending to parts, for there is no such thing as a beginning -and ending in Nature, neither in the whole, -nor in the parts, by reason there is no new creation or -production of Creatures out of new Matter, nor any -total destruction or annihilation of any part in Nature, -but onely a change, alteration and transmigration -of one figure into another; which change and alteration -proves rather the contrary, to wit, that Matter -is Eternal and Incorruptible; for if particular figures -change, they must of necessity change in the Infinite -Matter, which it self, and in its nature, is not subject -to any change or alteration: besides, though particulars -have a finite and limited figure, and do change, -yet their species do not; for Mankind never changes, -nor ceases to be, though <i>Peter</i> and <i>Paul</i> die, or rather -their figures dissolve and divide; for to die is nothing -else, but that the parts of that figure divide and -unite into some other figures by the change of motion -in those parts. Concerning the Inanimate Matter, -which of it self is a dead, dull, and idle matter, your -<i>Author</i> denies it to be a co-agent or assistant to the animate -matter: For, says he, how can dead and idle -things act? To which, I answer: That your <i>Author</i> -being, or pretending to be a Philosopher, should consider -that there is difference betwixt a Principal and Instrumental -cause or agent; and although this inanimate, -or dull matter, doth not act of it self as a principal -agent, yet it can and doth act as an Instrument, according -as it is imploy'd by the animate matter: for by reason -there is so close a conjunction and commixture of -animate and inanimate Matter in Nature, as they do -make but one body, it is impossible that the animate part -of matter should move without the inanimate; not that -the inanimate hath motion in her self, but the animate -bears up the inanimate in the action of her own substance, -and makes the inanimate work, act, and move -with her, by reason of the aforesaid union and commixture. -Lastly, your <i>Author</i> speaks much of Minima's, -<i>viz.</i> That all things may be resolved into their -minima's, and what is beyond them, is nothing, and -that there is one maximum, or biggest, which is the -world, and what is beyond that, is Infinite. Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, I must ingeniously confess, I am not so -high learned, as to penetrate into the true sense of these -words; for he says, they are both divisible, and indivisible, -and yet no atomes, which surpasses my Understanding; -for there is no such thing, as biggest and -smallest in Nature, or in the Infinite matter; for who -can know how far this World goes, or what is beyond -it? There may be Infinite Worlds, as I said before, -for ought we know; for God and Nature cannot be -comprehended, nor their works measured, if we cannot -find out the nature of particular things, which are -subject to our exterior senses, how shall we be able to -judg of things not subject to our senses. But your <i>Author</i> -doth speak so presumptuously of Gods Actions, -Designs, Decrees, Laws, Attributes, Power, and secret -Counsels, and describes the manner, how God created -all things, and the mixture of the Elements to an hair, as -if he had been Gods Counsellor and assistant in the -work of Creation; which whether it be not more impiety, -then to say, Matter is Infinite, I'le let others judg. -Neither do I think this expression to be against the holy -Scripture; for though I speak as a natural Philosopher, -and am unwilling to cite the Scripture, which onely -treats of things belonging to Faith, and not to Reason; -yet I think there is not any passage which plainly -denies Matter to be Infinite, and Eternal, unless it be -drawn by force to that sense: <i>Solomon</i> says, <i>That there -is not any thing new</i>: and in another place it is said, -<i>That God is all fulfilling</i>; that is, that the Will of God is -the fulfilling of the actions of Nature: also the Scripture -says, <i>That Gods ways are unsearchable, and past -finding out.</i> Wherefore, it is easier to treat of Nature, -then the God of Nature; neither should God be treated -of by vain Philosophers, but by holy Divines, which -are to deliver and interpret the Word of God without -sophistry, and to inform us as much of Gods Works, -as he hath been pleased to declare and make known. -And this is the safest way, in the opinion of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XI" id="IV_XI">XI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your new <i>Author</i> endeavours to prove, that Water -in its own proper nature is thicker then Earth; -which, to my sense and reason, seems not probable; -for although water is less porous then earth in -its exterior figure, yet 'tis not so thick as earth in its interior -nature: Neither can I conceive it to be true, that -water in its own nature, and as long as it remains water, -should be as hard as Crystal, or stone, as his opinion -is; for though Elements are so pliant (being not -composed of many different parts and figures) as they -can change and rechange their exterior figures, yet -they do not alter their interior nature without a total dissolution; -but your <i>Author</i> may as well say, that the interior -nature of man is dust and ashes, as that water in -its interior nature is as thick as earth, and as hard as -Christal, or stone; whereas yet a man, when he becomes -dust and ashes, is not a man; and therefore, when -water is become so thick as earth, or so hard as stone, it -is not water; I mean when it is so in its interior nature, -not in its exterior figure; for the exterior figure may -be contracted, when yet the interior nature is dilative; -and so the exterior may be thick or hard, when the interior -is soft and rare. But you may say, that water is -a close, and heavy, as also a smooth and glossy body. -I answer: That doth not prove its interior nature to -be hard, dense, thick, or contracted; for the interior -nature and parts of a body may be different from the exterior -figure or parts; neither doth the close joyning of -parts hinder dilatation; for if so, a line or circle could -not dilate or extend: But this close uniting of the parts -of water is caused through its wet and glutinous quality, -which wet and sticking quality is caused by a watery dilatation; -for though water hath not interiously so rare -a dilatation as Air, Fire, and Light, yet it hath not so -close a contraction as Earth, Stone, or Metal; neither -are all bodies that are smooth and shining, more solid -and dense, then those that are rough and dark; for light -is more smooth, glossy, and shining, then Water, Metal, -Earth, or Transparent-stones, and yet is of a dilative -nature. But because some bodies and figures -which are transparent and smooth, are dense, hard, and -thick, we cannot in reason, or sense, say, that all bodies -and figures are so. As for Transparency, it is -caused through a purity of substance, and an evenness -of parts: the like is glossiness, onely glossiness requires -not so much regularity, as transparency. But to -return to Water; its exterior Circle-figure may -dilate beyond the degree of the propriety or nature of -water, or contract beneath the propriety or nature of -water. Your <i>Author</i> may say, Water is a globous -body, and all globous bodies tend to a Center. I answer: -That my sense and reason cannot perceive, but -that Circles and Globes do as easily dilate, as contract: -for if all Globes and Circles should endeavour to draw -or fall from the circumference to the Center, the Center -of the whole World, or at least of some parts of the -World, would be as a Chaos: besides, it is against -sense and reason, that all Matter should strive to a -Center; for humane sense and reason may observe, that -all Creatures, and so Matter, desire liberty, and a -Center is but a Prison in comparison to the Circumference; -wherefore if Matter crowds, it is rather -by force, then a voluntary action. You will say, All -Creatures desire rest, and in a Center there's rest. I -answer; Humane sense and reason cannot perceive any -rest in Nature: for all things, as I have proved heretofore, -are in a perpetual motion. But concerning -Water, you may ask me, <i>Madam</i>, Whether congeal'd -Water, as Ice, if it never thaw, remains Water? -To which, I answer: That the interior nature of -Water remains as long as the Ice remains, although the -outward form is changed; but if Ice be contracted into -the firmness and density of Crystal, or Diamond, or -the like, so as to be beyond the nature of Water, and -not capable to be that Water again, then it is transformed -into another Creature, or thing, which is neither -Water, nor Ice, but a Stone; for the Icy contraction -doth no more alter the interior nature of Water, which -is dilating, then the binding of a man with Chains alters -his nature from being a man; and it might be said -as well, that the nature of Air is not dilating, when -inclosed in a bladder, as that Water doth not remain -Water in its interior nature, when it is contracted into -Ice. But you may ask, Whether one extreme can -change into another? I answer: To my sense and reason -it were possible, if extremes were in Nature; but I -do not perceive that in Nature there be any, although -my sense and reason doth perceive alterations in the effects -of Nature; for though one and the same part -may alter from contraction to dilation, and from dilation -to contraction; yet this contraction and dilation -are not extremes, neither are they performed at one and -the same time, but at different times. But having sufficiently -declared my opinion hereof in my former Letters, -I'l add no more, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XII" id="IV_XII">XII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>My discourse of Water in my last Letter has given -you occasion to enquire after the reason, <i>Why -the weight of a great body of water doth not press -so hard and heavily as to bruise or crush a body, when it is -sunk down to the bottom?</i> As for example: If a man -should be drowned, and afterwards cast out from the -bottom of a great Sea, or River, upon the shore; he -would onely be found smother'd or choak'd to death, -and not press'd, crush'd, or bruised, by the weight of water. -I answer; The reasons are plain: for, first, the -nature of a mans respiration requires such a temperature -of breath to suck in, as is neither too thick, nor -too thin for his lungs, and the rest of his interior parts, -as also for the organs and passages of his exterior senses, -but fit, proper, and proportionable to those mentioned -parts of his body: As for example; in a too thin and -rarified air, man will be as apt to die for want of breath, -as in a too gross and thick air he is apt to die with a superfluity -of the substance he imbreaths; for thick smoak, or -thick vapour, as also too gross air, will soon smother a -man to death; and as for choaking, if a man takes more -into his throat then he can swallow, he will die; and if -his stomack be filled with more food then it is able to digest, -if it cannot discharge it self, he will die with the -excess of food; and if there be no food, or too little put -into it, he will also die for want of food. So the eye, -if it receives too many, or too gross, or too bright objects, -it will be dazled or blinded, and some objects -through their purity are not to be seen at all: The -same for Hearing, and the rest of the exterior senses: And -this is the reason, why man, or some animal Creatures -are smother'd and choak'd with water; because -water is thicker then the grossest air or vapour; for if -smoak, which is rarer then water, will smother and -choak a man, well may water, being so much thicker. -But yet this smothering or choaking doth not prove, -that water hath an interior or innate density (as your -<i>Authors</i> opinion is) no more then smoak, or thick and -gross air hath; but the density of water is caused more -through the wet and moist exterior parts, joyning and -uniting closely together; and the interior nature of -smoak being more moist or glutinous then thin air, and -so more apt to unite its exterior parts, it makes it to come -in effect nearer to water; for though water and smoak -are both of rare natures, yet not so rare as clear and pure -air; neither is water or smoak so porous as pure air, by -reason the exterior parts of water and smoak are more -moist or glutinous then pure air. But the thickness of -water and smoak is the onely cause of the smothering -of men, or some animals, as by stopping their breath, -for a man can no more live without air, then he can -without food; and a well tempered or middle degree of -air is the most proper for animal Respiration; for if the -air be too thick, it may soon smother or choak him; -and if too thin, it is not sufficient to give him breath: -And this is the reason that a man being drown'd, is not -onely smother'd, but choak'd by water; because there -enters more through the exterior passages into his body -then can be digested; for water is apt to flow more -forcibly and with greater strength then air; not that -it is more dilating then air, but by reason it is thicker, -and so stronger, or of more force; for the denser a body -is, the stronger it is; and a heavy body, when moved, -is more forcible then a light body. But I pray -by this expression mistake not the nature of water; for -the interior nature of water hath not that gravity, -which heavy or dense bodies have, its nature being -rare and light, as air, or fire; but the weight of water, -as I said before, proceeds onely from the closeness and -compactness of its exterior parts, not through a contraction -in its interior nature; and there is no argument, -which proves better, that water in its interior nature -is dilating, then that its weight is not apt to press -to a point; for though water is apt to descend, through -the union of its parts, yet it cannot press hard, by -reason of its dilating nature, which hinders that heavy -pressing quality; for a dilating body cannot have a -contracted weight, I mean, so as to press to a Center, -which is to a point; and this is the reason, that when -a grave or heavy body sinks down to the bottom of -water, it is not opprest, hurt, crusht, or bruised by the -weight of water; for, as I said, the nature of water being -dilating, it can no more press hard to a center, then -vapour, air, or fire: The truth is, water would be as -apt to ascend as descend, if it were not for the wet, glutinous -and sticking, cleaving quality of its exterior parts; -but as the quantity and quality of the exterior parts -makes water apt to sink, or descend, so the dilating nature -makes it apt to flow, if no hinderance stop its course; -also the quantity and quality of its exterior parts is the -cause, that some heavy bodies do swim without sinking: -as for example; a great heavy Ship will not readily -sink, unless its weight be so contracted as to break -asunder the united parts of water; for the wet quality -of water causing its exterior parts to joyn close, gives -it such an united strength, as to be able to bear a heavy -burden, if the weight be dilated, or level, and not piercing -or penetrating; for those bodies that are most compact, -will sink sooner, although of less weight then -those that are more dilated although of greater weight: -Also the exterior and outward shape or form makes -some bodies more apt to sink then others; Indeed, the -outward form and shape of Creatures is one of the -chief causes of either sinking or swimming. But to -conclude, water in its interior nature is of a mean or -middle degree, as neither too rare, nor too grave a body; -and for its exterior quality, it is in as high a degree -for wetness, as fire is for heat; and being apt both to -divide, and to unite, it can bear a burden, and devour -a burden, so that some bodies may swim, and others -sink; and the cause, that a sunk body is not opprest, -crush'd, or squeesed, is the dilating nature and quality -of water, which hinders its parts from pressing or crowding -towards a point or center; for although water is heavy, -and apt to descend, yet its weight is not caused by -a contraction of its substance, but by a union of its parts. -Thus, <i>Madam</i>, I have obeyed your commands, in -giving you my reasons to your propounded question, -which if you approve, I have my aim; if not, I submit -to your better judgment: for you know I am in all -respects,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>to serve you.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XIII" id="IV_XIII">XIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am glad, you are pleased with my reasons I gave -to your propounded question concerning the weight -of Water; and since you have been pleased to send -me some more of that subject, I shall be ready also to -give my answer to them, according to the capacity of -my judgment. First, you desire to know, <i>How it -comes, that Water will by degrees ascend through a narrow -pipe, when the pipe is placed straight upright; or perpendicular?</i> -The reason, in my opinion is, that Water, -having a dilative nature, when it finds an obstruction -to descend or flow even, will dilate it self ascendingly, -according as it hath liberty, or freedom, and -strength, or quantity; the truth is, water would be -more apt to ascend then to descend, were it not for the -close uniting of its liquid Parts, which causes its exterior -density, and this density makes it of more weight then -its nature is; and the proof that water is apt in its nature -to ascend, is, that some sorts of vapours are made onely -by the dilation and rarefaction of ascending Water. -Your second question is, <i>Why the surface of water seems -to be concave in its middle, and higher on every side?</i> I -answer, The interior figure of water is a circular figure, -which being a round figure, is both concave, and convex; -for where one is, the other must be; and the motions -of ebbing and flowing, and ascending or descending, -are partly of that figure; and so according to the -exterior dilating strength or weakness, the exterior parts -of water become either concave or convex; for in a -full strength, as a full stream, the exterior parts of water -flow in a convex figure, but when they want strength, -they ebb in a concave figure. Your third question is, -<i>What makes frozen water apt to break those Vessels wherein -it is contained, in the act of freezing or congealing?</i> I -answer: The same cause that makes water clear, as also -more swell'd then usually it is: which cause is the inherent -dilative nature of water; for water being naturally -dilative, when as cold attractions do assault it, the moist -dilations of water in the conflict use more then their ordinary -strength to resist those cold contracting motions, -by which the body of water dilates it self into a larger -compass, according as it hath liberty or freedom, or -quantity of parts; and the cold parts not being able to -drive the water back to its natural compass, bind it as -it is extended, like as if a beast should be bound when -his legs and neck are thrust out at the largest extent, in -striving to kick or thrust away his enemies and imprisoners: -And so the reason why water breaks these vessels -wherein it is inclosed, in the act of its freezing or -congealing is, that when the cold contractions are -so strong as they endeavour to extinguish the dilating -nature of water, the water refilling, forces its -parts so, as they break the vessel which incloses them: -The same reason makes Ice clear and transparent; for it -is not the rarefaction of water that doth it, but the dilation, -which causes the parts of water to be not onely -more loose and porous, but also more smooth and even, -by resisting the cold contractions; for every part endeavours -to defend their borders with a well ordered and -regular flowing or streaming, and not onely to defend, -but to enlarge their compass against their enemies. Your -fourth question is, How it comes <i>that Snow and Salt -mixt together doth make Ice?</i> The reason, in my judgment, -is, that Salt being very active, and partly of the -nature of fire, doth sometimes preserve, and sometimes -destroy other bodies, according to its power, or rather -according to the nature of those bodies it works on; and -salt being mixt with snow, endeavours to destroy it; but -having not so much force, melts it onely by its heat, and -reduces it into its first principle, which is water, altering -the figure of snow; but the cold contractions remaining -in the water, and endeavouring to maintain and -keep their power, straight draw the water or melted -snow into the figure of ice, so as neither the salts heat, -nor the waters dilative nature, are able to resist or destroy -those cold contractions; for although they destroy'd -the first figure, which is snow, yet they cannot hinder -the second, which is Ice. Your last question is, <i>How -the Clouds can hang so long in the Skie without falling -down?</i> Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I do not perceive that Clouds, -being come to their full weight and gravity, do keep -up in the air, but some of them fall down in showres of -rain, others in great and numerous flakes of snow; some -are turned into wind, and some fall down in thick mists, -so that they onely keep up so long, until they are of a -full weight for descent, or till their figure is altered -into some other body, as into air, wind, rain, lightning, -thunder, snow, hail, mist, and the like. But -many times their dilating motions keep or hinder them -from descending, to which contracting motions are required. -In my opinion, it is more to be admired, that -the Sea doth not rise, then that Clouds do not fall; for, -as we see, Clouds fall very often, as also change from -being Clouds, to some other figure: Wherefore it is -neither the Sun, nor Stars, nor the Vapours, which -arise from the Earth, and cause the Clouds, nor the -porosity of their bodies, nor the Air, that can keep -or hinder them from falling or changing to some other -body; but they being come to their full weight, fall -or change according as is fittest for them. And these -are all the reasons I can give you for the present; if they -do not satisfie you, I will study for others, and in all -occasions endeavour to express my self,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XIV" id="IV_XIV">XIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since in my last, I made mention of the Congealing -of Water into Ice and Snow, I cannot choose, -but by the way tell you, that I did lately meet with -an <i>Author</i>, who is of opinion, That Snow is nothing else -but Ice broken or ground into small pieces. To -which, I answer: That this opinion may serve very -well for a Fancy, but not for a Rational Truth, or at -least for a Probable Reason; For why may not the cold -motions make snow without beating or grinding, as well -as they make Ice? Surely Nature is wiser then to -trouble her self with unnecessary labour, and to make -an easie work difficult, as Art her Creature doth, or as -some dull humane capacities conceive; for it is more easie -for Nature to make Snow by some sorts of cold contractions, -as she makes Ice by other sorts of cold contractions, -then to force Air and Wind to beat, grinde, -or pound Ice into Snow, which would cause a confusion -and disturbance through the Irregularity of several -parts, being jumbled in a confused manner together. -The truth is, it would rather cause a War in Nature, -then a natural production, alteration, or transformation: -Neither can I conceive, in what region this turbulent -and laborious work should be acted; certainly -not in the caverns of the Earth, for snow descends -from the upper Region. But, perchance, this <i>Author</i> -believes, that Nature imploys Wind as a Hand, and -the Cold air as a Spoon, to beat Ice like the white of an -Egg into a froth of Snow. But the great quantity of -Snow, in many places, doth prove, that Snow is not -made of the fragments of Ice, but that some sorts of -cold contractions on a watery body, make the figure of -snow in the substance of water, as other sorts of cold -contractions make the figure of ice; which motions and -figures I have treated of in my Book of Philosophy, according -to that Judgment and Reason which Nature -has bestowed upon me. The Author of this Fancy, -gives the same reason for Snow being white: <i>For Ice</i>, -says he, <i>is a transparent body, and all transparent bodies, -when beaten into powder, appear white; and since Snow -is nothing else but Ice powder'd small, it must of necessity -shew white.</i> Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I am not so experienced, -as to know that all transparent bodies, being beaten -small, shew white; but grant it be so, yet that doth -not prove, that the whiteness of snow proceeds from the -broken parts of Ice, unless it be proved that the whiteness -of all bodies proceeds from the powdering of transparent -bodies, which I am sure he cannot do; for Silver, -and millions of other things are white, which -were never produced from the powder of transparent -bodies: Neither do I know any reason against it, but -that which makes a Lilly white, may also be the cause of -the whiteness of Snow, that is, such a figure as makes -a white colour; for different figures, in my opinion, -are the cause of different colours, as you will find in my -Book of Philosophy, where I say, that Nature by contraction -of lines draws such or such a Figure, which is -such or such a Colour; as such a Figure is red, and such -a Figure is green, and so of all the rest: But the Palest -colours, and so white, are the loosest and slackest figures; -Indeed, white, which is the nearest colour to -light, is the smoothest, evenest and straightest figure, -and composed of the smallest lines: As for example; -suppose the figure of 8. were the colour of Red, and the -figure of 1. the colour of White; or suppose the figure -of Red to be a <i>z.</i> and the figure of an <i>r.</i> to be the figure -of Green, and a straight <i>l.</i> the figure of White; And -mixt figures make mixt colours: The like examples -may be brought of other Figures, as of a Harpsichord -and its strings, a Lute and its strings, a Harp and its -strings, &c. By which your Reason shall judg, whether -it be not easier for Nature, to make Snow and its -whiteness by the way of contraction, then by the way -of dissolution: As for example; Nature in making -Snow, contracts or congeals the exterior figure of -Water into the figure of a Harp, which is a Triangular -figure with the figure of straight strings within it; for -the exterior figure of the Harp represents the exterior -figure of Snow, and the figure of the strings extended -in straight lines represent the figure of its whiteness. And -thus it is easier to make Snow and its whiteness at one act, -then first to contract or congeal water into Ice, and then -to cause wind and cold air to beat and break that Ice into -powder, and lastly to contract or congeal that powder -into flakes of Snow. Which would be a very troublesom -work for Nature, <i>viz.</i> to produce one effect by -so many violent actions and several labours, when the -making of two figures by one action will serve the turn. -But Nature is wiser then any of her Creatures can conceive; -for she knows how to make, and how to dissolve, -form; and transform, with facility and ease, -without any difficulty; for her actions are all easie -and free, yet so subtil, curious and various, as not any -part or creature of Nature can exactly or throughly -trace her ways, or know her wisdom. And thus leaving -her, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XV" id="IV_XV">XV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I have taken several questions out of your new <i>Author</i>, -which I intend to answer in this present Letter -according to the conceptions of my own sense and -reason, and to submit them to your censure; which if -you vouchsafe to grant me without partiality, I shall -acknowledg my self much obliged to you for this -favour. The first question is, <i>Why wet Linnen is dried -in the Air?</i> I answer; That, according to my sense -and reason, the water which is spred upon the linnen, -being not united in a full and close body, dilates beyond -the Circle-degree of water and wetness, and so -doth easily change from water to vapour, and from -vapour to air, whereby the linnen becomes as dry, as -it was before it became wet. The second question is, -<i>Why Water and Wine intermix so easily and suddenly together?</i> -I answer: All wet liquors, although their -exterior figures do differ, yet their interior natures, figures -and forms are much alike, and those things that -are of the same interior nature, do easily and suddenly -joyn as into one: Wherefore Wine and Water having -both wet natures, do soon incorporate together, -whereas, were they of different natures, they would -not so peaceably joyn together, but by their contrary -natures become enemies, and strive to destroy each other; -but this is to be observed, that the sharp points of -the Circle-lines of Wine, by passing through the -smooth Circle-lines of Water, help to make a more -hasty and sudden conjunction. The third question, is, -<i>Why Light, which in its nature is white, shining through a -coloured Glass, doth appear of the same colour which the -Glass is of, either Blew, Green, Red, or the like?</i> I -answer: The reason is, that though Light in its nature -be white, and the Glass clear and transparent, yet when -as the Glass is stained or painted with colours, both the -clearness of the glass, and the whiteness of the light, is -obstructed by the figure of that colour the glass is stained -or painted withal, and the light spreading upon or -thorow the glass, represents it self in the figure of that -same colour; indeed, in all probability to sense and -reason, it appears, that the lines or beams of light, which -are straight, small, even, and parallel, do contract in -their entrance through the glass into the figure of the colour -the glass is stained or painted with, so that the -light passes through the glass figuratively, in so much, -as it seems to be of the same colour the glass is of, although -in it self it is white, lucent, and clear; and as -the light appears, so the eye receives it, if the sight be -not destructive. The fourth question, is, <i>Whether</i> (as -your <i>Authors</i> opinion is) <i>kisses feel pleasing and delightful -by the thinness of the parts, and a gentle stirring and -quavering of the tangent spirits, that give a pleasing -tact?</i> I answer: If this were so, then all kisses would -be pleasing, which surely are not; for some are thought -very displeasing, especially from thin lips; wherefore, -in my opinion, it is neither the thinness of the parts of -the lips, nor the quavering of the tangent spirits, but -the appetites and passions of life, reason, and soul, that -cause the pleasure; Nevertheless, I grant, the stirring -up of the spirits may contribute to the increasing, heightening, -or strengthning of that tact, but it is not the prime -cause of it. The fifth question, is, <i>Whether the greatest -man have always the greatest strength?</i> I answer, -Not: for strength and greatness of bulk doth not always -consist together, witness experience: for a little -man may be, and is oftentimes stronger then a tall -man. The like of other animal Creatures: As for example, -some Horses of a little or middle size, have a -great deal more strength then others which are high and -big; for it is the quantity of sensitive matter that gives -strength, and not the bigness or bulk of the body. The -sixth question, is, <i>Whether this World or Universe be -the biggest Creature?</i> I answer: It is not possible to -be known, unless Man could perfectly know its dimension -or extension, or whether there be more Worlds -then one: But, to speak properly, there is no such -thing as biggest or least in Nature. The seventh question, -is, <i>Whether the Earth be the Center of Matter, or -of the World?</i> As for Matter, it being Infinite, has -no Center, by reason it has no Circumference; and, -as for this World, its Center cannot be known, unless -man knew the utmost parts of its circumference, for no -Center can be known without its circumference; and -although some do imagine this world so little, that in -comparison to Infinite Matter, it would not be so big -as the least Pins head, yet their knowledg cannot extend -so far as to know the circumference of this little World; -by which you may perceive the Truth of the old saying, -Man talks much, but knows little. The eighth -question is, <i>Whether all Centers must needs be full, and -close, as a stufft Cushion; and whether the matter in the -Center of the Universe or World be dense, compact, and -heavy?</i> I answer: This can no more be known, then -the circumference of the World; for what man is able -to know, whether the Center of the world be rare, or -dense, since he doth not know where its Center is; and -as for other particular Centers, some Centers may -be rare, some dense, and some may have less matter -then their circumferences. The ninth question is, <i>Whether -Finite Creatures can be produced out of an Infinite material -cause?</i> I answer: That, to my sense and reason, -an Infinite cause must needs produce Infinite effects, -though not in each Particular, yet in General; -that is, Matter, being Infinite in substance, must needs -be dividable into Infinite parts in number, and thus Infinite -Creatures must needs be produced out of Infinite -Matter; but Man being but a finite part, thinks all -must be finite too, not onely each particular Creature, -but also the Matter out of which all Creatures are -produced, which is corporeal Nature. Nevertheless, -those Infinite effects in Nature are equalized by her different -motions which are her different actions; for it -is not <i>non</i>-sence, but most demonstrable to sense and -reason that there are equalities or a union in Infinite. -The tenth question is, <i>Whether the Elements be the onely -matter out of which all other Creatures are produced?</i> -I answer: The Elements, as well as all other Creatures, -as it appears to humane sense and reason, are all -of one and the same Matter, which is the onely Infinite -Matter; and therefore the Elements cannot be the -Matter of all other Creatures, for several sorts of -Creatures have several ways of productions, and I know -no reason to the contrary, but that Animals, Vegetables, -and Minerals, may as well derive their essence -from each other, as from the Elements, or the Elements -from them; for as all Creatures do live by each other, -so they are produced from each other, according to the -several ways or manners of productions. But mistake -me not, <i>Madam</i>, for I speak of production in General, -and not of such natural production whereby the -several species of Creatures are maintained: As for example, -Generation in Animals; for an Element cannot -generate an Animal in that manner as an Animal can -generate or produce its like; for as Nature is wise, so her -actions are all wise and orderly, or else it would make a -horrid confusion amongst the Infinite parts of Nature. -The eleventh question is, <i>What is meant by Natural -Theology?</i> I answer: Natural Theology, in my opinion, -is nothing else but Moral Philosophy; for as -for our belief, it is grounded upon the Scripture, and -not upon Reason.</p> - -<p>These, <i>Madam</i>, are the questions which I have -pickt out of your new <i>Author</i>, together with my answers, -of which I desire your impartial Judgment: But -I must add one thing more before I conclude, which is, -I am much pleased with your <i>Authors</i> opinion, That -Sound may be perceived by the Eye, Colour by the -Ear, and that Sound and Colour may be smell'd and -tasted; and I have been of this opinion eleven years -since, as you will find in my Book of Poems, whose -first Edition was printed in the Year, 1653. And thus I -take my leave of you, and remain constantly,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>to serve you.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XVI" id="IV_XVI">XVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning your question of the ascending nature -of fire, I am absolutely of <i>Aristotle's</i> Opinion, -that it is as natural for Fire to ascend, as it is -for Earth to descend; And why should we believe the -nature of one, and doubt the nature of the other? For -if it be granted, that there are as well ascending, as descending -bodies in Nature, as also low and high places, -(according to the situation of Particulars) and Circumferences, -as well as Centers, (considering the -shape of bodies) I cannot perceive by humane reason, -but that the Nature of fire is ascending, and that it is -very improbable, it should have a descending or contracting -nature, as to tend or endeavour to a Center. -But, <i>Madam</i>, give me leave to ask what sort of Fire -you mean, whether a Celestial, or a Terrestrial Fire, -<i>viz.</i> that which is named an Elemental fire, or any other -sort of fire? for there may be as many several -sorts of fire, as of other Creatures; or whether you -mean onely that sort of fire that belongs to this terrestrial -Globe, or all the fire in general that is in Infinite -Nature? and if you mean onely that sort of fire which -belongs to this Terrestrial World we live upon; I answer, -There are many several sorts of that fire too; for -all the fire belonging to this Earthly Globe, doth not -lie in one place, body, or part, no more then all metal, -or but one sort of metal, as Gold, lies in one mine, -or all Mankind in one womb. Neither can I believe, -that the Sun is the onely Celestial Fire in Nature, but -that there may be as numerous Suns, as there are other -sorts of Creatures in Nature. But as for the ascending -propriety of this terrestrial Fire, you may say, That -the Elements do commix and unite in this worldly -Globe, and if Fire should have an ascending motion, it -would pierce into other Globes, or Worlds, and never -leave ascending. I answer: That, first of all, the -strength of fire is to be considered, consisting not onely -in its quantity, but also in its quality; as whether it can -ascend to those bodies and places which are far above it: -For example; A Man, or any other Creature, hath -never so much strength, or ability, or length of life, as to -travel to the utmost parts of the Universe, were the way -never so plain and free, and the number of men never so -great: the like for Elementary fire, which hath life -and death, that is, generation and dissolution, and successive -motion, as well as other Creatures. But you -would fain know, whether fire, if it were left at liberty, -would not turn to a Globous figure? I answer; That, -to my sense and reason, it would not: but some men, -seeing the flame of fire in an arched Oven, descend -round the sides of the Oven in a Globous figure, do -perhaps imagine the nature of fire to be descending, -and its natural figure round as a Globe, which is ridiculous; -for the fire in the Oven, although every -where incompassed and bound, yet, according to its -nature, ascends to the top of the Oven; and finding -a stoppage and suppression, offers to descend perpendicularly; -but by reason of a continual ascending of -the following flame, the first, and so all the following -parts of flame are forced to spread about, and descend -round the sides of the Oven, so that the descension of -the flame is forced, and not natural, and its Globous -figure is caused, as it were, by a mould, which is the -Oven. But some are of opinion, that all bodies have -descending motions towards the Center of this worldly -Globe, and therefore they do not believe, that any -bodies do ascend naturally: But what reason have they -to believe one, and not the other? Besides, how -do they know that all bodies would rest in the Center -of this terrestrial Globe, if they came thither? For -if it was possible, that a hole could be digged from the -superficies of this Earthly Globe thorow the middle -or Center of it unto the opposite superficies, and a -stone be sent thorow; the question is, whether the -stone would rest in the Center, and not go quite thorow? -Wherefore this is but an idle Fancy; and the -proof that Fire tends not to a Center, is, because it -cannot be poised or weighed, not onely by reason of -its rarity, but of its dilative and aspiring Nature; and -as fire is ascending, or aspiring, so likewise do I, <i>Madam</i>, -aspire to the top of your favour, and shall never -descend from the ambition to serve you, but by the suppression -of death. Till then, I remain,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XVII" id="IV_XVII">XVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In your last, you were pleased to desire my answer -to these following questions: First, <i>What the reason -is, that a Vessel, although it be of a solid and compact -substance, yet will retain the smell or odour of a forreign -substance poured into it, for a long time?</i> I answer: -The Vessel, or rather the perceptive corporeal -motions of the Vessel, having patterned out the figure -of the sent of the odorous substance, retain that same figure -of sent, although the odorous substance is gone; and -as long as that patterned figure is perfect, the sent will -remain in the Vessel, either more or less, according as -the figure doth last or alter. But you must consider, -<i>Madam</i>, that although it be the natural motions that -make those patterns of odours, yet those patterned figures -are but as it were artificial, like as a man who -draws a Copy from an Original; for Nature has divers -and several ways of such motions as we call Art, -for whatsoever is an imitation, is that which man calls -Art. Your second question was, <i>How it came, that the -mind and understanding in many did die or dissolve before -the body?</i> I answer: The reason is, because the rational -corporeal motions alter before the sensitive; for as -in some, as for example, in Natural fools, the rational -motions never move to a regular humane understanding, -so in some dying Persons they do make a general -alteration before the sensitive. Your third question was, -<i>Why a man, being bitten by a mad Dog, is onely distempered -in his mind, and not in his body?</i> The reason, according -to my judgment, is, that the rational part of -Matter is onely disturbed, and not the sensitive. The -fourth question was, <i>Why a Basilisk will kill with his eyes?</i> -I answer: It is the sensitive corporeal motions in the -organ of sight in the man, which upon the printing -of the figure of the eyes of the Basilisk, make a sudden -alteration. Your fifth question was, <i>Why an Asp will -kill insensibly by biting?</i> The reason, in my opinion, is, -That the biting of the Asp hath the same efficacy as -deadly <i>Opium</i> hath, yea, and much stronger. Your -sixth question was, <i>Why a Dog that rejoyces, swings his tail, -and a Lyon when angry, or a Cat when in a fear, do lift -up their tails?</i> I answer: The several motions of the -mind may produce either but one, or several sorts of -motions in some part or parts of the body; and as the -sensitive motions of anger will produce tears, so will -the motions of joy; but grief made by the rational motions -of the mind, may by excess disturb and make a -general alteration of the sensitive motions in an animal: -the same may excessive joy. But, <i>Madam</i>, you may -perhaps find out better reasons for your own questions -then these are; for my endeavour was onely to frame my -answer to the ground of my own opinions, and so to -satisfie your desire, which was, and is still the ambition -of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XVIII" id="IV_XVIII">XVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In your last, you were pleased to desire an account, -how far, or how much I did understand the ancient -and modern Philosophers in their Philosophical -Writings. Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I can more readily tell -you what I do not understand, then what I do understand: -for, first, I do not understand their sophistical -Logick, as to perswade with arguments that black is -white, and white is black; and that fire is not hot, nor -water wet, and other such things; for the glory in Logick -is rather to make doubts, then to find truth; indeed, -that Art now is like thick, dark clouds, which darken -the light of truth. Next: I do not understand in -particular, what they mean by second matter; for if -they name figures and forms second matter, they may -as well say, all several motions, which are the several -actions of Nature, are several matters, and so there -would be infinite several matters, which would produce -a meer confusion in Nature. Neither do I understand, -when they say, a body dissolves into the -first matter; for I am not able to conceive their first -matter, nor what they mean by <i>magna</i> and <i>major materia</i>; -for I believe there is but one matter, and the -motion of that matter is its action by which it -produces several figures and effects; so that the nature -of the matter is one and the same, although its -motions, that is, its actions, be various, for the various -effects alter not the nature or unity of the onely matter. -Neither do I understand what they mean by -corruption, for surely Nature is not corruptible. Nor -do I understand their individables in Nature, nor a -bodiless form, nor a privation, nor a being without a -body; nor any such thing as they call rest, for there's -not any thing without motion in Nature: Some do -talk of moving <i>minima's</i>, but they do not tell what -those <i>minima's</i> or their motions are, or how they were -produced, or how they came to move. Neither do I -understand when they say there is but one World, and -that finite; for if there be no more Matter then that -which they call the whole World, and may be measured -by a <i>Jacob's</i> staff, then certainly there is but little -matter, and that no bigger then an atome in comparison -to Infinite. Neither can my reason comprehend, -when they say, that not any thing hath power -from its interior nature to move exteriously and locally; -for common sense and reason, that is sight and observation, -doth prove the contrary. Neither do I know -what they mean by making a difference between matter -and form, power and act; for there can be no form -without matter, nor no matter without form; and as act -includes power, so power is nothing without act: Neither -can I conceive Reason to be separable from matter; -nor what is meant when they say, that, onely that -is real, which moves the understanding without. Nor do -I understand what they mean by intentionals, accidentals, -incorporeal beings, formal <i>ratio</i>, formal <i>unity</i>, and hundreds -the like; enough to puzle truth, when all is but the -several actions of one cause, to wit, the onely matter. But -most men make such cross, narrow, and intricate ways in -Nature, with their over-nice distinctions, that Nature -appears like a Labyrinth, whenas really she is as plain as -an un-plowed, ditched, or hedged champion: Nay, some -make Nature so full, that she can neither move nor stir; -and others again will have her so empty, as they leave -not any thing within her; and some with their penetrations, -pressings, squeezings, and the like, make such holes -in her, as they do almost wound, press and squeeze her to -death: And some are so learned, witty, and ingenious, as -they understand and know to discourse of the true compass, -just weight, exact rules, measures and proportions of -the Universe, as also of the exact division of the <i>Chaos</i>, -and the architecture of the world, to an atome. Thus, <i>Madam</i>, -I have made my confession to you of what I understand -not, and have endeavoured to make my ignorance -as brief as I could; but the great God knows, that -my ignorance is longer then that which is named life and -death; and as for my understanding, I can onely say, -that I understand nothing better, but my self to be,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your most faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XIX" id="IV_XIX">XIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since I have given you, in my last, an account how -much I did understand the Philosophical works of -both the ancient and modern Philosophers, or rather -what I did not understand of them, you would fain -have my opinion now of the persons themselves. Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, as for those that are dead, or those that are -living, I cannot say any thing, but that I believe they all -were or are worthy persons, men of vast understandings, -subtil conceptions, ingenious wits, painful students, -and learned writers. But as for their works, as -I told you heretofore, I confess ingeniously, I understand -them not, by reason I am ignorant in their Scholastical -Arts, as Logick, Metaphysick, Mathematicks, -and the like: For to my simple apprehension, when as -Logicians argue of natural causes and effects, they make -natural causes to produce natural effects with more difficulty -and enforcement then Nature knows of; and as -for Mathematicians, they endeavour to inchant Nature -with Circles, and bind her with lines so hard, as if she -were so mad, that she would do some mischief, when -left at liberty. Geometricians weigh Nature to an Atome, -and measure her so exactly, as less then a hairs -breadth; besides, they do press and squeeze her so -hard and close, as they almost stifle her. And Natural -Philosophers do so stuff her with dull, dead, senceless -<i>minima's</i>, like as a sack with meal, or sand, by which -they raise such a Dust as quite blinds Nature and natural -reason. But Chymists torture Nature worst of all; for -they extract and distil her beyond substance, nay, into no -substance, if they could. As for natural Theologers, -I understand them least of any; for they make such a -gallamalfry of Philosophy and Divinity, as neither can -be distinguished from the other. In short, <i>Madam</i>, -They all with their intricate definitions and distinctions -set my brain on the rack: but some Philosophers are like -some Poets, for they endeavour to write strong lines. -You may ask me, what is meant by strong lines? I -answer: Weak sense. To which leaving them, I -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XX" id="IV_XX">XX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I am not of your opinion, That nice distinctions and -Logistical arguments discover truth, dissolve doubts, -and clear the understanding; but I say, they rather -make doubts of truth, and blind-fold the understanding; -Indeed, nice distinctions and sophistical arguments, -are very pernicious both in Schools, Church, -and State: As for the Church, although in Divinity -there is but one Truth, yet nice distinctions, and Logistical -sophistry, have made such confusion in it, as has -caused almost as many several opinions as there are -words in the Scripture; and as for natural Theology, -which is moral Philosophy, they have divided vertues -and vices into so many parts, and minced them so small, -that neither can be clearly distinguished. The same in -Government; they endeavour to cut between command -and obedience to a hairs breadth. Concerning -causes of Law, they have abolish'd the intended benefit, -and banish'd equity; and instead of keeping -Peace, they make War, causing enmity betwixt men: -As for Natural Philosophy, they will not suffer sense and -reason to appear in that study: And as for Physick, they -have kill'd more men then Wars, Plagues, or Famine. -Wherefore from nice distinctions and Logistical sophistry, -Good God deliver us, especially, from those that -concern Divinity; for they weaken Faith, trouble Conscience, -and bring in Atheism: In short, they make controversies, -and endless disputes. But least the opening -of my meaning in such plain terms should raise a controversie -also between you and me, I'le cut off here, and -rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXI" id="IV_XXI">XXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Yesterday I received a visit from the Lady <i>N. M.</i> -who you know hath a quick wit, rational opinions, -and subtil conceptions; all which she is -ready and free to divulge in her discourse. But when -she came to my Chamber, I was casting up some -small accounts; which when she did see, What, said -she, are you at Numeration? Yes, said I: but I -cannot number well, nor much, for I do not understand -Arithmetick. Said she, You can number to -three. Yes, said I, I can number to four: Nay, -faith, said she, the number of three is enough, if you -could but understand that number well, for it is a mystical -number. Said I, There is no great mystery to -count that number; for one, and two, makes three. Said -she, That is not the mystery; for the mystery is, That -three makes one: and without this mystery no man -can understand Divinity, Nature, nor himself. Then -I desired her to make me understand that mystery. She -said, It required more time to inform me, then a short -visit, for this mystery was such, as did puzle all wise -men in the world; and the not understanding of this -mystery perfectly, had caused endless divisions and disputes. -I desired, if she could not make me understand -the mystery, she would but inform me, how three -made one in Divinity, Nature, and Man. She said, -That was easie to do; for in Divinity there are three -Persons in one Essence, as God the Father, the Son, -and the holy Ghost, whose Essence being individable, -they make but one God; And as for Philosophy, there -is but Matter, Motion, and Figure, which being individable, -make but one Nature; And as for Man, -there is Soul, Life, and Body, all three joyned in one -Man. But I replied, Man's Life, Soul and Body, is dividable. -That is true, said she, but then he is no more -a Man; for these three are his essential parts, which -make him to be a man; and when these parts are dissolved, -then his interior nature is changed, so that he can -no longer be call'd a man: As for example; Water being -turned into Air, and having lost its interior nature, -can no more be called Water, but it is perfect Air; the -same is with Man: But as long as he is a Man, then -these three forementioned parts which make him to be -of that figure are individably united as long as man lasts. -Besides, said she, this is but in the particular, considering -man single, and by himself; but in general, these -three, as life, soul, and body, are individably united, -so that they remain as long as mankind lasts. Nay, although -they do dissolve in the particulars, yet it is but -for a time; for they shall be united again at the last day, -which is the time of their resurrection; so that also in this -respect we may justly call them individable, for man -shall remain with an united soul, life, and body, eternally. -And as she was thus discoursing, in came a Sophisterian, -whom when she spied, away she went as -fast as she could; but I followed her close, and got -hold of her, then asked her, why she ran away? She -answer'd, if she stayed, the Logician would dissolve -her into nothing, for the profession of Logicians is to -make something nothing, and nothing something. I -pray'd her to stay and discourse with the Logician: Not -for a world, said she, for his discourse will make my -brain like a confused <i>Chaos</i>, full of senseless <i>minima's</i>; and -after that, he will so knock, jolt, and jog it, and make -such whirls and pits, as will so torture my brain, that -I shall wish I had not any: Wherefore, said she, I -will not stay now, but visit you again to morrow. And -I wish with all my heart, <i>Madam</i>, you were so -near as to be here at the same time, that we three might -make a Triumvirate in discourse, as well as we do in -friendship. But since that cannot be, I must rest satisfied -that I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXII" id="IV_XXII">XXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>You were pleased to desire my opinion of the -works of that Learned and Ingenious Writer <i>B.</i> -Truly, <i>Madam</i>, I have read but some part of -his works; but as much as I have read, I have observed, -he is a very civil, eloquent, and rational Writer; -the truth is, his style is a Gentleman's style. And in -particular, concerning his experiments, I must needs -say this, that, in my judgment, he hath expressed himself -to be a very industrious and ingenious person; for -he doth neither puzle Nature, nor darken truth with -hard words and compounded languages, or nice distinctions; -besides, his experiments are proved by his -own action. But give me leave to tell you, that I observe, -he studies the different parts and alterations, more -then the motions, which cause the alterations in those -parts; whereas, did he study and observe the several -and different motions in those parts, how they change -in one and the same part, and how the different alterations -in bodies are caused by the different motions of -their parts, he might arrive to a vast knowledg by the -means of his experiments; for certainly experiments -are very beneficial to man. In the next place, you -desire my opinion of the Book call'd, <i>The Discourses of -the Virtuosi in France</i>: I am sorry, <i>Madam</i>, this book -comes so late to my hands, that I cannot read it so slowly -and observingly, as to give you a clear judgment of -their opinions or discourses in particular; however, -in general, and for what I have read in it, I may say, it -expresses the French to be very learned and eloquent -Writers, wherein I thought our English had exceeded -them, and that they did onely excel in wit and ingenuity; -but I perceive most Nations have of all sorts. -The truth is, ingenious and subtil wit brings news; -but learning and experience brings proofs, at least, argumental -discourses; and the French are much to be -commended, that they endeavour to spend their time -wisely, honourably, honestly, and profitably, not onely -for the good and benefit of their own, but also of other -Nations. But before I conclude, give me leave -to tell you, that concerning the curious and profitable -Arts mentioned in their discourses, I confess, I do -much admire them, and partly believe they may arrive -to the use of many of them; but there are two arts -which I wish with all my heart I could obtain: the -first is, to argue without error in all kinds, modes, and -figures, in a quarter of an hour; and the other is to -learn a way to understand all languages in six hours. -But as for the first, I fear, if I want a thorow understanding -in every particular argument, cause, or -point, a general art or mode of words will not help -me, especially, if I, being a woman, should want -discretion: And as for the second, my memory is -so bad, that it is beyond the help of Art, so that Nature -has made my understanding harder or closer then -Glass, through which the Sun of verity cannot pass, -although its light doth; and therefore I am confident -I shall not be made, or taught to learn this mentioned -Art in six hours, no not in six months. But I wish -all Arts were as easily practised, as mentioned; and -thus I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXIII" id="IV_XXIII">XXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Concerning your question, <i>Whether a Point be -something, or nothing, or between both</i>; My opinion -is, that a natural point is material; but -that which the learned name a Mathematical point, is -like their Logistical Egg, whereof there is nothing in -Nature any otherwise, but a word, which word is material, -as being natural; for concerning immaterial beings, it -is impossible to believe there be any in Nature; and -though witty Students, and subtil Arguers have both -in past, and this present age, endeavoured to prove -something, nothing; yet words and disputes have not -power to annihilate any thing that is in Nature, no -more then to create something out of nothing; and -therefore they can neither make something, nothing; nor -nothing to be something: for the most witty student, -nor the subtilest disputant, cannot alter Nature, but -each thing is and must be as Nature made it. As for -your other question, <i>Whether there be more then five -Senses?</i> I answer: There are as many senses as there -are sensitive motions, and all sensation or perception is -by the way of patterning; and whosoever is of another -opinion, is, in my judgment, a greater friend to contradiction, -then to truth, at least to probability. Lastly, -concerning your question, why a Gun, the longer -its barrel is made, the further it will shoot, until -it come to a certain degree of length; after which, -the longer it is made, the weaker it becomes, so that -every degree further, makes it shoot shorter and shorter, -whereas before it came to such a degree of length, -it shot further and further: Give me leave to tell -you, <i>Madam</i>, that this question would be put more -properly to a Mathematician, then to me, who am ignorant -in the Mathematicks: However, since you are -pleased to desire my opinion thereof, I am willing to -give it you. There are, in my judgment, but three -reasons which do produce this alteration: The one -may be the compass of the stock, or barrel, which being -too wide for the length, may weaken the force, or -being too narrow for the length, may retard the force; -the one giving liberty before the force is united, -the other inclosing it so long by a streight passage, as it -loses its force before it hath liberty; so that the one -becomes stronger with length, the other weaker with -length. The second reason, in my opinion, is, That -degrees of strength may require degrees of the <i>medium</i>. -Lastly, It may be, that Centers are required for degrees -of strength;, if so, every <i>medium</i> may be a Center, -and the middle length to such a compass may be a -Center of such a force. But many times the force -being weaker or stronger, is caused by the good or ill -making of the Powder, or Locks, or the like. But, -<i>Madam</i>, such questions will puzle me as much as those -of Mr. <i>V. Z.</i> concerning those glasses, one of which -being held close in ones hand, and a little piece being -broke of its tail, makes as great a noise as the discharging -of a Gun: Wherefore I beseech you, <i>Madam</i>, do -not trouble my brain with Mathematical questions, -wherein I have neither skill, learning, nor experience -by Practice; for truly I have not the subtilty to find -out their mystery, nor the capacity to understand arts, -no more then I am capable to learn several languages. If -you command me any thing else I am able to do, assure -your self, there is none shall more readily and cheerfully -serve you then my self; who am, and shall ever -continue,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXIV" id="IV_XXIV">XXIV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I have heard that Artists do glory much in their Glasses, -Tubes, Engines, and Stills, and hope by their -Glasses and Tubes to see invisible things, and by -their Engines to produce incredible effects, and by -their Stills, Fire, and Furnaces, to create as Nature doth; -but all this is impossible to be done: For Art cannot arrive -to that degree, as to know perfectly Natures secret -and fundamental actions, her purest matter, and subtilest -motions; and it is enough if Artists can but produce -such things as are for mans conveniencies and use, -although they never can see the smallest or rarest bodies, -nor great and vast bodies at a great distance, nor make -or create a Vegetable, Animal, or the like, as Nature -doth; for Nature being Infinite, has also Infinite -degrees of figures, sizes, motions, densities, rarities, -knowledg, &c. as you may see in my Book of Philosophy, -as also in my book of Poems, especially that -part that treats of little, minute Creatures, which -I there do name, for want of other expressions, Fairies; -for I have considered much the several sizes of -Creatures, although I gave it out but for a fancy in the -mentioned book, lest I should be thought extravagant -to declare that conception of mine for a rational -truth: But if some small bodies cannot be -perfectly seen but by the help of magnifying glasses, -and such as they call Microscopia; I pray, Nature -being Infinite, What figures and sizes may there -not be, which our eyes with all the help of Art are not -capable to see? for certainly, Nature hath more -curiosities then our exterior senses, helped by Art, -can perceive: Wherefore I cannot wonder enough -at those that pretend to know the least or greatest -parts or creatures in Nature, since no particular Creature -is able to do it. But concerning Artists, you -would fain know, <i>Madam</i>, whether the Artist be -beholden to the conceptions of the Student? To -which I return this short answer: That, in my -judgment, without the Students conceptions, the -Artist could not tell how to make experiments: The -truth is, the conceptions of studious men set the Artists -on work, although many Artists do ungratefully -attribute all to their own industry. Neither -doth it always belong to the studious Concepter -to make trials or experiments, but he leaves that -work to others, whose time is not so much imployed -with thoughts or speculations, as with actions; for the -the Contemplator is the Designer, and the Artist the -Workman, or Labourer, who ought to acknowledg -him his Master, as I do your <i>Ladiship</i>, for I am in all -respects,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXV" id="IV_XXV">XXV.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your Command in your last was to send you my -opinion concerning the division of Religions, or -of the several opinions in Religions, I suppose -you mean the division of the Religion, not of Religions; -for certainly, there is but one divine Truth, and -consequently but one true Religion: But natural men -being composed of many divers parts, as of several motions -and figures, have divers and several Ideas, which -the grosser corporeal motions conceive to be divers and -several gods, as being not capable to know the Great -and Incomprehensible God, who is above Nature. -For example: Do but consider, <i>Madam</i>, what strange -opinions the Heathens had of God, and how they divided -him into so many several Persons, with so many -several bodies, like men; whereas, surely God considered -in his Essence, he being a Spirit, as the Scripture -describes him, can neither have Soul nor body, as he -is a God, but is an Immaterial Being; Onely the Heathens -did conceive him to have parts, and so divided the -Incomprehensible God into several Deities, at least they -had several Deitical Ideas, or rather Fancies of him. But, -<i>Madam</i>, I confess my ignorance in this great mystery, -and honour, and praise the Omnipotent, Great, and -Incomprehensible God, with all fear and humility as I -ought; beseeching his infinite mercy to keep me from -such presumption, whereby I might prophane his holy -Name, and to make me obedient to the Church, as -also to grant me life and health, that I may be able to -express how much I am,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXVI" id="IV_XXVI">XXVI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since I spake of Religion in my last, I cannot but -acquaint you, that I was the other day in the company -of Sir <i>P. H.</i> and Sir <i>R. L.</i> where amongst -other discourses they talk'd of Predestination and Free-will. -Sir <i>P. H.</i> accounted the opinion of Predestination -not onely absurd, but blasphemous; for, said he, Predestination -makes God appear Cruel, as first to create -Angels and Man, and then to make them fall from their -Glory, and damn them eternally: For God, said he, -knew before he made them, they would fall; Neither -could he imagine, from whence that Pride and -Presumption did proceed, which was the cause of the -Angels fall, for it could not proceed from God, God -being infinitely Good. Sir <i>R. L.</i> answer'd, That this -Pride and Presumption did not come from God, but -from their own Nature. But, replyed Sir <i>P. H.</i> -God gave them that Nature, for they had it not of -themselves, but all what they were, their Essence and -Nature, came from God the Creator of all things, and -to suffer that, which was in his power to hinder, was -as much as to act. Sir <i>R. L.</i> said, God gave both -Angels and Man a Free-will at their Creation. Sir -<i>P. H.</i> answered, that a Free-will was a part of a divine -attribute, which surely God would not give away to -any Creature: Next, said he, he could not conceive -why God should make Creatures to cross and oppose -him; for it were neither an act of Wisdom to make -Rebels, nor an act of Justice to make Devils; so that -neither in his Wisdom, Justice, nor Mercy, God -could give leave, that Angels and Man should fall -through sin; neither was God ignorant that Angels -and Man would fall; for surely, said he, God knew -all things, past, present, and to come; wherefore, said -he, Free-will doth weaken the Power of God, and Predestination -doth weaken the power of man, and both -do hinder each other: Besides, said he, since God -did confirm the rest of the Angels in the same state -they were before, so as they could not fall afterwards, -he might as well have created them all so -at first. But Sir <i>R. L.</i> replied, That God suffered -Angels and Man to fall for his Glory, to shew his -Justice in Devils, and his Mercy in Man; and that the -Devils express'd God's Omnipotency as much as the -Blessed. To which Sir <i>P. H.</i> answered, That they expressed -more God's severity in those horrid torments -they suffer through their Natural Imperfections, then -his power in making and suffering them to sin. Thus -they discoursed: And to tell you truly, <i>Madam</i>, my -mind was more troubled, then delighted with their discourse; -for it seemed rather to detract from the honour -of the great God, then to increase his Glory; and -no Creature ought either to think or to speak any thing -that is detracting from the Glory of the Creator: -Wherefore I am neither for Predestination, nor for -an absolute Free-will, neither in Angels, Devils, nor -Man; for an absolute Free-will is not competent to any -Creature: and though Nature be Infinite, and the Eternal -Servant to the Eternal and Infinite God, and -can produce Infinite Creatures, yet her Power and -Will is not absolute, but limited; that is, she has a -natural free-will, but not a supernatural, for she cannot -work beyond the power God has given her. But -those mystical discourses belong to Divines, and not to -any Lay-person, and I confess my self very ignorant in -them. Wherefore I will nor dare not dispute God's -actions, being all infinitely wise, but leave that to Divines, -who are to inform us what we ought to believe, -and how we ought to live. And thus taking my leave -of you for the present, I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXVII" id="IV_XXVII">XXVII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>You are pleased to honor me so far, that you do not -onely spend some time in the perusing of my Book -called <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>, but take it so much -into your consideration, as to examine every opinion of -mine which dissents from the common way of the -Schools, marking those places which seem somewhat -obscure, and desiring my explanation of them; All -which, I do not onely acknowledg as a great favour, -but as an infallible testimony of your true and unfeigned -friendship; and I cannot chuse but publish it to all the -world; both for the honour of your self, as to let every -body know the part of so true a friend, who is so -much concerned for the honour and benefit of my poor -Works; as also for the good of my mentioned Book, -which by this means will be rendred more intelligible; -for I must confess that my Philosophical Opinions are -not so plain and perspicuous as to be perfectly understood -at the first reading, which I am sorry for. And -there be two chief reasons why they are so: First, Because -they are new, and never vented before; for the -have their original meerly from my own conceptions, -and are not taken out of other Philosophers. Next, because -I being a Woman, and not bred up to Scholarship, -did want names and terms of Art, and therefore -being not versed in the Writings of other Philosophers, -but what I knew by hearing, I could not form my -named Book so methodically, and express my opinions -so artificially and clearly, as I might have done, had -I been studious in the reading of Philosophical Books, or -bred a Scholar; for then I might have dressed them with -a fine coloured Covering of Logick and Geometry, -and set them out in a handsome array; by which I -might have also cover'd my ignorance, like as Stage-Players -do cover their mean persons or degrees with -fine Cloathes. But, as I said, I being void of Learning -and Art, did put them forth according to my own -conceptions, and as I did understand them myself; but -since I have hitherto by the reading of those famous -and learned <i>Authors</i> you sent me, attained to the knowledg -of some artificial Terms, I shall not spare any labour -and pains to make my opinions so intelligible, that -every one, who without partiality, spleen, or malice, doth -read them, may also easily understand them: And thus -I shall likewise endeavour to give such answers to your -scruples, objections, or questions, as may explain those -passages which seem obscure, and satisfie your desire. In -the first place, and in general, you desire to know, <i>Whether -any truth may be had in Natural Philosophy</i>: for -since all this study is grounded upon probability, and -he that thinks he has the most probable reasons for his -opinion, may be as far off from truth, as he who is -thought to have the least; nay, what seems most probable -to day, may seem least probable to morrow, especially -if an ingenious opposer, bring rational arguments -against it: Therefore you think it is but vain for any -one to trouble his brain with searching and enquiring -after such things wherein neither truth nor certainty can -be had. To which, I answer: That the undoubted -truth in Natural Philosophy, is, in my opinion, like -the Philosopher's Stone in Chymistry, which has -been sought for by many learned and ingenious -Persons, and will be sought as long as the Art -of Chymistry doth last; but although they cannot -find the Philosophers Stone, yet by the help -of this Art they have found out many rare things -both for use and knowledg. The like in Natural -Philosophy, although Natural Philosophers -cannot find out the absolute truth of Nature, or -Natures ground-works, or the hidden causes of -natural effects; nevertheless they have found out many -necessary and profitable Arts and Sciences, to -benefit the life of man; for without Natural Philosophy -we should have lived in dark ignorance, -not knowing the motions of the Heavens, the cause -of the Eclipses, the influences of the Stars, the use -of Numbers, Measures, and Weights, the vertues -and effects of Vegetables and Minerals, the -Art of Architecture, Navigation, and the like: -Indeed all Arts and Sciences do adscribe their original -to the study of Natural Philosophy; and those -men are both unwise and ungrateful, that will refuse -rich gifts because they cannot be masters of all -Wealth; and they are fools, that will not take remedies -when they are sick, because Medicines can onely -recover them from death for a time, but not -make them live for ever. But to conclude, Probability -is next to truth, and the search of a hidden cause -finds out visible effects; and this truth do natural Philosophers -find, that there are more fools, then wise -men, which fools will never attain to the honour of being -Natural Philosophers. And thus leaving them, -I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships</i></p> - -<p><i>humble and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXVIII" id="IV_XXVIII">XXVIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Your desire is to know, since I say Nature is Wise, -Whether all her parts must be wise also? To -which, I answer; That (by your favour) all -her parts are not fools: but yet it is no necessary consequence, -that because Nature is infinitely wise, all -her parts must be so too, no more then if I should say, -Nature is Infinite, therefore every part must be Infinite: -But it is rather necessary, that because Nature is -Infinite, therefore not any single part of hers can be -Infinite, but must be finite. Next, you desire to know, -Whether Nature or the self-moving matter is subject -to err, and to commit mistakes? I answer: Although -Nature has naturally an Infinite wisdom and knowledg, -yet she has not a most pure and intire perfection, no -more then she has an absolute power; for a most pure -and intire perfection belongs onely to God: and though -she is infinitely naturally wise in her self, yet her parts -or particular creatures may commit errors and mistakes; -the truth is, it is impossible but that parts or particular -Creatures must be subject to errors, because no part can -have a perfect or general knowledg, as being but a part, -and not a whole; for knowledg is in parts, as parts are -in Matter: Besides several corporeal motions, that is, -several self-moving parts do delude and oppose each other -by their opposite motions; and this opposition is -very requisite in Nature to keep a mean, and hinder -extreams; for were there not opposition of parts, Nature -would run into extreams, which would confound -her, and all her parts. And as for delusion, it is part -of Natures delight, causing the more variety; but there -be some actions in Nature which are neither perfect -mistakes, nor delusions, but onely want of a clear and -thorow perception: As for example; when a man is -sailing in a Ship, he thinks the shore moves from the -ship, when as it is the ship that moves from the shore: -Also when a man is going backward from a Looking-glass, -he thinks, the figure in the Glass goeth inward, -whereas it is himself that goes backward, and not his figure -in the glass. The cause of it is, That the perception -in the eye perceives the distanced body, but not -the motion of the distance or medium; for though the -man may partly see the motion of the visible parts, yet -he doth not see the parts or motion of the distance or -medium, which is invisible, and not subject to the perception -of sight; and since a pattern cannot be made if -the object be not visible, hence I conclude, that the -motion of the medium cannot make perception, but -that it is the perceptive motions of the eye, which pattern -out an object as it is visibly presented to the corporeal -motions in the eye; for according as the object is -presented, the pattern is made, if the motions be regular: -For example; a fired end of a stick, if you -move it in a circular figure, the sensitive corporeal motions -in the eye pattern out the figure of fire, together -with the exterior or circular motion, and apprehend -it as a fiery circle; and if the stick be moved any otherwise, -they pattern out such a figure as the fired end of -the stick is moved in; so that the sensitive pattern is -made according to the exterior corporeal figurative motion -of the object, and not according to its interior figure -or motions. And this, <i>Madam</i>, is in short my -answer to your propounded questions, by which, I hope, -you understand plainly the meaning of,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXIX" id="IV_XXIX">XXIX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>The scruples or questions you sent me last, are -these following. First, you desire to be informed -what I mean by <i>Phantasmes</i> and <i>Ideas</i>? I answer: -They are figures made by the purest and subtilest -degree of self-moving matter, that is to say, by -the rational corporeal motions, and are the same with -thoughts or conceptions. Next, your question is, -what I do understand by <i>Sensitive Life</i>? I answer: -It is that part of self-moving matter, which in its own -nature is not so pure and subtil as the rational, for it is -but the labouring, and the rational the designing part -of matter. Your third question is, <i>Whether this sensitive -self-moving matter be dense or rare?</i> I answer: -density and rarity are onely effects caused by the several -actions, that is, the corporeal motions of Nature; -wherefore it cannot properly be said, that sensitive matter -is either dense, or rare; for it has a self-power to -contract and dilate, compose and divide, and move in -any kind of motion whatsoever, as is requisite to the -framing of any figure; and thus I desire you to observe -well, that when I say the rational part of matter is purer -in its degree then the sensitive, and that this is a rare and -acute matter, I do not mean that it is thin like a rare -egg, but that it is subtil and active, penetrating and -dividing, as well as dividable. Your fourth question -is, <i>What this sensitive matter works upon?</i> I answer: -It works with and upon another degree of matter, -which is not self-moving, but dull, stupid, and immoveable -in its own nature, which I call the inanimate -part or degree of matter. Your fifth question is, -<i>Whether this inanimate Matter do never rest?</i> I answer; -It doth not: for the self-moving matter being -restless in its own nature, and so closely united and -commixed with the inanimate, as they do make but one -body, will never suffer it to rest; so that there is no -part in Nature but is moving; the animate matter in it -self, or its own nature, the inanimate by the help or -means of the animate. Your sixth question is, <i>If there -be a thorow mixture of the parts of animate and inanimate -matter, whether those parts do retain each their own nature -and substance, so that the inanimate part of matter -remains dull and stupid in its essence or nature, and the animate -full of self-motion, or all self-motion?</i> I answer: -Although every part and particle of each degree are -closely intermixed, nevertheless this mixture doth not -alter the interior nature of those parts or degrees; As -for example; a man is composed of Soul, and Body, -which are several parts, but joyned as into one substance, -<i>viz.</i> Man, and yet they retain each their own -proprieties and natures; for although soul and body -are so closely united as they do make but one Man, yet -the soul doth not change into the body, nor the body -into the soul, but each continues in its own nature as it -is. And so likewise in Infinite Matter, although the -degrees or parts of Matter are so throughly intermixed -as they do make but one body or substance, which -is corporeal Nature, yet each remains in its nature as -it is, to wit, the animate part of matter doth not become -dull and stupid in its nature, but remains self-moving; -and the inanimate, although it doth move -by the means of the animate, yet it doth not become -self-moving, but each keeps its own interior nature -and essence in their commixture. The truth is, there -must of necessity be degrees of matter, or else there -would be no such various and several effects in Nature, -as humane sense and reason do perceive there -are; and those degrees must also retain each their own -nature and proprieties, to produce those various and -curious effects: Neither must those different degrees -vary or alter the nature of Infinite Matter; for Matter -must and doth continue one and the same in its -Nature, that is, Matter cannot be divided from being -Matter: And this is my meaning, when I say in -my <i>Philosophical Opinions, There is but one kind of -Matter</i>: Not that Matter is not dividable into several -parts or degrees, but I say, although Matter has several -parts and degrees, yet they do not alter the nature -of Matter, but Matter remains one and the same in its -own kind, that is, it continues still Matter in its own -nature notwithstanding those degrees; and thus I do -exclude from Matter all that which is not Matter, and -do firmly believe, that there can be no commixture of -Matter and no Matter in Nature; for this would breed -a meer confusion in Nature. Your seventh question -is, <i>Whether that, which I name the rational part of self-moving -Matter makes as much variety as the sensitive?</i> -To which I answer: That, to my sense and reason, -the rational part of animate or self-moving Matter -moves not onely more variously, but also more swiftly -then the sensitive; for thoughts are sooner made, then -words spoke, and a certain proof of it are the various -and several Imaginations, Fancies, Conceptions, Memories, -Remembrances, Understandings, Opinions, -Judgments, and the like: as also the several sorts of -Love, Hate, Fear, Anger, Joy, Doubt; and the like -Passions. Your eighth question is, <i>Whether the -Sensitive Matter can and doth work in it self and its own -substance and degree?</i> My answer is, That there is -no inanimate matter without animate, nor no animate -without inanimate, both being so curiously and subtilly -intermixt, as they make but one body; Nevertheless -the several parts of this one body may move -several ways. Neither are the several degrees bound -to an equal mixture, no more then the several parts -of one body are bound to one and the same size, bigness, -shape, or motion; or the Sea is bound to be always -at the high tide; or the Moon to be always at the -Full; or all the Veins or Brains in animal bodies are -bound to be of equal quantity; or every Tree of the -same kind to bear fruit, or have leaves of equal number; -or every Apple, Pear, or Plum, to have an equal -quantity of juice; or every Bee to make as much honey -and wax as the other. Your nineth question is, -<i>Whether the Sensitive Matter can work without taking -patterns?</i> My answer is, That all corporeal motion -is not patterning, but all patterning is made by corporeal -motion; and there be more several sorts of corporeal -motions then any single Creature is able to conceive, -much less to express: But the perceptive corporeal -motions are the ground-motions in Nature, -which make, rule, and govern all the parts of Nature, -as to move to Production, or Generation, Transformation, -and the like. Your tenth question is, <i>How -it is possible, that numerous figures can exist in one -part of matter? for it is impossible that two things -can be in one place, much less many.</i> My answer in -short is, That it were impossible, were a part of -Matter, and the numerous figures several and distinct -things; but all is but one thing, that is, -a part of Matter moving variously; for there -is neither Magnitude, Place, Figure, nor Motion, -in Nature, but what is Matter, or Body; Neither -is there any such thing as Time: Wherefore -it cannot properly be said, <i>There was</i>, and -<i>There shall be</i>; but onely, <i>There is</i>. Neither can -it properly be said, from this to that place; but onely in -reference to the several moving parts of the onely Infinite -Matter. And thus much to your questions; I -add no more, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXX" id="IV_XXX">XXX.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In your last, you were pleased to express, that some -men, who think themselves wise, did laugh in a scornful -manner at my opinion, when I say that every -Creature hath life and knowledg, sense and reason; -counting it not onely ridiculous, but absurd; and asking, -whether you did or could believe, a piece of wood, -metal, or stone, had as much sense as a beast, or as -much reason as a man, having neither brain, blood, -heart, nor flesh; nor such organs, passages, parts, nor -shapes as animals? To which, I answer: That it is -not any of these mentioned things that makes life and -knowledg, but life and knowledg is the cause of them, -which life and knowledg is animate matter, and is in -all parts of all Creatures: and to make it more plain -and perspicuous, humane sense and reason may perceive, -that wood, stone, or metal, acts as wisely as an -animal: As for example; Rhubarb, or the like drugs, -will act very wisely in Purging; and Antimony, or the -like, will act very wisely in Vomiting; and Opium -will act very wisely in Sleeping; also Quicksilver or -Mercury will act very wisely, as those that have the -French disease can best witness: likewise the Loadstone -acts very wisely, as Mariners or Navigators will -tell you: Also Wine made of Fruit, and Ale of Malt, -and distilled Aqua-vitæ will act very subtilly; ask the -Drunkards, and they can inform you; Thus Infinite -examples may be given, and yet man says, all Vegetables -and Minerals are insensible and irrational, -as also the Planets and Elements; when as yet the -Planets move very orderly and wisely, and the Elements -are more active, nay, more subtil and searching -then any of the animal Creatures; witness Fire, -Air, and Water: As for the Earth, she brings forth -her fruit, if the other Elements do not cause abortives, -in due season; and yet man believes, Vegetables, -Minerals, and Elements, are dead, dull, senseless, -and irrational Creatures, because they have not -such shapes, parts, nor passages as Animals, nor such -exterior and local motions as Animals have: but -Man doth not consider the various, intricate and obscure -ways of Nature, unknown to any particular -Creature; for what our senses are not capable to know, -our reason is apt to deny. Truly, in my opinion, -Man is more irrational then any of those Creatures, -when he believes that all knowledg is not onely confined -to one sort of Creatures, but to one part of one -particular Creature, as the head, or brain of man; for -who can in reason think, that there is no other sensitive -and rational knowledg in Infinite Matter, but -what is onely in Man, or animal Creatures? It is a -very simple and weak conclusion to say, Other Creatures -have no eyes to see, no ears to hear, no tongues -to taste, no noses to smell, as animals have; wherefore -they have no sense or sensitive knowledg; or because -they have no head, nor brain as Man hath, therefore -they have no reason, nor rational knowledg at all: -for sense and reason, and consequently sensitive and rational -knowledg, extends further then to be bound to -the animal eye, ear, nose, tongue, head, or brain; -but as these organs are onely in one kind of Natures -Creatures, as Animals, in which organs the sensitive -corporeal motions make the perception of exterior objects, -so there may be infinite other kinds of passages or -organs in other Creatures unknown to Man, which -Creatures may have their sense and reason, that is, sensitive -and rational knowledg, each according to the nature -of its figure; for as it is absurd to say, that all Creatures -in Nature are Animals, so it is absurd to confine -sense and reason onely to Animals; or to say, that all -other Creatures, if they have sense and reason, life -and knowledg, it must be the same as is in Animals: I -confess, it is of the same degree, that is, of the same animate -part of matter, but the motions of life and knowledg -work so differently and variously in every kind and -sort, nay, in every particular Creature, that no single -Creature can find them out: But, in my opinion, not -any Creature is without life and knowledg, which life -and knowledg is made by the self-moving part of matter, -that is, by the sensitive and rational corporeal motions; -and as it is no consequence, that all Creatures -must be alike in their exterior shapes, figures, and motions, -because they are all produced out of one and the -same matter, so neither doth it follow, that all Creatures -must have the same interior motions, natures, and proprieties, -and so consequently the same life and knowledg, -because all life and knowledg is made by the same -degree of matter, to wit, the animate. Wherefore -though every kind or sort of Creatures has different -perceptions, yet they are not less knowing; for Vegetables, -Minerals, and Elements, may have as numerous, -and as various perceptions as Animals, and they -may be as different from animal perceptions as their kinds -are; but a different perception is not therefore no perception: -Neither is it the animal organs that make perception, -nor the animal shape that makes life, but the motions -of life make them. But some may say, it is Irreligious -to believe any Creature has rational knowledg -but Man. Surely, <i>Madam</i>, the God of Nature, in -my opinion, will be adored by all Creatures, and adoration -cannot be without sense and knowledg. Wherefore -it is not probable, that onely Man, and no Creature -else, is capable to adore and worship the Infinite -and Omnipotent God, who is the God of Nature, and -of all Creatures: I should rather think it irreligious to -confine sense and reason onely to Man, and to say, that -no Creature adores and worships God, but Man; -which, in my judgment, argues a great pride, self-conceit, -and presumption. And thus, <i>Madam</i>, having -declared my opinion plainly concerning this subject, I -will detain you no longer at this present, but rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your constant Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and faithful Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXXI" id="IV_XXXI">XXXI.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>I perceive you do not well apprehend my meaning, -when I say in my <i>Philosophical Opinions,</i><a name="FNanchor_1_177" id="FNanchor_1_177"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_177" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>That the -Infinite degrees of Infinite Matter are all Infinite:</i> -For, say you, the degrees of Matter cannot be Infinite, -by reason there cannot be two Infinites, but one would -obstruct the other. My answer is; I do not mean that -the degrees of Matter are Infinite each in its self, that -is, that the animate and inanimate are several Infinite -matters, but my opinion is, that the animate -degree of matter is in a perpetual motion, and the inanimate -doth not move of it self, and that those degrees -are infinite in their effects, as producing and making -infinite figures; for since the cause, which is the onely -matter, is infinite, the effects must of necessity be infinite -also; the cause is infinite in its substance, the effects -are Infinite in number. And this is my meaning, -when I say,<a name="FNanchor_2_178" id="FNanchor_2_178"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_178" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> that, although in Nature there is but -one kind of matter, yet there are Infinite degrees, Infinite -motions, and Infinite parts in that onely matter; -and though Infinite and Eternal matter has no perfect -or exact figure, by reason it is Infinite, and therefore -unlimited, yet there being infinite parts in number, made -by the infinite variations of motions in infinite Matter, -these parts have perfect or exact figures, considered as -parts, that is, single, or each in its particular figure: -And therefore if there be Infinite degrees, considering -the effects of the animate and inanimate matter, infinite -motions for changes, infinite parts for number, infinite -compositions and divisions for variety and diversity -of Creatures; then there may also be infinite sizes, -each part or figure differing more or less, infinite smallness -and bigness, lightness and heaviness, rarity and -density, strength and power, life and knowledg, and -the like: But by reason Nature or Natural matter is -not all animate or inanimate, nor all composing or dividing, -there can be no Infinite in a part, nor can there -be something biggest or smallest, strongest or weakest, -heaviest or lightest, softest or hardest in Infinite Nature, -or her parts, but all those several Infinites are as -it were included in one Infinite, which is Corporeal -Nature, or Natural Matter.</p> - -<p>Next, you desire my opinion of <i>Vacuum</i>, whether -there be any, or not? for you say I determine nothing, -of it in my Book of <i>Philosophical Opinions</i>. Truly, -<i>Madam</i>, my sense and reason cannot believe a <i>Vacuum</i>, -because there cannot be an empty Nothing; but -change of motion makes all the alteration of figures, and -consequently all that which is called place, magnitude, -space, and the like; for matter, motion, figure, place, -magnitude, &c. are but one thing. But some men -perceiving the alteration, but not the subtil motions, -believe that bodies move into each others place, which -is impossible, because several places are onely several -parts, so that, unless one part could make it self another -part, no part can be said to succeed into anothers place; -but it is impossible that one part should make it self -another part, for it cannot be another, and it self, no -more then Nature can be Nature, and not Nature; -wherefore change of place is onely change of motion, -and this change of motion makes alteration of Figures.</p> - -<p>Thirdly, you say, You cannot understand what I -mean by Creation, for you think that Creation is a -production or making of Something out of Nothing. -To tell you really, <i>Madam</i>, this word is used by -me for want of a better expression; and I do not take -it in so strict a sense as to understand by it, a Divine or -supernatural Creation, which onely belongs to God; -but a natural Creation, that is, a natural production -or Generation; for Nature cannot create or produce -Something out of Nothing: And this Production may -be taken in a double sence; First, in General, as for example, -when it is said, that all Creatures are produced -out of Infinite Matter; and in this respect every particular -Creature which is finite, that is, of a circumscribed -and limited figure, is produced of Infinite Matter, -as being a part thereof: Next, Production is taken -in a more strict sense, to wit, when one single Creature -is produced from another; and this is either Generation -properly so called, as when in every kind and sort -each particular produces its like; or it is such a Generation -whereby one creature produces another, each being -of a different kind or species, as for example, when -an Animal produces a Mineral, as when a Stone is generated -in the Kidneys, or the like; and in this sence -one finite creature generates or produces another finite -creature, the producer as well as the produced being -finite; but in the first sence finite creatures are produced -out of infinite matter.</p> - -<p>Fourthly, you confess, You cannot well apprehend -my meaning, when I say,<a name="FNanchor_3_179" id="FNanchor_3_179"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_179" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> that the several kinds are as -Infinite as the particulars; for your opinion is, That -the number of particulars must needs exceed the number -of kinds. I answer: I mean in general the Infinite -effects of Nature which are Infinite in number, -and the several kinds or sorts of Creatures are Infinite -in duration, for nothing can perish in Nature.</p> - -<p>Fifthly, When I say,<a name="FNanchor_4_180" id="FNanchor_4_180"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_180" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> that ascending and descending -is often caused by the exterior figure or shape of a -body; witness a Bird, who although he is of a much -bigger size and bulk then a Worm, yet can by his shape -lift himself up more agilly and nimbly then a Worm; -Your opinion is, That his exterior shape doth not contribute -any thing towards his flying, by reason a Bird -being dead retains the same shape, but yet cannot fly -at all. But, truly, <i>Madam</i>, I would not have you -think that I do exclude the proper and interior natural -motion of the figure of a Bird, and the natural and proper -motions of every part and particle thereof; for that -a Bird when dead, keeps his shape, and yet cannot fly, -the reason is, that the natural and internal motions -of the Bird, and the Birds wings, are altered towards -some other shape or figure, if not exteriously, yet interiously; -but yet the interior natural motions could -not effect any flying or ascending without the help of -the exterior shape; for a Man, or any other animal, -may have the same interior motions as a Bird hath, but -wanting such an exterior shape, he cannot fly; whereas -had he wings like a Bird, and the interior natural -motions of those wings, he might without doubt fly as -well as a Bird doth.</p> - -<p>Sixthly, Concerning the descent of heavy bodies,<a name="FNanchor_5_181" id="FNanchor_5_181"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_181" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> -that it is more forcible then the ascent of light bodies, -you do question the Truth of this my opinion. Certainly, -<i>Madam</i>, I cannot conceive it to be otherwise -by my sense and reason; for though Fire that is -rare, doth ascend with an extraordinary quick motion, -yet this motion is, in my opinion, not so strong and -piercing as when grosser parts of Creatures do descend; -but there is difference in strength and quickness; for -had not Water a stronger motion, and another sort of -figure then Fire, it could not suppress Fire, much less -quench it. But Smoak, which is heavier then Flame, -flies up, or rises before, or rather, above it: Wherefore -I am still of the same opinion, that heavy bodies -descend more forcibly then light bodies do ascend, and -it seems most rational to me.</p> - -<p>Lastly, I perceive you cannot believe that all bodies -have weight; by reason, if this were so, the Sun, and -the Stars would have long since cover'd the Earth. In -answer to this objection, I say, That as there can be -no body without figure and magnitude, so consequently -not without weight, were it no bigger then an atome; -and as for the Sun's and the Stars not falling down, or -rising higher, the reason is, not their being without -weight, but their natural and proper motion, which -keeps them constantly in their spheres; and it might as -well be said, a Man lives not, or is not, because he doth -not fly like a Bird, or dive and catch fish like a Cormorant, -or dig and undermine like a Mole, for those -are motions not proper to his nature. And these, <i>Madam</i>, -are my answers to your objections, which if they -do satisfie you, it is all I desire, if not, I shall endeavour -hereafter to make my meaning more intelligible -and study for other more rational arguments -then these are, to let you see how much I value both -the credit of my named Book, and your <i>Ladiships</i> -Commands; which assure you self, shall never be more -faithfully performed, then by,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Ladiships most obliged Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_177" id="Footnote_1_177"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_177"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_178" id="Footnote_2_178"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_178"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 8.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_179" id="Footnote_3_179"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_179"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 4. <i>c.</i> 10.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_180" id="Footnote_4_180"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_180"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 20.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_181" id="Footnote_5_181"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_181"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Ch.</i> 21.</p></div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXXII" id="IV_XXXII">XXXII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>Since my opinion is, that the Animate part of Matter, -which is sense and reason, life and knowledg, is -the designer, architect, and creator of all figures in -Nature; you desire to know, whence this Animate -Matter, sense and reason, or life and knowledg (call -it what you will, for it is all one and the same thing) -is produced? I answer: It is eternal. But then you -say, it is coequal with God. I answer, That cannot -be: for God is above all Natural sense and reason, -which is Natural life and knowledg; and therefore it -cannot be coequal with God, except it be meant in Eternity, -as being without beginning and end. But if Gods -Power can make Man's Soul, as also the good and -evil Spirits to last eternally without end, he may, by -his Omnipotency make as well things without beginning. -You will say, If Nature were Eternal, it -could not be created, for the word Creation is contrary -to Eternity. I answer, <i>Madam</i>, I am no Scholar for -words; for if you will not use the word Creation, you -may use what other word you will; for I do not stand -upon nice words and terms, so I can but express my -conceptions: Wherefore, if it be (as in Reason it -cannot be otherwise) that nothing in Nature can be -annihilated, nor any thing created out of nothing, but -by Gods special and all-powerful Decree and Command, -then Nature must be as God has made her, until -he destroy her. But if Nature be not Eternal, then the -Gods of the Heathens were made in time, and were no -more then any other Creature, which is as subject to be -destroyed as created; for they conceived their Gods, as -we do men, to have Material Bodies, but an Immaterial -Spirit, or as some Learned men imagine, to be an Immaterial -Spirit, but to take several shapes, and so to -perform several corporeal actions; which truly is too -humble and mean a conception of an Immaterial Being, -much more of the Great and Incomprehensible God; -which I do firmly believe is a most pure, all-powerful -Immaterial Being, which doth all things by his own -Decree and Omnipotency without any Corporeal actions -or shapes, such as some fancy of Dæmons and the -like Spirits. But to return to the former question; you -might as well enquire how the world, or any part of it -was created, or how the variety of creatures came to -be, as ask how Reason and sensitive corporeal Knowledg -was produced. Nevertheless, I do constantly believe, -that both sensitive and rational Knowledg in Matter was -produced from God; but after what manner or way, is -impossible for any creature or part of Nature to know, -for Gods wayes are incomprehensible and supernatural. -And thus much I believe, That as God is an Eternal -Creator, which no man can deny, so he has also an Eternal -Creature, which is Nature, or natural Matter. -But put the case Nature or natural Matter was made -when the World was created, might not God give this -Natural Matter self-motion, as well as he gave self-motion -to Spirits and Souls? and might not God endue -this Matter with Sense and Reason, as well as he endued -Man? Shall or can we bind up Gods actions with our -weak opinions and foolish arguments? Truly, if -God could not act more then Man is able to conceive, -he were not a God of an infinite Power; but God is -Omnipotent, and his actions are infinite, supernatural, -and past finding out; wherefore he is rather to be admired, -adored and worshipped, then to be ungloriously -discoursed of by vain and ambitious men, whose -foolish pride and presumption drowns their Natural -Judgment and Reason; to which leaving them, -I rest,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your Faithful Friend</i></p> - -<p><i>and Servant.</i></p> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="IV_XXXIII" id="IV_XXXIII">XXXIII.</a></h3> - - -<p><i>MADAM,</i></p> - -<p>In obedience to your commands, I here send you -also an explanation and clearing of those places and -passages in my Book of Philosophy, which in your -last Letter you were pleased to mark, as containing -some obscurity and difficulty of being understood.</p> - -<p>First, When I say,<a name="FNanchor_1_182" id="FNanchor_1_182"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_182" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> <i>Nature is an Individable Matter</i>, -I do not mean as if Nature were not dividable into -parts; for because Nature is material, therefore she -must also needs be dividable into parts: But my meaning -is, that Nature cannot be divided from Matter, -nor Matter from Nature, that is, Nature cannot be -Immaterial, nor no part of Nature, but if there be any -thing Immaterial, it doth not belong to Nature. -Also when I call Nature a <i>Multiplying Figure</i>;<a name="FNanchor_2_183" id="FNanchor_2_183"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_183" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> I mean, -that Nature makes infinite changes, and so infinite -figures.</p> - -<p>Next, when I say,<a name="FNanchor_3_184" id="FNanchor_3_184"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_184" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> <i>There are Infinite Divisions in -Nature</i>; my meaning is not, that there are infinite -divisions of one single part, but that Infinite Matter -has Infinite parts, sizes, figures, and motions, all -being but one Infinite Matter, or corporeal Nature. -Also when I say single parts, I mean not parts subsisting -by themselves, precised from each other, but single, -that is, several or different, by reason of their different -figures. Likewise, when I name Atomes, I -mean small parts of Matter; and when I speak of Place -and Time, I mean onely the variation of corporeal -figurative motions.</p> - -<p>Again: when I say,<a name="FNanchor_4_185" id="FNanchor_4_185"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_185" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <i>Nature has not an absolute -Power, because she has an Infinite power</i>; I mean by <i>absolute</i>, -as much as finite, or circumscribed; and in -this sense Nature cannot have an absolute power, for -the Infiniteness hinders the absoluteness; but when -in my former Letters I have attributed an absolute -Power onely to God, and said that Nature has not an -absolute power, but that her power, although it be -Infinite, yet cannot extend beyond Nature, but is an -Infinite natural power; I understand by an absolute -Power, not a finite power, but such a power which -onely belongs to God, that is, a supernatural and divine -power, which power Nature cannot have, by -reason she cannot make any part of her body immaterial, -nor annihilate any part of her Creatures, nor -create any part that was not in her from Eternity, nor -make her self a Deity; for though God can impower -her with a supernatural gift, and annihilate her when -he pleases, yet she is no ways able to do it her self.</p> - -<p>Moreover, when I say,<a name="FNanchor_5_186" id="FNanchor_5_186"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_186" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> <i>That one Infinite is contained -within another</i>; I mean, the several sorts of Infinites, -as Infinite in number, Infinite in duration; -as also the Infinite degrees, motions, figures, sizes, -compositions, divisions, &c. all which are contained -in the Infinite body of Nature, which is the onely Infinite -in quantity or substance, neither can the parts of -Nature go beyond Infinite.</p> - -<p>Also when I say,<a name="FNanchor_6_187" id="FNanchor_6_187"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_187" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> <i>That Matter would have power over -Infinite, and Infinite over Matter, and Eternal over both</i>; -I mean, that some corporeal actions endeavour -to be more powerful then others, and thus the whole -strives to over-power the parts, and the parts the whole: -As for example, if one end of a string were tied about -the little finger of ones hand, and the other end were -in the power of the other whole hand, and both did pull -several and opposite ways; certainly, the little finger -would endeavour to over-power the hand, and the -hand again would strive to over-power the little finger: -The same may be said of two equal figures, as two -hands, and other the like examples may be given. And -this is also my meaning, when I say, that some shapes -have power over others, and some degrees and temperaments -of matter over others; whereby I understand nothing -else, but that some parts have power over others. -Also when I say,<a name="FNanchor_7_188" id="FNanchor_7_188"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_188" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> that outward things govern, -and a Creature has no power over it self, I mean, -that which is stronger, by what means soever, is superior -in power.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_8_189" id="FNanchor_8_189"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_189" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> That <i>the Animate part of Matter is -not so gross an Infinite as the Inanimate</i>, I do not attribute -an Infiniteness to a part, as if animate matter considered -as a part were infinite; but my meaning is, that -the Animate matter produces infinite effects: For, it -being the Designer, Architect, and Creator of all Figures, -as also the Life and Soul of all Creatures, it must -needs be infinite in its effects, as also infinite in its duration. -But you may object, That a part cannot produce -infinite effects. I answer, It is true, if animate -matter should be considered in it self without the inanimate, -it could not produce infinite effects, having nothing -to work upon and withal; but because there is -such a close and inseparable conjunction of those parts -of matter, as they make but one body, and that Infinite, -none can be or work without the other, but both -degrees of matter, which make but one infinite Nature, -are required in the production of the infinite effects and -figures in Nature: Nevertheless, since the Animate -part of Matter is the onely architect, creator, or producer -of all those effects, by reason it is the self-moving -part, and the Inanimate is onely the instrument -which the Animate works withal, and the materials it -works upon, the Production of the infinite effects in -Nature is more fitly ascribed to the Animate then the Inanimate -part of matter; as for example, If an architect -should build an house, certainly he can do nothing without -materials, neither can the materials raise themselves -to such a figure as a house without the help of the architect -and workmen, but both are of necessity required -to this artificial production; nevertheless, the building -of the house is not laid to the materials, but to the architect: -the same may be said of animate and inanimate -matter in the production of natural effects. -Again, you may reply, That the animate and inanimate -parts of matter are but two parts, and the number -of Two is but a finite number, wherefore they cannot -make one infinite body, such as I call Nature or natural -Matter. I answer, <i>Madam</i>, I confess, that a finite -number is not nor cannot make an infinite number; -but I do not say, that the animate and inanimate parts or -degrees of matter are two finite parts each subsisting by it -self as circumscribed, and having its certain bounds, limits -and circumference; for if this were so, certainly they being -finite themselves, could not produce but finite effects; -but my meaning is, that both the animate and inanimate -matter do make but one Infinite bulk, body, or substance -and are not two several and dividable bodies in themselves, -and thus they may be divided not into two -but into Infinite parts; Neither are they two different -Matters, but they are but one Matter; for by the animate -Matter I do understand self-motion; and that I call this -self-motion Matter, the reason is, that no body shall -think as if self-motion were immaterial; for my opinion -is, that Nature is nothing but meer Matter, and that -nothing is in Nature which is a part of Nature, that is -not material; wherefore to avoid such a misapprehension -(seeing that most learned men are so much for abstractions -and immaterial beings) I called self-motion -animate matter, or the animate part of matter; not as -if they were two several matters, but that all is but one -natural Matter, or corporeal Nature in one bulk, body, -or substance, just like as the soul and body do make but -one man; and to avoid also this misapprehension, lest -they might be taken for several matters, I have upon -better consideration, in this volume of <i>Philosophical -Letters</i>, call'd the animate matter corporeal self-motion, -which expression, I think, is more proper, plain, and intelligible -then any other: Neither would I have you to -scruple at it, when I say, that both parts or degrees of -animate and inanimate matter do retain their own interior -natures and proprieties in their commixture, as if -those different natures and proprieties, where one is self-moving, -and the other not, did cause them to be two -different matters; for thus you might say as well, that -several figures which have several and different interior -natures and proprieties, are so many several matters. -The truth is, if you desire to have the truest expression -of animate and inanimate matter, you cannot find it -better then in the definition of Nature, when I say, -Nature is an infinite self-moving body; where by the -body of Nature I understand the inanimate matter, -and by self-motion the animate, which is the life and -soul of Nature, not an immaterial life and soul, but -a material, for both life, soul and body are and make -but one self-moving body or substance which is corporeal -Nature. And therefore when I call <i>Animate -matter</i> an <i>Extract</i>,<a name="FNanchor_9_190" id="FNanchor_9_190"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_190" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> I do it by reason of its purity, subtilty -and agility, not by reason of its immateriality. Also -when I name the word Motion by it self, and without -any addition, I understand corporeal Motion; and -when I name Motion, Matter and Figure, I do not -mean three several and distinct things, but onely figurative -corporeal motion, or figurative self-moving -matter, all being but one thing; the same when I speak -of Place, Time, Magnitude, and the like.</p> - -<p>Concerning Natural Production or Generation; -when I say,<a name="FNanchor_10_191" id="FNanchor_10_191"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_191" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> <i>The same matter or figure of the producers -doth not always move after one and the same manner in -producing, for then the same producers would produce one -and the same creature by repetition</i>, I do not mean the -very same creature in number, unless the same motions -and parts of matter did return into the producers -again, which is impossible; but I understand the like -creature, to wit, that one and the same sort of particular -motions would make all particular figures resemble -so, as if they were one and the same creature without -any difference.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_11_192" id="FNanchor_11_192"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_192" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> <i>Sensitive and Rational knowledg lives in -sensitive and rational Matter, and Animate liveth in -Inanimate matter</i>, I mean they are all several parts and -actions of the onely infinite matter inseparable from each -other; for wheresoever is matter, there is also self-motion, -and wheresoever is self-motion, there is sense and -reason, and wheresoever is sense and reason, there is sensitive -and rational knowledge, all being but one body or -substance, which is Nature.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_12_193" id="FNanchor_12_193"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_193" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> <i>The death of particular Creatures causes -an obscurity of Knowledge, and that particular Knowledges -increase and decrease, and may be more or less</i>, I -mean onely that parts divide themselves from parts, and -joyn to other parts; for every several Motion is a several -Knowledge, and as motion varies, so doth knowledge; -but there is no annihilation of any motion, and consequently -not of knowledge in Nature. And as for -more or less knowledge, I mean more or less alteration -and variety of corporeal figurative motions, not onely -rational but sensitive, so that that creature which has most -variety of those perceptive motions is most knowing, -provided they be regular, that is, according to the nature -and propriety of the figure, whether animal, vegetable, -mineral, or elemental; for though a large figure -is capable of most knowledge, yet it is not commonly -or alwayes so wise or witty as a less, by reason it is -more subject to disorders and irregularities; like as a private -Family is more regular and better ordered then a -great State or Common-wealth. Also when I say, -<i>That some particular Knowledge lasts longer then some -other</i>, I mean that some corporeal motions in some parts -do continue longer then in others.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_13_194" id="FNanchor_13_194"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_194" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> <i>A little head may be full, and a great -head may be empty of rational matter</i>, I mean there may -be as it were an ebbing or flowing, that is more or less of -Rational Matter joyned with the Sensitive and Inanimate: -And when I say, <i>That, if all the heads of Mankind -were put into one, and sufficient quantity of Rational -Matter therein, that Creature would not onely have the -knowledge of every particular, but that Understanding -and Knowledge would increase like Use-money</i>, my meaning -is, that if there were much of those parts of rational -matter joyned, they would make more variety by self-change -of corporeal motions.</p> - -<p>When I name <i>Humane sense and reason</i>, I mean such -sensitive and rational perception and knowledge as is -proper to the nature of Man; and when I say <i>Animal -sense and reason</i>, I mean such as is proper to the nature -of all Animals; for I do not mean that the sensitive and -rational corporeal motions which do make a man, or any -Animal, are bound to such figures eternally, but whilest -they work and move in such or such figures, they make -such perceptions as belong to the nature of those figures; -but when those self-moving parts dissolve the figure of -an Animal into a Vegetable or any other Creature, then -they work according to the nature of that same figure, -both exteriously and interiously.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_14_195" id="FNanchor_14_195"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_195" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> <i>That Place, Space, Measure, Number, -Weight, Figures, &c. are mixed with Substance</i>, -I do not mean they are incorporeal, and do inhere -in substance as so many incorporeal modes or accidents; -but my meaning is, they are all corporeal parts -and actions of Nature, there being no such thing in -Nature that may be called incorporeal; for Place, Figure, -Weight, Measure, &c. are nothing without Body, -but Place and Body are but one thing, and so of -the rest. Also when I say,<a name="FNanchor_15_196" id="FNanchor_15_196"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_196" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> <i>That sometimes Place, -sometimes Time, and sometimes Number gives advantage</i>, -I mean, that several parts of Matter are getting -or losing advantage.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_16_197" id="FNanchor_16_197"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_197" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> an Animal or any thing else that has -exterior local motion, goeth or moveth to such or such -a place, I mean, to such or such a body; and when -such a Creature doth not move out of its place, I mean, -it doth not remove its body from such or such parts adjoyning -to it.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_17_198" id="FNanchor_17_198"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_198" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> <i>The rational animate matter divides it -self into as many parts, and after as many several manners -as their place or quantity will give way to</i>, I mean their own -place and quantity: also, as other parts will give way to -those parts, for some parts will assist others, and some do -obstruct others.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_18_199" id="FNanchor_18_199"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_199" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> <i>That the Nature of extension or dilation -strives or endeavours to get space, ground, or compass</i>, -I mean those corporeal motions endeavour to make place -and space by their extensions, that is, to spread their -parts of matter into a larger compass or body. And -when I say, <i>That Contractions endeavour to cast or thrust -out space, place, ground, or compass</i>, My meaning is, -That those corporeal motions endeavour to draw their -parts of matter into a more close and solid body, for -there is no place nor space without body.</p> - -<p>Also when I name<a name="FNanchor_19_200" id="FNanchor_19_200"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_200" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> several <i>tempered substances and matters</i>, -I mean several changes and mixtures of corporeal -motions.</p> - -<p>Also when I speak of <i>Increase</i> and <i>Decrease</i>, I mean -onely an alteration of corporeal figurative motions, as -uniting parts with parts, and dissolving or separating -parts from parts.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_20_201" id="FNanchor_20_201"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_201" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> That the motions of cold, and the motions -of moisture, when they meet, make cold and -moist effects, and when the motions of heat and moisture -meet, make hot and moist effects; and so for the -motions of cold and dryness: I mean, that when -several parts do joyn in such several corporeal motions, -they cause such effects; and when I say cold and heat -presses into every particular Creature, I mean, that every -Creatures natural and inherent perceptive motions -make such patterns as their exterior objects are, <i>viz.</i> -hot or cold, if they do but move regularly, for if they -be irregular, then they do not: as for example; those -in an Ague will shake for cold in a hot Summers day, -and those that are in a Fever will burn with heat, -although they were at the Poles.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_21_202" id="FNanchor_21_202"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_202" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> that hot motions, and burning motions, -and hot figures, and burning figures do not associate or -joyn together in all Creatures: I mean, that the corporeal -motions in some figures or creatures, do act in -a hot, but not in a burning manner; and when I say, -some creatures have both hot and burning motions and -figures, I mean, the corporeal motions act both in a -hot and burning manner; for though heat is in a degree -to burning, yet it is not always burning, for -burning is the highest degree of heat, as wetness is the -highest degree of moisture.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_22_203" id="FNanchor_22_203"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_203" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> <i>Warmth feeds other Creatures after a -spiritual manner, not a corporeal</i>, My meaning is, not -as if heat were not corporeal, but that those corporeal -motions which make heat work invisibly, and not visibly -like as fire feeds on fuel, or man on meat.</p> - -<p>Also when I say, <i>Excercise amongst animals gets strength</i>, -I mean, that by excercise the inherent natural -motions of an animal body are more active, as being -more industrious.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_23_204" id="FNanchor_23_204"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_204" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> <i>That the passage whence cold and sharp -winds do issue out, is narrow</i>, I mean, when as such or -such parts disjoyn or separate from other parts; as for -example, when dilating parts disjoyn from contracting -parts; and oftentimes the disjoyning parts do move -according to the nature of those parts they disjoyn -from.</p> - -<p>Concerning the actions of Nature, my meaning is, -that there is not any action whatsoever, but was always -in Nature, and remains in Nature so long as it -pleases God that Nature shall last, and of all her actions -Perception and self-love are her prime and chief -actions; wherefore it is impossible but that all her particular -creatures or parts must be knowing as well as -self-moving, there being not one part or particle of -Nature that has not its share of animate or self-moving -matter, and consequently of knowledg and self-love, -each according to its own kind and nature; but -by reason all the parts are of one matter, and belong to -one body, each is unalterable so far, that although it can -change its figure, yet it cannot change or alter from being -matter, or a part of Infinite Nature; and this is the -cause there cannot be a confusion amongst those parts -of Nature, but there must be a constant union and -harmony betwixt them; for cross and opposite actions -make no confusion, but onely a variety, and such -actions which are different, cross and opposite, not -moving always after their usual and accustomed way, -I name Irregular, for want of a better expression; but -properly there is no such thing as Irregularity in Nature, -nor no weariness, rest, sleep, sickness, death or -destruction, no more then there is place, space, time, -modes, accidents, and the like, any thing besides body or -matter.</p> - -<p>When I speak of <i>unnatural Motions</i>,<a name="FNanchor_24_205" id="FNanchor_24_205"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_205" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> I mean such -as are not proper to the nature of such or such a Creature, -as being opposite or destructive to it, that is, moving -or acting towards its dissolution. Also when I call -Violence supernatural, I mean that Violence is beyond -the particular nature of such a particular Creature, that -is, beyond its natural motions; but not supernatural, -that is beyond Infinite Nature or natural Matter.</p> - -<p>When I say, <i>A thing is forced</i>, I do not mean that -the forced body receives strength without Matter; but -that some Corporeal Motions joyn with other Corporeal -Motions, and so double the strength by joyning their -parts, or are at least an occasion to make other parts more -industrious.</p> - -<p>By <i>Prints</i> I understand the figures of the objects -which are patterned or copied out by the sensitive and rational -corporeal figurative Motions; as for example, -when the sensitive corporeal motions pattern out the figure -of an exteriour object, and the rational motions -again pattern out a figure made by the sensitive motions, -those figures of the objects that are patterned out, I name -Prints; as for example, <i>The sense of Seeing is not capable -to receive the Print</i>,<a name="FNanchor_25_206" id="FNanchor_25_206"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_206" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> that is, the figure or pattern -<i>of the object of the whole Earth</i>. And again, <i>The rational -Motions are not alwayes exactly after the sensitive -Prints</i>, that is, after the figures made by the sensitive -motions. Thus by Prints I understand Patterns, and -by printing patterning; not that the exteriour object -prints its figure upon the exteriour sensitive organs, but -that the sensitive motions in the organs pattern out the -figure of the object: but though all printing is done by -the way of patterning, yet all patterning is not printing. -Therefore when I say,<a name="FNanchor_26_207" id="FNanchor_26_207"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_207" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> that <i>solid bodies print -their figures in that which is more porous and soft, and -that those solid bodies make new prints perpetually; -and as they remove, the prints melt out, like verbal or -vocal sounds, which print words and set notes in the Air</i>; -I mean, the soft body by its own self-motion patterns -out the figure of the solid body, and not that the solid -body makes its own print, and so leaves the place of its -own substance with the print in the soft body; for place -remains always with its own body, and cannot be separated -from it, they being but one thing: for example; -when a Seal is printed in Wax, the Seal gives not any -thing to the Wax, but is onely an object patterned out -by the figurative motions of the Wax in the action of -printing or sealing.</p> - -<p>When I make mention<a name="FNanchor_27_208" id="FNanchor_27_208"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_208" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> <i>of what the Senses bring in</i>, -I mean what the sensitive Motions pattern out of forreign -objects: And when I say,<a name="FNanchor_28_209" id="FNanchor_28_209"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_209" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> <i>that the pores being -shut, touch cannot enter</i>, I mean, the sensitive corporeal -motions cannot make patterns of outward objects.</p> - -<p>Also when I say, <i>our Ears may be as knowing as our -Eyes</i>, and so of the rest of the sensitive organs; I mean -the sensitive motions in those parts or organs.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_29_210" id="FNanchor_29_210"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_210" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> <i>The more the Body is at rest, the more -active or busie is the Mind</i>, I mean when the sensitive -Motions are not taken up with the action of patterning -out forreign objects.</p> - -<p>When I say,<a name="FNanchor_30_211" id="FNanchor_30_211"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_211" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> the Air is fill'd with sound, and that -words are received into the ears, as figures of exterior -objects are received into the eyes, I mean, the sensitive -motions of the Air pattern out sound, and the sensitive -motions of the Ears pattern out words, as the -sensitive figurative motions of the Eyes pattern out the -figures of external objects.</p> - -<p>Also when I speak of <i>Thunder</i> and <i>Lightning</i>, to -wit, <i>That Thunder makes a great noise by the breaking -of lines</i>: My meaning is, That the Air patterns out -this sound or noise of the lines; and by reason there are -so many patterns made in the air by its sensitive motions, -the Ear cannot take so exact a copy thereof, but somewhat -confusedly; and this is the reason why Thunder -is represented, or rather pattern'd out with some terrour; -for Thunder is a confused noise, because the patterns -are made confusedly.</p> - -<p>But concerning Sound and Light, I am forced to -acquaint you, <i>Madam</i>, that my meaning thereof is -not so well expressed in my Book of Philosophy, by -reason I was not of the same opinion at that time when I -did write that Book which I am now of; for upon better -consideration, and a more diligent search into the causes -of natural effects, I have found it more probable, that -all sensitive perception is made by the way of Patterning, -and so consequently the perception of Sound and -of Light; wherefore, I beseech you, when you find -in my mentioned Book any thing thereof otherwise expressed, -do not judg of it as if I did contradict my self, -but that I have alter'd my opinion since upon more probable -reasons.</p> - -<p>Thus, <i>Madam</i>, you have a true declaration of my -sence and meaning concerning those places, which in -my <i>Philosophical Opinions</i> you did note, as being obscure; -but I am resolved to bestow so much time and -labour as to have all other places in that Book rectified -and cleared, which seem not perspicuous, lest its obscurity -may be the cause of its being neglected: And I -pray God of his mercy to assist me with his Grace, and -grant that my Works may find a favourable acceptance. -In the mean time, I confess my self infinitely -bound to your Ladyship, that you would be pleased to -regard so much the Honour of your Friend, and be the -chief occasion of it; for which I pray Heaven may bless, -prosper, and preserve you, and lend me some means -and ways to express my self,</p> - -<p>Madam,</p> - -<p><i>Your thankfull Friend,</i></p> - -<p><i>and humble Servant.</i></p> - - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_182" id="Footnote_1_182"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_182"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 13.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_183" id="Footnote_2_183"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_183"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_184" id="Footnote_3_184"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_184"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 11.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_185" id="Footnote_4_185"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_185"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Part.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 13, 14.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_186" id="Footnote_5_186"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_186"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 8.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_6_187" id="Footnote_6_187"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_187"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 6. <i>c.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_7_188" id="Footnote_7_188"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_188"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 10.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_8_189" id="Footnote_8_189"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_189"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 1. <i>Ch.</i> 3.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_9_190" id="Footnote_9_190"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_190"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 4. <i>c.</i> 3, 32.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_10_191" id="Footnote_10_191"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_191"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 1. <i>c.</i> 22.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_11_192" id="Footnote_11_192"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_192"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 15.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_12_193" id="Footnote_12_193"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_193"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_13_194" id="Footnote_13_194"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_194"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 6. <i>c.</i> 11.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_14_195" id="Footnote_14_195"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_195"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 21.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_15_196" id="Footnote_15_196"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_196"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> <i>c.</i> 14.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_16_197" id="Footnote_16_197"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_197"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 5. <i>c.</i> 51.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_17_198" id="Footnote_17_198"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_198"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 6. <i>c.</i> 8.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_18_199" id="Footnote_18_199"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_199"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 4. <i>c.</i> 34.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_19_200" id="Footnote_19_200"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_200"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_20_201" id="Footnote_20_201"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_201"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 5. <i>c.</i> 4.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_21_202" id="Footnote_21_202"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_202"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 5. <i>c.</i> 13.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_22_203" id="Footnote_22_203"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_203"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 5. <i>c.</i> 27.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_23_204" id="Footnote_23_204"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_204"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 5. <i>c.</i> 45.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_24_205" id="Footnote_24_205"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_205"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 7. <i>c.</i> 11.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_25_206" id="Footnote_25_206"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_206"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 3. <i>c.</i> 2.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_26_207" id="Footnote_26_207"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_207"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 5. <i>c.</i> 23.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_27_208" id="Footnote_27_208"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_208"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 6. <i>c.</i> 13.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_28_209" id="Footnote_28_209"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_209"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 7. <i>c.</i> 12.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_29_210" id="Footnote_29_210"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_210"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 6. <i>c.</i> 13.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_30_211" id="Footnote_30_211"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_211"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> <i>P.</i> 6. <i>c.</i> 29.</p></div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - - -<p> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i><a id="Eternal_God_Infinite_Deity"></a>Eternal God, Infinite Deity,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Thy Servant</i>, NATURE, <i>humbly prays to Thee,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>That thou wilt please to favour Her, and give</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Her parts, which are Her Creatures, leave to live,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>That in their shapes and forms, what e're they be,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>And all their actions they may worship thee;</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>For 'tis not onely Man that doth implore,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>But all Her parts, Great God, do thee adore;</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>A finite Worship cannot be to thee,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Thou art above all finites in degree:</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Then let thy Servant Nature mediate</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Between thy Justice, Mercy, and our state,</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>That thou may'st bless all Parts, and ever be</i></span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;"><i>Our Gracious God to all Eternity.</i></span><br /> -<br /> -<br /> -</p> - - -<h4>FINIS.</h4> - - - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Philosophical Letters: or, modest -Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy, by Margaret Cavendish - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PHILOSOPHICAL LETTERS: OR *** - -***** This file should be named 53679-h.htm or 53679-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/6/7/53679/ - -Produced by Clare Graham and Marc D'Hooghe at Free -Literature (online soon in an extended version, also linking -to free sources for education worldwide ... MOOC's, -educational materials,...) Images generously made available -by the Internet Archive. - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - - -</pre> - -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/53679-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/53679-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7e0501c..0000000 --- a/old/53679-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null |
