Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	word_n	world_n	writ_n	20	3	7.9148	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A32712	Physiologia Epicuro-Gassendo-Charltoniana, or, A fabrick of science natural, upon the hypothesis of atoms founded by Epicurus repaired [by] Petrus Gassendus ; augmented [by] Walter Charleton ...	Charleton, Walter, 1619-1707.; Epicurus.; Gassendi, Pierre, 1592-1655.	1654 (1654)	Wing C3691; ESTC R10324	556,744	505

or material Principle of the World as we shall clearly enunciate in a singular Chapter subsequent we may adventure to affirm that God created exactly such a proportion of Atoms as might be sufficient to the making up of so vast a Bulk as this of the World and that there remained no one superfluous 'T is unworthy a Philosopher to acknowledge any superfluity in Nature and consequently a dangerous soloecism to say the God of Nature knowing not how to proportion the quantity of his materials to the model or platform of his structure created more Atoms then were necessary and left an infinite Residue to be perpetually hurried too and fro in the ultramundane space If they shall urge upon us that no man was privy to the Councel of God at the Creation and consequently no can know whether He created either more Atoms then were requisite to the amassment of this World or more Worlds then this one we may justly retort the Argument upon them and conclude that since no man was privy to the Councel of God they have no reason to pretend to know that God created either more matter or more Worlds and so the whole substance of the Dispute must be reduced only to this That they have no more Reason for the support of their opinion of a Plurality of Worlds then we have fo● ours of the Unity of the World Nay the greatest weight of Reason hangs on our end of the scale for we ground our Opinion upon that stable Criterion our sense and asserting the singularity of the world discourse of what our sight apprehends but They found theirs upon the fragil reed of wild Imagination and affirming a Plurality discourse of what neither the information of their sense nor solid reason nor judicious Authority hath learned them enough to warrant even Conjecture And as to their second Argument viz. That there is in Nature no one Thing special to which under the same kind there are not many singulars alike we Answer that All those singulars which we observe to be multiplied under one and the same kind are such which perish in the Individual and therefore cannot but be lost if not conserved by the multitude of Successors and not such as are not obnoxious to destruction by Corruptibility for they constantly existing in the ●ndividual need not Multiplicity to their conservation For which cause one Sun and one Moon are sufficient and in al probability of this sort is the World for though it be conceived obnoxious to corruption and shall once confess a Period yet is this no valid reason to justifie the necessity of a multitude of worlds since the Dissolution of the World shal be synchronical to the Dissolution of Nature when Sun Moon and all other kinds of Creatures as well single as numerous shall be blended together in one common ruine and then the same Infinite Cause which hath destroyed them can with as much facility as he first Created them repair their ruines educe them out of their second Chaos and redintegrate them into what Form His Wisdom shall design Nor is this opinion of a Plurality of Worlds only destitute of but even è diametro repugnant to the principal Inducements of Belief For if we consider Authority Divine in Moses inaestimable Diary or Narrative of the Creation can be found no mention at all of a Multitude of Worlds but on the contrary a positive assertion of one world and the express declarement of the manner how the Fiat of Omnipotence educed the several Parts thereof successively out of the Chaos disposed them into subordinate Piles and endowed them with exquisite configurations respective to their distinct destinations motions and uses and in all the other Books of Sacred Writ whatever concerns the Providence of God the Condition of man the mysteries of his Redemption means of salvation c. doth more then intimate the singularity of the World nor is there any one word if rightly interpreted which can be produced as an excuse for the opposite Error If Humane Authority we may soon perceive that those Ancient Philosophers who have declared on our side for the Unity of the World do very much exceed those Pluralists nominated in our praecedent Catalogue both in Number and Dignity For Thales Milesius Pythagoras Empedocles Ecphantus Parmenides Melissus Heraclitus Anaxagoras Plato Aristotle Zeno the Sto●ck attended on by all their sober Disciples have unanimously rejected and derided the Conceit of many Worlds not only as vain and weak but as extremly Hypochondriack and worthy a whole acre of Hellebor Nor indeed are we persuaded that so great Wits as those of Democritus and Epicurus did apprehend it as real but only Imaginary proposing it as a necessary Hypothesis whereon to erect their main Physical Pillar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vniversum esse ortus interitusque expers That the Universe is nonprincipiate and indissoluble For having mediated thus Whatever is Finite is circumscribed by an External Space from which a cause may come and invading destroy it and into which the matter thereof a●ter the dissolution of its Form may be received now this World being Finite must be environed by a circumambient space from which a Cause may invade and destroy it and into which the matter thereof after the dissolution of its Form may be received must of necessity therefore be dissoluble They inferred that unless they would concede the Universe to be dissoluble which could never consist with their Principles they must affirm it to be Infinite i. e. without which no space can be from whence any Cause might invade it and into which the matter thereof after the destruction of its Form might be received and thereupon concluded to suppose an Infinity of Worlds Coexistent Which seems to be the Reason also that induced Epicurus and Metrodorus to opinion that the Vniverse was not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Immutable but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Immoveable as may be collected from these words of Plutarch quoted by Eusebius 1. praepa Evang. 5. concerning Metrodorus Is inter caetera non moveri universum dixit quoniam non est quò migrare possit nam si posset quidem vel in plenum vel in vacuum atqui universum continet quicquid hujusmodi est quia si non contineret minime foret Vniversum Having thus amply refuted the Dream of a Plurality of Worlds both by detecting the exceeding invalidity of those two Cardinal Reasons on which the Authors and Abettors of it had rashly fixed their Assent and by convicting it of manifest Repugnancy to Authority Divine and Human we may safely praesume the understanding of our Reader is sufficiently praepared to determine his judgment to an Approbation of our Thesis the Argument and Title of this Chapter viz. That this Adspectable world is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vniversum the All in Rerum Natura the large Magazine wherein all the wealth and treasure

the Aer when agitated by the wind or a fan appears Colder then when quiet what solution can be more satisfactory then this that by reason of its motion it doth more deeply penetrate the pores of the skin and so more vigorously affect the sense However if we confine our assumption only to these three Heads Figure Order and Position we shall yet be able without much difficulty to make it out how from them either single or diversly commixt an infinite Multiplicity of Qualities may be created as may be most appositely explained by the Analogy which Letters hold to Atoms For as Letters are the Elements of Writing and from them arise by gradation Syllables Words Sentences Orations Books so proportionately are Atoms the Elements of Things and from them arise by gradation most exile Moleculae or the Seminaries of Concretions then greater and greater Masses successively until we arrive at the highest round in the scale of Magnitude But we are restrained to an insistence only upon our 3 Heads assumed As Letters of divers Figures U G A E O when praesented to the eye carry 3 different species or aspects and when pronounced affect the Ear with as many distinct sounds exactly so do Atoms respectively to the variety of their Figures and determinate Contexture into this or that species occurring to the Organs of Sight Hearing Smelling Tasting Touching make divers impressions thereupon or praesent themselves in divers Apparences or what is tantamount make divers Qualities 2 As one and the same Letter diversly posited is divers to the Sight and Hearing as may be instanced in Z N y ● b d p q so likewise doth one and the same Atom according to its various positions or faces produce various affections in the Organs of Sense For instance if the Atome assumed be Pyramidal when the Cone is obverted to the sensory Organ it must make a different impression upon it from that which the Base when obverted and applyed will cause 3 As the same two three or more Letters according to their mutation of Site or Antecession and Consequution impart divers words to the eye divers sounds to the ear and divers things to the mind as ET TE IS SI SUM MUS ROMA AMOR MARO RAMO ORAM MORA ARMO c. so also may two three or more Atoms according to their various positions and transpositions affect the sense with various Apparences or Qualities 4 And as Letters whose variety of Figures exceeds not those of the Alphabet are sufficient only by the variety of order to compose so great diversity of words as are contained in this or all the Books in the World so likewise if there were but 24 diverse Figures competent to Atoms they alone by variety of Order or transposition would suffice to the constitution of as incomprehensible a diversity of Qualities But when the diversity of their Figures is incomparably greater how infinitely more incomprehensible must that variety of Qualities be which the possible changes of their Order may produce Thus in the Water of the Sea when agitated into a white froth no other mutation is made save only the situation and differing contexture of the parts thereof disposed by the included aer into many small bubbles from which the incident rayes of Light which otherwise would not have been reflected in united are reflected in united and direct streams to the eye and so creat a whiteness continued which is but paler or weaker light which must disappeari mmediately upon the dissolution of the bubbles and return of the p●rts of the water to their natural constitution of fluidity And since we are fallen upon that eminent Quality Colour we shall illustrate the obscure nativity thereof in the general by a most praegnant example Immerge into a Glass Vial of clean fountain Water set upon warm embers half●n ounce more or less according the quantity of Water of the leaves of 〈◊〉 and after a small interval of time instill into the infusion a few drops of the oil of Tartar made per Deliqu●um which done you shall perceive the whole mixture to become Red. Now seeing that no one of the three ingredients in their simple and divided state do retain to that species of Colour in the remotest degree of affinity from what original can we derive this emergent Redness Doubtless only from hence that the Water doth so penetrate by a kind of Discussion separate and educe the smaller particle● of that substance whereof the leaves of Senna are composed as that the particles of the oyl of Tartar subtily perme●ting the infusion totally after the Contexture thereof and so commove and convert its minute dissolved particles as that the rayes of Light from without falling upon them suffer various refractions and reflections from their several obverted faces and praesent themselves to the eye in the apparence of that particular Colour And to confirm you herein you need only instead of oyl of Tartar infuse the like proportion of oyl of Vitriol into the same Tincture of Senna for thereupon no such redness at all will arise to the composition Which can be solved by no better a reason than this that the oyl of Vitriol wants that virtue of commoving and converting the educed particles of the Senna into such positions and order as are determinately requisite to the incidence refraction and reflection of the rayes of Light to the eye necessary to the creation of that Colour On the Contrary instead of Senna infuse Rose leaves in the Water and superaffuse thereto a few drops of the Spirit of Vitriol and then the infusion shall instantly acquire a purple tincture or deep scarlet when from the like or greater quantity of oyl of Tartar instilled no such event shall ensue Both which Experiments collated are Demonstration sufficient that a Red may be produced from simples absolutely destitute of that gloss only by a determinate Commixture and position of their insensible particles no otherwise then as the same Feathers in the neck of a Dove or train of a Peacock upon a various position of their parts both among themselves and toward the incident Light praesent various Colours to the eye or as a peice of Changeable Taffaty according as it is extended or plicated appears of two different dyes The same may also be conceived of the Caerule Tincture caused in White Wine by Lignum Nephriticum infused when the Decoction thereof shall remain turbid and subnigricant Moreover lest we leave you destitute of Examples in the other 4 orders of Qualities respondent to the 4 remaining senses to illustrate the sufficiency of Figure Order and Situation to their production be pleased to observe First that Lead calcined with the spirit of the most eager Vinegre so soon as it hath imbibed the moysture of the ambient aer or be irrigated with a few drops of Water will instantly conceive so intense a heat as to burn his finger that shall touch it Now since both the

those things to be Contiguous or Continued whose Rayes are received into the Eye as Contiguous or Continued none of the spaces interjacent affording one raye Of which truth Des Cartes seems to have had a glimpse when in Dioptrices cap. 6. Sect. 15. he conceds objectorum quae intuemur praecedaneam cognitionem ipsorum distantiae melius dignoscendae inservire that a certain praecognition of the object doth much conduce to the more certain dignotion of its Distance And on this branch may we ingraft a PARADOX that one and the same object speculated by the same man in the same degree of light doth alwayes appear greater to one Eye than to the other The truth of this is evincible by the joint testimony of those incorruptible Witnesses of Certitude Experience and Reason 1 Of Experience because no man can make the vision of both his eyes equally perfect but beholding a thing first with one eye the other being closed or eclipsed and then with the other the former being closed or eclipsed shall constantly discover it to be greater in dimensions in the apprehension of one Eye than of the other and Gassendus making a perfect and strict Experiment hereof testifies of himself in Epist. 2. de Apparent Magnitud Solis c. Sect. 17. that the Characters of his Book appeared to his right Eye by a fifth part greater in dimensions though somewhat more obscure than to his left 2 Of Reason because of all Twin Parts in the body as Ears Hands Leggs Testicles c. one is alwayes more vigorous and perfect in the performance of its action than the other Which Inaequality of Vigour if it be not the Bastard of Custom may rightfully be Fathered upon either this that one part is invigorated with a more liberal afflux of Spirits than the other or this that the Orgaganical Constitution of one Part is more perfect and firm than that of the other And therefore one Eye having its Pupill wider or the figure of the Chrystalline more Convex or the Retina Tunica more concave than the other must apprehend an object to be either larger in Dimensions or more Distinct in Parts than the other whose parts are of a different configuration either of these Causes necessitating a respective Disparity in the Action If this sound strange in the ears of any man how will he startle at the mention of that much more Paradoxical Thesis of Ioh. Baptista Porta lib. 6. de Refra●tion cap. 1. That no man can see distinctly but with one eye at once Which though seemingly repugnant not only to common persuasion but also to that high and mighty Axiom of Alhazen Vitellio Franc. Bacon Niceron and other the most eminent Professors of the Optiques That the Visive Axes of both eyes concurr and unite in the object speculated is yet a verity well worthy our admission and assertion For the Axes of the Eyes are so ordained by Nature that when one is intended the other is relaxed when one is imployed the other is idle and unconcerned nor can they be both intended at once or imployed though both may be at once relaxed or unimployed as is Experimented when with both eyes open we look on the leaf of a Book for we then perceive the lines and print thereof but do not distinctly discern the Characters so as to read one word till we fix the Axe of one eye thereon and at that instant we feel a certain suddain subsultation or gentle impulse in the Centre of that eye arising doubtless from the rushing in of more spirits through the Optick Nerve for the more efficacious performance of its action The Cause of the impossibility of the intention of both Visive Axes at one object may be desumed from the Parallelism of the Motion of the Eyes which being most evident to sense gives us just ground to admire how so many subtle Mathematicians and exquisite Oculists have not discovered the Coition and Union of the Visive Axes in the object speculated which they so confidently build upon to be an absolute Impossibility For though man hath two Eyes yet doth he use but one at once in the case of Distinct inspection the right eye to discern objects on the right side and the left to view objects on the left nor is there more necessity why he should use both Eyes at once than both Arms or Leggs or Testicles at once And for an Experiment to assist this Reason we shall desire you only to look at the top of your own Nose and you shall soon be convicted that you cannot discern it with both eyes at once but the right side with the right eye and afterward the left side with the left eye and at the instant of changing the Axe of the first eye you shall be sensible of that impulse of Spirits newly mentioned No● indeed is it possible that while your right eye is levelled at the right side of your nose your left should be levelled at the left side but on the contrary averted quite ●rom it because the motion of the eyes being Conjugate or Parallel when the Axe of the right eye is converted to the right side of the nose the Axe of the left must be converted toward the left Ear. And therefore since the Visive Axes of both Eyes cannot Concurr and Unite in the Tipp of the Nose what can remain to persuade that they must Concurr and unite in the same Letter or Word in a book which is not many inches more remote than the Nose And that you may satisfie your self that the Visive Axes doe never meet but run on in a perpetual Parallelism i. e. in direct lines as far distant each from other as are the Eyes themselves having fixed a staff or launce upright in the ground and retreated from it to the distance of 10 or 20 paces more or less look as earnestly as you can on it with your right eye closing your left and you shall perceive it to eclipse a certain part of the wall tree or other body situate beyond it Then look on it again with your left eye closing your right and you shall observe it to eclipse another part of the wall that space being intercepted which is called the Parallaxe This done look on it with both eyes open and if the Axes of both did meet and unite in the staff as is generally supposed then of necessity would you observe the staff to eclipse either both parts of the Wall together or the middle of the Parallaxe but you shall observe it to do neither for the middle shall never be eclipsed but only one of the parts and that on which you shall fix one of your eyes more intently than the other This considered we dare second Gassendus in his promise to Gunners that they shall shoot as right with both eyes open as only with one for levelling the mouth of the Peece directly at the mark with one eye their other must be wholly unconcerned therein nor is