hairs breadth causes a several perception besides it is not onely the five organs in an animal but every part and particle of his body that has a peculiar knowledg and perception because it consists of self-moving Matter Which if so then a Looking-glass that patterns out the face of a Man and a Mans Eye that patterns again the copy from the Glass cannot be said to have the same perception by reason a Glass and an animal are different sorts of Creatures for though a piece of Wood Stone or Metal may have a perceptive knowledg of Man yet it hath not a Man's perception because it is a Vegetable or Mineral and cannot have an Animal knowledg or perception no more then the Eye patterning out a Tree or Stone can be said to have a Vegetable or Mineral Perception nay when one Animal as for example one man perceives another he doth not perceive his knowledg for it is one thing to perceive the exterior figure of a Creature and another thing to perceive its interior proper and innate actions also it is one thing to perceive exterior objects and another to receive knowledg for no part can give away to another its inherent and proper particular nature neither can one part make it self another part it may imitate some actions of another part but not make it self the same part which proves that each part must have its own knowledg and perception according to its own particular nature for though several parts may have the like perceptions yet they are not the same and although the exterior figures of some objects may be alike yet the perceptions may be quite different 't is true sensitive and rational knowledg is general and infinite in Nature but every part being finite can have but a finite and particular knowledg and that according to the nature of its particular figure for as not all Creatures although they be composed of one Matter are alike in their figures so not all can have the like knowledges and perceptions though they have all self-motion for particular Creatures and actions are but effects of the onely Infinite self-moving Matter and so are particular perceptions and although they are different yet the difference of effects does not argue different causes but one and the same cause may produce several and different effects so that although there be infinite different motions in Nature yet they are all but motions and cannot differ from each other in being motions or self-moving parts and although there be infinite several and different perceptions yet they are all perceptions for the effects cannot alter the cause but the cause may alter the effects Wherefore rational and sensitive corporeal motions cannot change from being motions though they may change from moving thus to move thus nor perceptions from being perceptions though they may change from being such or such particular perceptions for the change is onely in particulars not in the ground or principle which continues always the same The truth is as it is impossible that one figure should be another figure or one part another part so likewise it is impossible that the perception of one part should be the perception of another but being in parts they must be several and those parts being different they must be different also But some are more different then others for the perceptions of Creatures of different sorts as for example of a Vegetable and an Animal are more different then the perception of particulars of one sort or of one composed figure for as there is difference in their interior natures so in their perceptions so that a Mineral or Vegetable that perceives the figure of an Animal has no more the perception of an Animal then an Animal which perceives or patterns out the figure of a Mineral or Vegetable has the perceptions of those Creatures for example when a man lies upon a stone or leans on a tree or handles and touches water c. although these parts be so closely joined to each other yet their perceptions are quite different for the man onely knows what he feels or sees or hears or smells or tasteth but knows not what sense or perception those parts have nay he is so far from that that even one part of his body doth not know the sense and perception of another part of his body as for example one of his hands knows not the sense and perception of his other hand nay one part of his hand knows not the perception of another part of the same hand for as the corporeal figurative motions differ so do particular knowledges and perceptions and although sensitive and rational knowledg is general and infinite in infinite Nature yet every part being finite has but finite and particular perceptions besides perception being but an effect and not a cause is more various in particulars for although all Creatures are composed of rational and sensitive Matter yet their perceptions are not alike neither can the effect alter the cause for though the several actions of sensitive and rational Matter be various and make several perceptions yet they cannot make several kinds of sensitive and rational Matter but when as perceptions change the parts of the sensitive and rational matter remain the same in themselves that is they do not change from being sensitive or rational parts although they may make numerous perceptions in their particular parts according to the various changes of self-motion But some may say If the particular parts of one composed figure be so ignorant of each others knowledg as I have expressed How can they agree in some action of the whole figure where they must all be imployed and work agreeably to one effect As for example when the Mind designs to go to such a place or do such a work How can all the parts agree in the performing of this act if they be ignorant of each others actions I answer Although every Parts knowledg and perception is its own and not anothers so that every part knows by its own knowledg and perceives by its own perception yet it doth not follow from thence that no part has any more knowledg then of it felf or of its own actions for as I said before it is well to be observed that there being an entercourse and commerce as also an acquaintance and agreement between parts and parts there must also of necessity be some knowledg or perception betwixt them that is one part must be able to perceive another part and the actions of that same part for wheresoever is life and knowledg that is sense and reason there is also perception and though no part of Nature can have an absolute knowledg yet it is neither absolutely ignorant but it has a particular knowledg and particular perceptions according to the nature of its own innate and interior figure In short as there are several kinds sorts and particular perceptions and particular ignorances between parts so there are more general perceptions
a self-perception although there may be an interior self-knowledg Nor is it proper to say a part may perceive it self or have a perception of it self But by perception I mean an exterior or forreign knowledg that is a knowledg of other parts figures or actions These perceptions I say are different according to the difference of the corporeal figurative motions for it is impossible that such or such parts should have such or such perceptions if they have not such or such corporeal motions Therefore though all parts have self-knowledg as well as self-motion yet by reason all parts do not move alike they cannot make the like perceptions and though self-knowledg as it is the ground and fountain not onely of all particular knowledges but also of all exterior perceptions is but one in it self as a fixt being and cannot be divided from its own nature for as Matter cannot be divided from being Matter or self-motion from being self-motion so neither can self-knowledg be divided from being self-knowledg nor can they be separated from each other but every part and particle of natural matter has self-knowledg and perception as well as it hath self-motion Yet all this hinders not but there may be degrees of self-knowledg according to the degrees of Matter for as there is rational and sensitive matter so there is also rational and sensitive self-knowledg nay there are infinite particular self-knowledges and perceptions according to the infiniteness of parts and motions and yet all is but one self-moving and self-knowing Nature for parts are nothing else but a division of the whole and the whole is nothing else but a composition of parts All which I desire may be taken notice of lest my sense be misinterpreted for when I speak of rational and sensitive self-knowledg I do not mean as if there were more self-knowledg then one in the onely infinite Matter to wit a double kind of self-knowledg but I speak in reference to the parts of Matter for the rational part is more pure and so more agil quick and free then the sensitive and the animate part is self-knowing but the inanimate not and thus in respect to parts as they are divided so they have several self-knowledges and perceptions as also numerous lives and souls in one composed figure or Creature and as infinite parts belong to one infinite whole so infinite self-knowledges and infinite perceptions belong to the infinite actions of those infinite parts But some may ask Why there are no more degrees of Matter but two viz. Animate and Inanimate and no more degrees of Animate but Rational and Sensitive I answer humane sense and reason cannot conceive it possible there should be more or fewer for the rational and sensitive are the purest degrees Matter can be capable of and were there any purer then these they would be beyond the nature of Matter which is impossible because Nature cannot go beyond it self Again some may perhaps desire to know why there are more degrees of Inanimate Matter then of Animate to wit of thickness and thinness rarity and density lightness aud heaviness c I answer These are nothing else but the actions of the material parts and do not belong to the nature of Matter so that they cannot make Parts less or more material for all is but Matter neither can they alter the nature of Matter for Matter is still Matter however it moves Lastly some may ask How it is possible that such an infinite variety can proceed but from two degrees of Matter to wit Animate and Inanimate I answer As well as Infinite effects can proceed from one Infinite cause for Nature being an Infinite body must also have Infinite parts and having an Infinite self-motion must of necessity have an infinite variety of parts and being infinitely self-knowing must also have infinite self-knowing parts which proves that Natures body must of necessity consist of those two degrees viz. Animate and Inanimate Matter for were there no Animate matter which is corporeal self-motion there would never be such variety of figures parts and actions in Nature as there is nor no perceptions for Self-knowledg or Matter without self-motion could never make any variety in Nature and therefore although self-motion causes an obscurity by the division of parts yet it causes also particular perceptions between parts and as the motions vary so do perceptions of parts In short there is but one infinite body and infinite parts one infinite self-knowledg and infinite particular self-knowledges one infinite self-motion and infinite particular actions as also infinite particular perceptions for self-motion is the cause of all the variety of Nature and as one figure or part of Nature lies within another so one perception is within another Q. 8. How can there be Self-knowledg and Perception in one and the same part I answer As well as the being or substance of a thing and its actions can consist together or as a cause and its effects for though they are so far different from each other that the cause is not the effect nor the effect the cause as also that the effect must of necessity depend upon the cause but the cause may chuse whether it will produce such or such effects as for example though action or motion depends upon matter yet matter does not depend upon motion as being able to subsist without it and though perception depends upon self-knowledg yet self-knowledg does not depend upon perception nevertheless wheresoever is perception there is also self-knowledg by reason that wheresoever there is an effect in act or being there is also its cause and although perception depends also upon outward objects yet outward objects do not depend upon perceptions but perception as it depends upon self-knowledg so it depends also upon self-motion for without self-knowledg and self-motion there would be no perception so that both exterior perceptions and all interior voluntary actions proceed from self-knowing and self-moving matter but the difference between particular interior self-knowledges and perceptions is caused by the changes of corporeal figurative self-motion Q. 9. Whether particular Parts or Figures be bound to particular perceptions I answer Particular Parts make Perceptions according to the nature of their corporeal figurative motions and their perceptions are as numerous as their actions for example those parts that are composed into the figure of an Animal make perceptions proper to that figures corporeal interior natural motions but if they be dissolved from the animal figure and composed into Vegetables they make such perceptions as are proper for Vegetables and being again dissolved and composed into Minerals they make perceptions proper to Minerals c. so that no part is tied or bound to one particular kind of perception no more then it is bound to one particular kind of figures but when the interior motions of that figure change the perceptions proper to that same figure change also for though self-knowledg the ground of all perceptions is a fixt
perceptive after their way as those that work to the act of Perception properly so called that is to the act of seeing made by patterning or imitation But it is well to be observed That although the eye has the quickest action in the Perception of seeing yet is this action most visible not onely by its motions but by the figures of the objects that are represented in the eye for if you look into anothers eye you will plainly perceive therein the picture of your own figure and had other objects but such an optick perception as Animals they would without question observe the same Some will say Those figures in the Eye are made by reflection but reflections cannot make such constant and exact patterns or imitations Others believe it proceeds from pressure and reaction but pressure and reaction being but particular actions cannot make such variety of figures Others again say That the species of the objects pass from the objects to the optick organ and make figures in the air but then the multitude of those figures in the air would make such a confusion as would hinder the species's passing through besides the species being corporeal and proceeding from the object would lessen its quantity or bulk Wherefore my opinion is that the most rare and subtilest parts in the animal sensitive organs do pattern out the figures of exterior objects and that the perception of the exterior animal senses to wit sight hearing tasting touching smelling is certainly made by no other way then by figuring and imitation Q. 12. How the bare patterning out of the Exterior figure of an object can give us an information of its Interior nature My answer is That although our sensitive Perception can go no further then the exterior shape figure and actions of an object yet the rational being a more subtil active and piercing Perception by reason it is more free then the sensitive does not rest in the knowledg of the exterior figure of an object but by its exterior actions as by several effects penetrates into its interior nature and doth probably guess and conclude what its interior figurative motions may be for although the interior and exterior actions of a composed figure be different yet the exterior may partly give a hint or information of the interior I say partly because it is impossible that one finite particular Creature should have a perfect knowledg or perception of all the interior and exterior actions of another particular Creature for example our sensitive Perception patterns out an Animal a Mineral a Vegetable c. we perceive they have the figure of flesh stone wood c. but yet we do not know what is the cause of their being such figures for the interior figurative motions of these Creatures being not subject to the perception of our exterior senses cannot exactly be known nevertheless although our exterior senses have no perception thereof yet their own parts which are concern'd in it as also their adjoining or neighbouring parts may For example a man knows he has a digestion in his body which being an interior action he cannot know by his exterior senses how it is made but those parts of the body where the digestion is performed may know it nay they must of necessity do so because they are concerned in it as being their proper imployment The same may be said of all other particular parts and actions in an Animal body which are like several workmen imployed in the building of a house for although they do all work and labour to one and the same end that is the exstruction of the house and every onemay have some inspection or perception of what his neighbour doth yet each having his peculiar task and employment has also its proper and peculiar knowledg how to perform his own work for a Joiner knows best how to finish and perfect what he has to do and so does a Mason Carpenter Tiler Glasier Stone-cutter Smith c. And thus it is with all composed figures or Creatures which proves That Perception has onely a respect to exterior parts or objects when as self-knowledg is an interior inherent inate and as it were a fixt being for it is the ground and fountain of all other particular knowledges and perceptions even as self-motion is the cause and principle of all other particular actions and although self-knowledg can be without perception yet perception cannot be without self-knowledg for it has its being from self-knowledg as an effect from its cause and as one and the same cause may produce numerous effects so from one self-knowledg proceed numerous perceptions which do vary infinitely according to the various changes of corporeal self-motion In short self-knowledg is the fundamental cause of perception but self-motion the occasional cause Just like Matter and self-motion are the causes of all natural figures for though Perception could not be without self-knowledg yet were there no self-motion there would be no variety of figures and consequently not exterior objects to be perceived Q. 13. How is it possible that several figures can be patterned out by one act of Perception for example how can a man when he sees a statue or a stone pattern out both the exterior shape of the statue the matter which the statue is made of and its colour and all this by one and the same act I answer First it is to be observed That Matter Colour Figure Magnitude c. are all but one thing and therefore they may easily be patterned out by one act of Perception at one and the same time Next I say That no sense is made by one single part but every sense consists of several parts and therefore the perception of one sense may very well pattern out several objects at once for example I see an embroidred bed my eye patterns out both the Velvet Gold Silver Silk Colour and the Workmanship nay superficially the figure of the whole Bed and all this by one act and at one the same time But it is to be observed That one object may have several proprieties which are not all subject to the perception of one sence as for example the smell of an odoriferous body and its colour are not subject to the same sense neither is the hardness or softness roughness or smoothness of its parts subject to the sense of smelling or seeing but each is perceived by such a sense as is proper for such a sort of Perception Nevertheless these different perceptions do not make them to be different bodies for even one and the same attribute or propriety of a body may be patterned out by several senses for example Magnitude or shape of body may be patterned out both by fight and touch which proves that there is a near affinity or alliance betwixt the several senses and that Touch is as it were a general sense which may imitate some other sensitive perceptions The truth is it is as easie for several senses to pattern
as fire is beyond smoak which cannot be but dangerous and unfit to be used except it be to encounter opposite extreams By extreams I mean not the extreams of Nature but the height of a distemper when it is grown so far that it is upon point of destroying or dissolving a particular animal figure for Nature being infinite has no extreams neither in her substance nor actions for she has nothing that is opposite to Matter neither is there any such thing as most or least in Nature she being infinite and all her actions are ballanced by their opposites as for example there is no dilation but hath opposite to it contraction no condensation but has its opposite viz. rarefaction no composition but hath its opposite division no gravity without levity no grossness without purity no animate without inanimate no regularity without irregularity All which produces a peaceable orderly and wise Government in Natures Kingdom which wise Artists ought to imitate But you may say How is it possible That there can be a peaceable and orderly Government where there are so many contrary or opposite actions for contraries make war not peace I answer Although the actions of Nature are opposite yet Nature in her own substance is at peace because she is one and the same that is one material body and has nothing without her self to oppose and cross her neither is she subject to a general change so as to alter her own substance from being Matter for she is Infinite and Eternal but because she is self-moving and full of variety of figures this variety cannot be produced without variety of actions no not without opposition which opposition is the cause that there can be no extreams in particulars for it ballances each action so that it cannot run into infinite which otherwise would breed a horrid confusion in Nature And thus much of Principles Concerning the particulars of Chymical preparations I being not versed in that Art am not able to give my judgment thereof neither do I understand their terms and expressions as first what Chymists mean by Fixation for there 's nothing in Nature that can properly be called fixt because Nature and all her parts are perpetually self-moving onely Nature cannot be altered from being material nor from being dependant upon God Neither do I apprehend what some mean by the unlocking of bodies unless they understand by it a separation of natural parts proper for artificial uses neither can natural effects be separated by others any otherwise but occasionally so that some parts may be an occasion of such or such alterations in other parts But I must say this that according to humane sense and reason there is no part or particle in Nature which is not alterable by reason Nature is in a perpetual motion and full of variety 'T is true some bodies as Gold and Mercury seem to be unalterable from their particular natures but this onely appears thus to our senses because their parts are more fixt and retentive then others and no Art has been found out as yet which could alter ther proper and particular figures that is untie and dissolve or rather cause an alteration of their corporeal retentive motions that bind them into so fixt and consistent a body but all that is mixt with them has hitherto been found too weak for the alteration of ther inherent motions Nevertheless this doth not prove that they are not altogether unalterable for though Art cannot do it yet Nature may but it is an argument that they are not composed of straying Atomes or most minute particles for not to mention what I have often repeated before that there cannot be such most minute bodies in Nature by reason Nature knows of no extreams it is altogether improbable nay impossible that wandering corpuscles should be the cause of such fixt effects and by their association constitute such indissoluble masses or clusters as some do conceive which they call primary concretions for there is no such thing as a primary concretion or composition in Nature onely there are several sorts and degrees of motions and several sorts of compositions and as no particular creature can know the strength of motion so neither can it know the degrees of strength in particular natural bodies Wherefore although composition and division of parts are general motions and some figures may be more composed then others that is consist of more or fewer parts then others yet there is none that hath not a composition of parts The truth is there is nothing prime or principal amongst the effects of Nature but onely the cause from which they are produced which is self-moving Matter which is above particular effects yet Nature may have more ways then our particular reason can apprehend and therefore it is not to be admired that Camphor and the like bodies do yield differing effects according to the different occasions that make them move thus or thus for though changes and alterations of particulars may be occasioned by others yet they move by their own corporeal figurative motions as it is evident by the power of fire which makes other bodies move or change their parts and figures not by its own transforming motion but onely by giving an occasion to the inherent figurative motions of those bodies which by imitating the motions of fire change into such or such figures by their own proper innate and inherent motions otherwise if the alteration of combustible bodies proceeded from fire they would all have the like motions which is contradicted by experience I will not deny but there is as much variety in occasioning as there is in acting for the imitation is according to the object but the object is not the immediate agent but onely an occasional efficient so that according to my opinion there is no such difference as the learned make between Patient and Agent when they call the exterior occasional cause as for example Fire the Agent and the combustible body the Patient for they conceive that a body thrown into fire acts nothing at all but onely in a passive way suffers the fire to act upon it according to the degree of its own to wit the fires strength which sense and reason perceives otherwise for to pass by what I mentioned before that those bodies on which they suppose fire doth work change according not to the fires but their own inherent figurative motions it is most certain that if Nature and all her parts be self-moving which regular reason cannot deny and if Self-motion be corporeal then every part of Nature must of necessity move by its own motion for no body can impart motion to another body without imparting substance also and though particular motions in particular bodies may change infinite ways yet they cannot quit those bodies so as to leave them void and destitute of all motion because Matter and Motion are but one thing and therefore though fire be commixed with the parts of the fuel yet
from the Real the Mechanical the Experimental Philosophy which hath this advantage over the Philosophy of discourse and disputation That whereas that chiefly aims at the subtilty of its deductions and conclusions without much regard to the first ground-work which ought to be well laid on the sense and memory so this intends the right ordering of them all and making them serviceable to each other In which discourse I do not understand first what they mean by our power over natural causes and effects for we have no power at all over natural causes and effects but onely one particular effect may have some power over another which are natural actions but neither can natural causes nor effects be over-powred by man so as if man was a degree above Nature but they must be as Nature is pleased to order them for Man is but a small part and his powers are but particular actions of Nature and therefore he cannot have a supreme and absolute power Next I say That Sense which is more apt to be deluded then Reason cannot be the ground of Reason no more then Art can be the ground of Nature Wherefore discourse shall sooner find or trace Natures corporeal figurative motions then deluding Arts can inform the Senses For how can a Fool order his understanding by Art if Nature has made it defective or how can a wise man trust his senses if either the objects be not truly presented according to their natural figure and shape or if the senses be defective either through age sickness or other accidents which do alter the natural motions proper to each sense And hence I conclude that Experimental and Mechanick Philosophy cannot be above the Speculative part by reason most Experiments have their rise from the Speculative so that the Artist or Mechanick is but a servant to the Student 3. Of Micrography and of Magnifying and Multiplying Glasses ALthough I am not able to give a solid judgment of the Art of Micrography and the several dioptrical instruments belonging thereto by reason I have neither studied nor practised that Art yet of this I am confident that this same Art with all its Instruments is not able to discover the interior natural motions of any part or creature of Nature nay the questions is whether it can represent yet the exterior shapes and motions so exactly as naturally they are for Art doth more easily alter then inform As for example Art makes Cylinders Concave and Convex-glasses and the like which represent the figure of an object in no part exactly and truly but very deformed and mis-shaped also a Glass that is flaw'd crack'd or broke or cut into the figure of Lozanges Triangles Squares or the like will present numerous pictures of one object Besides there are so many alterations made by several lights their shadows refractions reflexions as also several lines points mediums interposing and intermixing parts forms and positions as the truth of an object will hardly be known for the perception of sight and so of the rest of the senses goes no further then the exterior Parts of the object presented and though the Perception may be true when the object is truly presented yet when the presentation is false the information must be false also And it is to be observed that Art for the most part makes hermaphroditical that is mixt figures as partly Artificial and partly Natural for Art may make some metal as Pewter which is between Tin and Lead as also Brass and numerous other things of mixt natures In the like manner may Artificial Glasses present objects partly Natural and partly Artificial nay put the case they can present the natural figure of an object yet that natural figure may be presented in as monstrous a shape as it may appear mis-shapen rather then natural For example a Lowse by the help of a Magnifying-glass appears like a Lobster where the Microscope enlarging and magnifying each part of it makes them bigger and rounder then naturally they are The truth is the more the figure by Art is magnified the more it appears mis-shapen from the natural in so much as each joynt will appear as a diseased swell'd and tumid body ready and ripe for incision But mistake me not I do not say that no Glass presents the true picture of an object but onely that Magnifying Multiplying and the like optick Glasses may and do oftentimes present falsly the picture of an exterior object I say the Picture because it is not the real body of the object which the Glass presents but the Glass onely figures or patterns out the picture presented in and by the Glass and there may easily mistakes be committed in taking Copies from Copies Nay Artists do confess themselves that Flies and the like will appear of several figures or shapes according to the several reflections refractions mediums and positions of several lights which if so how can they tell or judg which is the truest light position or medium that doth present the object naturally as it is and if not then an edge may very well seem flat and a point of a needle a globe but if the edge of a knife or point of a needle were naturally and really so as the microscope presents them they would never be so useful as they are for a flat or broad plain-edged knife would not cut nor a blunt globe pierce so suddenly another body neither would or could they pierce without tearing and rending if their bodies were so uneven and if the Picture of a young beautiful Lady should be drawn according to the representation of the Microscope or according to the various refraction and reflection of light through such like glasses it would be so far from being like her as it would not be like a humane face but rather a Monster then a picture of Nature Wherefore those that invented Microscopes and such like dioptrical Glasses at first did in my opinion the world more injury then benefit for this Art has intoxicated so many mens brains and wholly imployed their thoughts and bodily actions about phaenomena or the exterior figures of objects as all better Arts and Studies are laid aside nay those that are not as earnest and active in such imployments as they are by many of them accounted unprofitable subjects to the Commonwealth of Learning But though there be numerous Books written of the wonders of these Glasses yet I cannot perceive any such at best they are but superficial wonders as I may call them But could Experimental Philosophers find out more beneficial Arts then our Fore-fathers have done either for the better increase of Vegetables and brute Animals to nourish our bodies or better and commodious contrivances in the Art of Architecture to build us houses or for the advancing of trade and traffick to provide necessaries for us to live or for the decrease of nice distinctions and sophistical disputes in Churches Schools and Courts of Judicature to make men live in unity
its degree of consistency for if it did no animal Creature would be able to breath since all or most of them are subject to such a sort of respiration as requires a certain intermediate degree of air neither too thick nor too thin what respirations other Creatures require I am not able to determine for as there are several infinite parts and actions of Nature so also several sorts of Respirations and I believe that what is called the ebbing and flowing of the Sea may be the Seas Respiration for Nature has ordered for every part or Creature that which is most fitting and proper for it Concerning Artificial Congelations as to turn Water or Snow into the figure of Ice by the commixture of Salt Nitre Allum or the like it may very probably be effected for Water and watery liquors their interior figure being Circular may easily change by contracting that Circular figure into a Triangle or square that is into Ice or Snow for Water in my opinion has a round or Circular interior figure Snow a Triangular and Ice a square I do not mean an exact Mathematical Triangle or Square but such a one as is proper for their figures and that the mixture of those or the like ingredients being shaken together in a Vial doth produce films of Ice on the outside of the Glass as Experimenters relate proves not onely that the motions of Cold are very strong but also that there is perception in all parts of Nature and that all Congelations both natural and artificial are made by the corporeal perceptive motions which the sentient has of exterior cold which is also the reason that Salt being mixt with Snow makes the liquor always freeze first on that side of the Vessel where the mixture is for those parts which are nearest will imitate first the motions of frost and after them the neighbouring parts until they be all turned into Ice The truth is that all or most artificial experiments are the best arguments to evince there is perception in all corporeal parts of Nature for as parts are joyned or commix with parts so they move or work accordingly into such or such figures either by the way of imitation or otherwise for their motions are so various as it is impossible for one particulare to describe them all but no motion can be without perception because every part or particle of Nature as it is self-moving so it is also self-knowing and perceptive for Matter Self-motion Knowledg and Perception are all but one thing and no more differing nor separable from each other then Body Place Magnitude Colour and Figure Wherefore Experimental Philosophers cannot justly blame me for maintaining the opinion of Self-motion and a general Perception in Nature But to return to Artificial Congelations there is as much difference between Natural and Artificial Ice and Snow as there is between Chalk and Cheese or between a natural Child and a Baby made of Paste or Wax and Gummed-silk or between artificial Glass and natural Diamonds the like may be said of Hail Frost Wind c. for though their exterior figures do resemble yet their interior natures are quite different and therefore although by the help of Art some may make Ice of Water or Snow yet we cannot conclude from hence that all natural Ice is made the same way by saline particles or acid Spirits and the like for if Nature should work like Art she would produce a man like as a Carver makes a statue or a Painter draws a picture besides it would require a world of such saline or acid particles to make all the Ice that is in Nature Indeed it is as much absurdity as impossibility to constitute some particular action the common principle of all natural heat or cold and to make a Universal cause of a particular effect for no particular Part or Action can be prime in Nature or a fundamental principle of other Creatures or actions although it may occasion some Creatures to move after such or such a way Wherefore those that will needs have a Primum Frigidum or some Body which they suppose must of necessity be supremely cold and by participation of which all other cold Bodies obtain that quality whereof some do contend for Earth some for Water others for Air some for Nitre and others for Salt do all break their heads to no purpose for first there are no extreams in Nature and therefore no Body can be supreamely cold nor supreamly hot Next as I said it is impossible to make one particular sort of Creatures the principle of all the various sorts of heat or cold that are in Nature for there is an Elemental heat and cold a Vegetable Mineral Animal heat and cold and there may be many other sorts which we do not know and how can either Earth or Water or Nitre or Salt be the Principle of all these different colds Concerning the Earth we see that some parts of the Earth are hot and some cold the like of Water and Air and the same parts which are now hot will often in a moment grow cold which shews they are as much subject to the perception of heat and cold as some other Creatures and doth plainly deny to them the possibility of being a Primum Frigidum I have mentioned in my Poetical Works that there is a Sun in the Center of the Earth and in another place I have described a Chymical heat but these being but Poetical Fancies I will not draw them to any serious proofs onely this I will say that there may be degrees of heat and cold in the Earth and in Water as well as there are in the Air for certainly the Earth is not without Motion a dull dead moveless and inanimate body but it is as much interiously active as Air and Water are exteriously which is evident enough by the various productions of Vegetables Minerals and other bodies that derive their off-spring out of the Earth And as for Nitre and Salt although they may occasion some sorts of Colds in some sorts of Bodies like as some sorts of food or tempers of Air or the like may work such or such effects in some sorts of Creatures yet this doth not prove that they are the onely cause of all kinds of heat and cold that are in Nature The truth is if Air Water Earth Nitre or Salt or insensible roving and wandering atomes should be the only cause of cold then there would be no difference of hot and cold climates but it would freeze as well under the Line as it doth at the Poles But there 's such a stir kept about Atoms as that they are so full of action and produce all things in the world and yet none describes by what means they move or from whence they have this active power Lastly Some are of opinion that the chief cause of all cold and its effects is wind which they describe to be air moved in a considerable quantity and that
heel is touched the sensitive spirits who watch in that place do run up to the head and bring news to the mind Truly if the senses have no knowledg of themselves How comes it that a man born blind cannot tell what the light of the Sun is or the light of a Candle or the light of a Glow-worms tail For though some objects of one sense may be guessed by the perception of another sense as we may guess by touch the perception of an object that belongs to sight c. yet we cannot perfectly know it except we saw it by reason the perception of sight belongs onely to the optick sense But some may ask if a man be so blind that he cannot make use of his optick sense what is become of the sensitive motions in that same part of his body to wit the optick sensorium I answer The motions of that part are not lost because the man is blind and cannot see for a privation or absence of a thing doth not prove that it is quite lost but the same motions which formerly did work to the perception of sight are onely changed and work now to some other action then the perception of sight so that it is onely a change or alteration of motions in the same parts and not an annihilation for there 's no such thing as an annihilation in Nature but all the variety in Nature is made by change of motions Wherefore to conclude the opinion of sense and reason or a sensitive and rational knowledg in all parts of Nature is in my judgment more probable and rational then the Opinion which confines all knowledg of Nature to a mans Brains or Head and allows none neither to the Senses nor to any part of Nature 37. Several Questions and Answers concerning Knowledg and Perception I Am not ignorant that endless questions and objections may be raised upon one subject and to answer them would be an infinite labour But since I desire to be perspicuous in delivering my opinions and to remove all those scruples which seem to obstruct the sense thereof I have chosen rather to be guilty of prolixity and repetitions then to be obscure by too much brevity And therefore I will add to my former discourse of knowledg and perception the resolution of these following questions which I hope will render it more intelligible Q. 1. What difference is there between Self-knowledg and Perception I answer There is as much difference betwixt them as betwixt a whole and its parts or a cause and its effects For though Self-motion be the occasional cause of particular perceptions by reason it is the cause of all particular actions of Nature and of the variety of figures yet self-knowledg is the ground or fundamental cause of Perception for were there not selfknowledg there could not be perception by reason perceptions are nothing else but particular exterior knowledges or knowledges of exterior parts and actions occasioned by the various compositions and divisions of parts so that self-moving Matter has a perceptive self-knowledg and consisting of infinite Parts those parts have particular self-knowledges and perceptions according to the variety of the corporeal figurative motions which as they are particular cannot be infinite in themselves for although a whole may know its parts yet the parts cannot possibly know the whole because an infinite may know a finite but a finite cannot know an infinite Nevertheless when many parts are regularly composed those parts by a conjunction or union of their particular self-knowledges and perceptions of each other may know more and so judg more probably of infinite as I have declared above but as for single parts there is no such thing in Nature no more then there can be an Infinite part Q. 2. Whether the Inanimate Part of Matter may not have self-knowledg as well as the Animate I answer That in my opinion and according to the conceptions of my sense and reason the Inanimate part of matter has self-knowledg as well as the Animate but not Perception for it is onely the animate part of matter that is perceptive and this animate matter being of a two-fold degree sensitive and rational the rational not being incumbred with the inanimate parts has a more clear and freer perception then the sensitive which is well to be observed for though the rational sensitive and inanimate parts of matter make but one infinite self-moving body of Nature yet there are infinite particular self-knowledges for Nature is divided into infinite parts and all parts of Nature are self-knowing But as all are not animate so all are not perceptive for Perception though it proceeds from self-knowledg as its ground or principle yet it is also an effect of self-motion for were there no self-motion there would be no perception and because Nature is self-moving all her parts are so too and as all her parts are moving so they have all compositions and divisions and as all are subject to compositions and divisions so all have variety of self-knowledg so that no part can be ignorant And by reason self-knowledg is the ground and Principle of Perception it knows all the effects by the variety of their changes therefore the Inanimate part of Matter may for any thing I know or perceive be as knowing as the other parts of Nature for although it be the grossest part and so the dullest wanting self-motion yet by the various divisions and compositions which the animate parts do make the inanimate may be as knowing as the animate But some may say If Inanimate Matter were knowing of it self then it would also be sensible of it self I answer Self-knowledg is so far sensible of it self that it knows it self and therefore the inanimate part of Matter being self-knowing may be sensible of its own self-knowledg but yet it is not such a sense as self-moving matter has that is a perceptive sense for the difference of animate and inanimate Matter consists herein that one is self-moving and consequently perceptive but the other not and as animate matter is self-moving as well as self-knowing so it is the chief and architectonical part of Nature which causes all the variety that is in Nature for without animate Matter there could be no composition and division and so no variety and without inanimate Matter there could not be such solid compositions of parts as there are for the animate part of Matter cannot be so gross as the inanimate and therefore without these degrees there would be no variety of figures nor no composition of solid figures as Animals Vegetables Minerals c. so that those effects which our sense and reason perceives could not be without the degrees of animate and inanimate Matter neither could there be perception without animate Matter by which all the various effects of Nature are perceived for though one Creature cannot perceive all the effects yet the infinite parts of Nature by their infinite actions perceive infinitely Again Some may
object That if the Inanimate part of Matter have self-knowledg and sense it must of necessity have life also To which I answer That the Inanimate part of Matter may have life according as it hath sense and knowledg but not such a life as the animate part of Matter has that is an active life as to compose and divide the infinite body of Nature into infinite parts and figures and to produce infinite varieties of them for all this cannot be withont motion nevertheless it has so much life as to know it self and so much sense as to be sensible of its own self-knowledg In short the difference between animate and inanimate Matter 's life sense and self-knowledg is that the animate Matter has an active life and a perceptive sense and self-knowledg which the inanimate part of Matter has not because it wants self-motion which is the cause of all actions and perceptions in Nature Q. 3. Whether the Inanimate Matter could have parts without self-motion I answer Yes For wherefoever is body or matter there are also parts because parts belong to body and there can be no body without parts but yet were there no self-motion there could be no various changes of parts or figures The truth is Nature considered as she is and as much as our sense and reason can perceive by her various effects must of necessity be composed or consist of a commixture of animate both rational and sensitive and inanimate matter for were there no inanimate matter there would be no ground or grosser substance to work on and so no solid figures and were there no animate sensitive matter there would be no labourer or workman as I may call it to form the inanimate part of matter into various figures nor would there be such infinite changes compositions divisions productions dissolutions c. as we see there are Again were there no animate rational Matter there would be no designer or surveigher to order and direct all things methodically nor no Fancies Imaginations Conceptions Memory c. so that this Triumvirate of the degrees of matter is so necessary a constitutive principle of all natural effects that Nature could not be without it I mean Nature considered not what she might have been but as she is and as much as we are able to perceive by her actions for Natural Philosophy is no more but a rational inquisition into the causes of natural effects and therefore as we observe the effects and actions of Nature so we may probably guess at their causes and principles Q. 4. How so fine subtil and pure a part as the Animate Matter is can work upon so gross a part as the Inanimate I answer More easily then Vitriol or Aqua-fortis or any other high extracts can work upon metal or the like nay more easily then fire can work upon wood or stone or the like But you will say That according to my opinion these bodies are not wrought upon or divided by the exterior agent as by fire vitriol c. but that they divide themselves by their own inherent self-motion and that the agent is no more but an occasion that the patient moves or acts thus or thus I answer 'T is very true For there is such a commixture of animate and inanimate matter that no particle in Nature can be conceived or imagined which is not composed of animate matter as well as of inanimate and therefore the patient as well as the agent having both a commixture of these parts of matter none can act upon the other but the patient changes its own parts by its own self-motion either of its own accord or by way of imitation But the inanimate part of Matter considered in it self or in its own narure hath no self-motion nor can it receive any from the animate but they being both so closely intermixt that they make but one self-moving body of Nature the animate parts of Matter bear the inanimate with them in all their actions so that it is impossible for the animate parts to divide compose contract c. but the inaimate must serve them or go along with them in all such corporeal figurative actions Q. 5. How is it possible that Parts being ignorant of each other should agree in the production of a figure I answer When I speak of Ignorance and knowledg my meaning is not that there is as much ignorance in the parts of Nature as there is knowledg for all parts have self-knowledg but I understand a perceptive knowledg by which parts do perceive parts and as for the agreeing actions of parts they cannot readily err unless it be out of wilfulness to oppose or cross each other for put the case the sensitive parts were as ignorant of perceptions as the inanimate yet the rational being thorowly intermixt with them would cause agreeable combinations and connexions of parts in all productions because they being not incumbred with the burthens of other parts make more general perceptions then the sensitive and moving freely in their own degree there is a more perfect acquaintance between them then the sensitive parts which is the cause that the rational design and order when as the sensitive labour and work I mean when they move regularly or to one and the same effect for then they must needs move agreeably and unitedly But because the sensitive parts are perceptive as well as the rational and perceive not onely the rational adjoining parts but also those of their own degree they cannot so grosly err as some believe especially since the sensitive parts do not onely know their own work but are also directed by the rational but as I have often said the several sorts both of the sensitive and rational perceptions are well to be considered which are as various as the actions of Nature and cannot be numbred by reason every figurative action is a several perception both sensitive and rational and infinite Matter being in a perpetual motion there must of necessity be infinite figures and so infinite perceptions amongst the infinite parts of Nature Q. 6. Whether there be single Self-knowledges and single Perceptions in Nature I answer If there can be no such thing as a single part in Nature there can neither be a single self-knowledg or perception for body and parts can never be separated from each other but wheresoever is body were it an atome there are parts also and when parts divide from parts at the same time and by the same act they are joined to other parts so that composition and division is done by one act The like for knowledg For knowledg being material consists of parts and as it is impossible that there can be single parts or parts subsisting by themselves without reference to each other or the body of Nature so it is impossible that there can be single knowledges Neither can there be a single magnitude figure colour place c. but all that is corporeal has parts and by reason Nature
out the several proprieties of one body as it is for several Painters to draw the several parts of one figure as for example of a burning Candle one may draw the wax or tallow another the wick another the flame The like for the Perceptions of several senses Sight may pattern out the figure and light of a Candle Touch may pattern out its weight hardness or smoothness the Nose may pattern out its smell the Ears may pattern out its sparkling noise c. All which does evidently prove That Perception cannot be made by pressure and reaction or else a fire coal by the perception of sight would burn out the eye because it would by pressure inflame its next adjoining parts and these again the next until it came to the eye Besides it proves that all objects are material for were Light Colour Figure Heat Cold c. immaterial they would never be patterned out by corporeal motions for no Painter is able to copy out or draw an immaterial mode or motion Neither could immaterial motions make pressure nor be subject to reaction Lastly it proves That Perception is an effect of knowledg in the sentient and not in the external object or else there would be but one knowledg in all parts and not several knowledges in several parts whereof sense and reason inform us otherwise viz. that particular figures have variety of knowledges according to the difference and variety of their corporeal figurative motions But then some will say That the actions of Matter would be more infinite then the parts I answer There can be neither more nor less in infinite For infinite can be but infinite but since parts figures changes of motion and perceptions are one and the same and since division and composition are the chief actions of Nature it does necessarily follow That as the actions vary so do also their parts and particular perceptions Q. 14. How is it possible that any Perception of outward objects can be made by patterning since patterning doth follow perception for how can any one pattern out that which he has no perception of I answer Natural actions are not like Artificial for Art is but gross and dull in comparison to Nature and although I alledg the comparison of a Painter yet is it but to make my meaning more intelligible to weaker capacities for though a Painter must see or know first what he intends to draw or copy out yet the natural perception of exterior objects is not altogether after the same manner but in those perceptions which are made by patterning the action of patterning and the perception are one and the same for as self-knowledg is the ground of Perception so self-motion is the action of Perception without which no perception could be and therefore perception and self-self-action are one and the same But I desire that it may well be observed what I have mentioned heretofore to wit That although there is but one self-knowledg and one selfmotion in Nature yet they being material are divideable and therefore as from one infinite cause there may flow infinite effects and one infinite whole may be divided into infinite parts so from one infinite self-knowledg and self-motion there may proceed infinite particular actions and perceptions But some may perhaps ask 1. Why those particular knowledges and perceptions are not all alike as being all but effects of one cause To which I answer That if the actions or motions of Nature were all alike all parts would have the like knowledges and perceptions but the actions being different how can it be otherwise but the perceptions must be different also for since every perception is a particular self-action then as the actions of Nature vary and as parts do divide and compose so are likewise their perceptions 2. It may be objected That if the Perception of the exterior senses in animals be made by the way of patterning then when a part of the body feels pain the rational motions by patterning out the same would be pained or sick I answer This does no more follow then that the Eye patterning out the exterior figure of Water Fire Earth c. should become of the same nature for the original is one thing and the copy another the picture of a house of stone is not made of natural stone nor is the picture of a Tree a natural Tree for if it were so Painters would do more then Chymists by fire and furnace but by reason there is a very close conjunction between the rational and sensitive perceptive motions so that when the sensitive motions of the body pattern out some exterior object the rational most commonly do the same That which we call pain or sickness in the body when patterned out by the mind is called trouble or grief for as there are degrees in their purity subtilty and activity so their perceptions are also different But it is well to be observed That although some parts are ignorant of others when they work not to one and the same perception yet sometimes there is a more general knowledg of a disease pain or soreness for example a man may have an inflamation or soreness in one part of his arm or leg and all the rest of the parts of that limb may be ignorant thereof but if the inflamation soreness or pain extend throughout the whole arm or leg then all the parts of that limb are generally sensible of it 3. It may be objected That if the rational perceptive motions take patterns from the sensitive then reason can never judg of things as naturally they are but onely of their copies as they are patterned out by the sensitive motions I answer first That reason is not so necessitated as to have no other perception then what sense presents for Reason is the instructer and informer of sense as an architect or surveigher is in the extruction of a house Next I say That in the act of Perception Reason doth not onely perceive the copies of the senses but it perceives with the sense also the original for surely the rational part of Matter being intermixed with the sensitive must perceive as well the original as sense doth for it is not so involved within the sensitive that it cannot peep out as a Jack-in-a-Box but both being closely intermixed one makes perceptions as well as the other as being both perceptive and by reason the rational part makes the same perception as the sensitive doth it seemeth as if the rational did take copies from the sensitive which although it doth yet this doth not hinder it from making a perception also of the original But then some may say if the rational Part has liberty to move as it will then it may perceive without sense that is Reason may make perceptions of outward objects in the organs of the senses when the senses make none as for example the rational motions in the eye may perceive light when the sensitive do not and sound in the ear
is an Infinite difference between Divine Attributes and Natural Properties wherefore to similize our Reason Will Understanding Faculties Pasions and Figures c. to God is too high a presumption and in some manner a blasphemy Nevertheless although our natural reason and faculties are not like to divine attributes yet our natural rational perceptions are not always delusions and therefore it is certain that Natures knowing parts both sensitive and rational do believe a God that is some Being above Nature But many Writers endeavour rather to make divisions in Religion then promote the honour and worship of God by a mutual and united agreement which I confess is an irregularity and imperfection in some parts of Nature and argues that Nature is not so perfect but she has some faults and infirmities otherwise she would be a God which she is not 11. Of a General Knowledg and Worship of God given him by all Natural Creatures IT is not the sight of the beauteous frame of this world as some do conceive that makes men believe and admire God but the knowledg of the existence of God is natural and there 's no part of Nature but believes a God for certainly were there not any optick sense in Nature yet God would be the God of Nature and be worshiped and adored by her Creatures which are her parts for it is irreligious to say God should want admiration and adoration for want of an eye or any other of the animal or humane organs surely Nature has more ways then five to express and declare God's Omnipotency It is Infinite sense and reason that doth worship and adore God and the several perceptions of this sense and reason know there is a God that ought to be worshipped and adored and not onely Ears or Eyes or the like exterior organs of man Neither is it man alone but all Creatures that do acknowledg God for although God cannot be perfectly known what he is in his Essence yet he may be known in as much as Nature can know of him But since Nature is dividable in her parts each part has but a particular knowledg of God which is the cause of several Religions and several opinions in those Religions and Nature being also composeable it causes a conformity and union of those Opinions and Religions in the fundamental knowledg which is the existence of God Wherefore that which makes a general and united knowledg of the Existence of God is that Nature is intire in her self as having but one body and therefore all her parts which are of that body have also one knowledg of God for though the parts be different in the Worship of God yet they have not a different belief of the Existence of God not that God can be perfectly known either by Nature or any of her parts for God is Incomprehensible and above Nature but in as much as can be known to wit his Being and that he is All-powerful and that not any thing can be compared or likened to him for he is beyond all draught and likeness as being an Eternal Infinite Omnipotent Incorporeal Individual Immovable Being And thus it is not one part or creature viewing another that causes either the knowledg or admiration of God but the soul and life of Nature which are her sensitive and rational parts and Nature being the Eternal servant and Worshipper of God God hath been also eternally worshipped and adored for surely God's Adoration and Worship has no beginning in time neither could God be worshipped and adored by himself so as that one part of him should adore and worship another for God is an individual and simple Being not composed of parts and therefore as it is impossible for me to believe that there is no general Worship and Adoration of God so it is impossible also to believe that God has not been adored and worshipped from all Eternity and that Nature is not Eternal for although God is the Cause of Nature and Nature the Effect of God yet she may be Eternal however there being nothing impossible to be effected by God but he as an Eternal Cause is able to produce an Eternal Effect for although it is against the rules of Logick yet it is not above the power of God 12. Of a Particular Worship of God given him by those that are his chosen and elect People NAtural Philosophy is the chief of all sorts of knowledges for she is a Guide not onely to other Sciences and all sorts of Arts but even to divine knowledg it self for she teaches that there is a Being above Nature which is God the Author and Master of Nature whom all Creatures know and adore But to adore God after a particular manner according to his special Will and Command requires his Particular Grace and Divine Instructions in a supernatural manner or way which none but the chosen Creatures of God do know at least believe nor none but the sacred Church ought to explain and interpret And the proof that all men are not of the number of those elect and chosen people of God is that there can be but one True Religion and that yet there are so many several and different opinions in that Religion wherefore the Truth can onely be found in some which are those that serve God truly according to his special Will and Command both in believing and acting that which he has been pleased to reveal and command in his holy Word And I pray God of his infinite mercy to give me Grace that I may be one of them which I doubt not but I shall as long as I follow the Instruction of our blessed Church in which I have been educated 'T is true many persons are much troubled concerning Free-will and Predestination complaining that the Christian Church is so divided about this Article as they will never agree in one united belief concerning that point which is the cause of the trouble of so many Consciences nay in some even to despair But I do verily believe that if man do but love God from his soul and with all his power and pray for his saving Graces and offend not any Creature when offences can or may be avoided and follow the onely Instructions of the sacred Church not endeavouring to interpret the Word of God after his own fancy and vain imagination but praying zealously believing undoubtedly and living virtuously and piously he can hardly fall into despair unless he be disposed and inclined towards it through the irregularities of Nature so as he cannot avoid it But I most humbly thank the Omnipotent God that my Conscience is in peace and tranquility beseeching him of his mercy to give to all men the like 13. Of the Knowledg of Man SOme Philosophical Writers discourse much concerning the knowledg of Man and the ignorance of all other Creatures but I have sufficiently expressed my opinion hereof not onely in this but in my other Philosophical Works to wit that I believe other
the fuel alters by its own motion and the fire doth but act occasionally and so do Chymical spirits or extracts which may cause a separation and alter some bodies as readily as fire doth for they are a certain kind of fire to wit such as is called a dead or liquid fire for a flaming fire although it be fluid yet it is not liquid The same may be said of the Antimonial-Cup For it is not probable to sense and reason there should be certain invisible little bodies that pass out of the Cup into the liquor and cause such effects no more then there are magnetical effluviums issuing out of the Load-stone towards Iron there being many causes which neither impart nor lose any thing in the production of their effects but the liquor that is within the Antimonial Cup does imitate the corporeal figurative motions of the Cup and so produces the same effects as are proper to Antimony upon other bodies or parts of Nature In the same manner does the Blood-stone stop bleeding not by imparting invisible Atomes or Rays to the affected parts or else if it were long worn about ones body it would be wasted at least alter its proper figure and vertue but by being imitated by the corporeal figurative motions of the distempered parts Thus many other examples could be alledged to prove that natural motions work such or such effects within their own parts without receiving any from without that is by imitation and not by reception of Motion By which it is evident that properly there is no passive or suffering body in Nature except it be the inanimate part of Matter which in its own nature is moveless or destitute of motion and is carried along with and by the animate parts of Matter However although inanimate Matter has no motion inherent in it self as it is inanimate yet it is so closely mixt with the animate parts that it cannot be considered without motion much less be separable from it and therefore although it acts not of it self yet it acts by vertue of the animate parts of Matter Next I cannot conceive what some Chymists mean when they call those Principles or Elements which they say composed bodies consist of distinct substances for though they may be of different figures yet they are not of different substances because there is but one onely substance in Nature which is Matter whose several actions cause all the variety in Nature But if all the parts of Natural bodies should be called Principles or Elements then there would be infinite Principles in Nature which is impossible because there can be no more but one principle which is self-moving Matter and although several Creatures by the help of fire may be reduced or dissolved into several different particles yet those particles are not principles much less simple bodies or else we might say as well that ashes are a principle of Wood Neither are they created anew because they are of another form or figure then when composed into one concrete body for there 's nothing that is material which is not pre-existent in Nature no nor figure motion or the like all being material although not always subject to our humane sensitive perception for the variation of the corporeal figurative motions blindeth our particular senses that we cannot perceive them they being too subtile to be discerned either by Art or humane perception The truth is if we could see the corporeal figurative motions of natural creatures and the association and division of all their parts we should soon find out the causes which make them to be such or such particular natural effects but Nature is too wise to be so easily known by her particulars Wherefore Chymists need not think they can create any thing anew for they cannot challenge to themselves a divine power neither can there be any such thing as a new Creation in Nature no not of an Atome Nor can they annihilate any thing they 〈◊〉 sooner waste their Estates then reduce the least particle of Matter into nothing and though they make waste of some parts of natural bodies yet those are but changes into other figures there being a perpetual inspiration and expiration that is composition and division of parts but composition is not a new Creation nor division an annihilation and though they produce new forms as they imagine yet those forms though they be new to them are not new in Nature for all that is material has been existent in Nature from all Eternity so that the combination of parts cannot produce anything that is not already in Nature Indeed the generation of new figures seems to me much like the generation of new motions which would put God to a perpetual Creation and argue that he was not able to make Nature or Matter perfect at first or that he wanted imployment But say they it is not Matter that is created anew but onely figures or forms I answer If any one can shew me a figure without Matter I shall be willing to believe it but I am confident Nature cannot do that much less Art which is but a particular effect for as Matter cannot be without Figure so neither can Figure be without Matter no more then body without parts or parts without body and if so no figure or form can be created without Matter there being no such thing as a substanceless form Chymists should but consider their own particular persons as whether they were generated anew or had been in Nature before they were got of their Parents if they had not been pre-existent in Nature they would not be natural but supernatural Creatures because they would not subsist of the same matter as other Creatures do Truly Matter being Infinite how some new material creatures could be created without some parts of this Infinite Matter is not conceivable by humane sense and reason for infinite admits of no addition but if there could be an addition it would presuppose an annihilation so that at the same time when one part is annihilating or perishing another must succeed by a new creation which is a meer Paradox But that which puzles me most is how those substances which they call Tria Prima and principles of natural things can be generated anew for if the principles be generated anew the effects must be so too and since they according to their supposition are Catholick or Universal principles all natural effects must have their origine from them and be like their principles created continually anew which how it be possible without the destruction of Nature is beyond my reason to conceive Some endeavour to prove by their Artificial Experiments that they have and can produce such things out of natural bodies which never were pre-existent in them as for example Glass out of Vegetables without any addition of forreign parts onely by the help of fire To which I answer That in my opinion the same Glass was as much pre-existent in the matter of those
Vegetables and the Fire and in the power of their corporeal figurative motions as any other figure whatsoever otherwise it would never have been produced nay not onely Glass but millions of other figures might be obtained from those parts they being subject to infinite changes for the actions of self-moving Matter are so infinitely various that according to the mixture or composition and division of parts they can produce what figures they please not by a new Creation but only a change or alteration of their own parts and though some parts act not to the production of such or such figures yet we cannot say that those figures are not in Nature or in the power of corporeal figurative self-motion we might say as well that a man cannot go when he sits or has no motion when he sleeps as believe that it is not in the power of Nature to produce such or such effects or actions when they are not actually produced for as I said before although Nature be but one material substance yet there are infinite mixtures of infinite parts produced by infinite self-motion infinite ways in so much that seldom any two Creatures even those of one sort do exactly resemble each other But some may say How is it possible That figure being all one with Matter can change and matter remain still the same without any change or alteration I answer As well as an animal body can put it self into various and different postures without any change of its interior animal figure for though figure cannot subsist without matter nor matter without figure generally considered yet particular parts of matter are not bound to certain particular figures Matter in its general nature remains always the same and cannot be changed from being Matter but by the power of self-motion it may change from being such or such a particular figure for example Wood is as much matter as Stone but it is not of the same figure nor has it the same interior innate motions which Stone hath because it has not the like composition of parts as other creatures of other figures have and though some figures be more constant or lasting then others yet this does not prove that they are not subject to changes as well as those that alter daily nay every moment much less that they are without motion for not all motions are dividing or dissolving but some are retentive some composing some attractive some expulsive some contractive some dilative and infinite other sorts of motions as 't is evident by the infinite variety which appears in the differing effects of Nature Nevertheless it is no consequence that because the effects are different they must also have different principles For first all effects of Nature are material which proves they have but one principle which is the onely infinite Matter Next they are all self-moving which proves that this material principle has self-motion for without self-motion there would be no variety or change of figures it being the nature of self-motion to be perpetually acting Thus Matter and Self-motion being inseparably united in one infinite body which is self-moving material Nature is the onely cause of all the infinite effects that are produced in Nature and not the Aristoteleon Elements or Chymists Tria prima which sense and reason perceives to be no more but effects or else if we should call all those Creatures principles which by the power of their own inherent motions change into other figures we shall be forced to make infinite principles and so confound principles with effects and after this manner that which is now an effect will become a principle and what is now a principle will become an effect which will lead our sense and reason into a herrid confusion and labyrinth of ignorance Wherefore I will neither follow the Opinions of the Ancient nor of our Moderns in this point but search the truth of Nature by the light of regular reason for I perceive that most of our modern Writings are not fill'd with new Inventions of their own but like a lumber stuff'd with old Commodities botch'd and dress'd up anew contain nothing but what has been said in former ages Nor am I of the opinion of our Divine Philosophers who mince Philosophy and Divinity Faith and Reason together and count it Irreligious if not Blasphemy to assert any other principles of Nature then what they I will not say by head and shoulders draw out of the Scripture especially out of Genesis to evince the finiteness and beginning of Nature when as Moses doth onely describe the Creation of this World and not of Infinite Nature But as Pure natural Philosophers do not meddle with Divinity or things Supernatural so Divines ought not to intrench upon Natural Philosophy Neither are Chymists the onely natural Philosophers because they are so much tied to the Art of Fire and regulate or measure all the effects of Nature according to their Artificial Experiments which do delude rather then inform their sense and reason and although they pretend to a vast and greater knowledg then all the rest yet they have not dived so deep into Nature yet as to perceive that she is full of sense and reason which is life and knowledg and in parts orders parts proper to parts which causes all the various motions figures and changes in the infinite parts of Nature Indeed no Creature that has its reason regular can almost believe that such wise and orderly actions should be done either by chance or by straying Atomes which cannot so constantly change and exchange parts and mix and join so properly and to such constant effects as are apparent in Nature And as for Galenists if they believe that some parts of Nature connot leave or pass by other parts to join meet or encounter others they are as much in an error as Chymists concerning the power of fire and furnace for it is most frequently observed thus amongst all sorts of Animals and if amongst Animals I know no reason but all other kinds and sorts of Creatures may do the like nay both sense and reason inform us they do as appears by the several and proper actions of all sorts of drugs as also Minerals and Elements and the like so that none ought to wonder how it is possible that medicines that must pass through digestions in the body should neglecting all other parts shew themselves friendly onely to the brain or kidnies or the like parts for if there be sense and reason in Nature all things must act wisely and orderly and not confusedly and though Art like an Emulating Ape strives to imitate Nature yet it is so far from producing natural figures that at best it rather produces Monsters instead of natural effects for it is like the Painter who drew a Rose instead of a Lion nevertheless Art is as active as any other natural Creature and doth never want imployment for it is like all other parts in a perpetual self-motion and
ever as it is now how is it possible that it should be reduced into Atomes He says also That the Vniniverse is immovable and immutable If he mean it to be so in its Essence or Nature so that it cannot be changed from being material and that it is immovable so that it cannot be moved beyond or without it self I am of his opinion For Nature being purely and wholly material cannot be made immaterial without its total destruction and being infinite has nothing without it self to move into Otherwise Nature is not onely a self-moving body but also full of changes and varieties I mean within her self and her particulars As for his infinite Worlds I am not different from his opinion if by Worlds he mean the parts of infinite Nature but my Reason will not allow that those infinite Worlds do subsist by themselves distinguished from each other by Vacuum for it is meer non-sense to say the Universe consists of body and Vacuum that is of something and nothing for nothing cannot be a constitutive principle of any thing neither can it be measured or have corporeal dimensions for what is no body can have no bodily affections or properties God by his Omnipotency may reduce the World into nothing but this cannot be comprehended by natural reason 2. The Matter or Principle of all natural Beings Epicurus makes Atomes For say he There are Simple and Compounded bodies in the Universe the Simple bodies are the first matter out of which the Compounded bodies consist and those are Atomes that is bodies indivisible immutable and in themselves void of all mutation consisting of several infinite figures some bigger and some less Which opinion appears very Paradoxical to my reason for if Atomes be bodies I do not see how they can be indivisible by reason wheresoever is body there are also parts so that divisibility is an essential propriety or attribute of Matter or Body He counts it impossible that one finite part should be capable of infinite divisions but his Vacuum makes him believe there are single finite parts distinguished from each other by little spaces or intervals of vacuity which in truth cannot be but as soon as parts are divided from such or such parts they immediately join to other parts for division and composition as I mentioned before are done by one act and one countervails the other 'T is true there are distinctions of parts in Nature or else there would be no variety but these are not made by little intervals of vacuity but by their own figures interior as well as exterior caused by self-motion which make a difference between the infinite parts of Nature But put the case there were such Atomes out of which all things are made yet no man that has his sense and reason regular can believe they did move by chance or at least without sense and reason in the framing of the world and all natural bodies if he do but consider the wonderful order and harmony that is in Nature and all her parts Indeed I admire so witty and great a Philosopher as Epicurus should be of such an extravagant opinion as to divide composed bodies into animate and inanimate and derive them all from one Principle which are senseless and irrational Atomes for if his Atomes out of which all things consist be self-moving or have as he says some natural impulse within themselves then certainly all bodies that are composed of them must be the same He places the diversity of them onely in figure weight and magnitude but not in motion which he equally allows to all nay moreover he says that although they be of different fifiures weight and magnitude yet they do all move equally swift but if they have motion they must of necessity have also sense that is life and knowledg there being no such thing as a motion by chance in Nature because Nature is full of reason as well as of sense and wheresoevever is reason there can be no chance Chance is onely in respect to particulars caused by their ignorance for particulars being finite in themselves can have no Infinite or Universal knowledg and where there is no Universal knowledg there must of necessity be some ignorance Thus ignorance which proceeds from the division of parts causes that which we call chance but Nature being an infinite self-moving body has also infinite knowledg and therefore she knows of no chance nor is this visible World or any part of her made by chance or a casual concourse of senseless and irrational Atomes but by the All-powerful Decree and Command of God out of that pre-existent Matter that was from all Eternity which is infinite Nature for though the Scripture expresses the framing of this World yet it doth not say that Nature her self was then created but onely that this world was put into such a frame and state as it is now and who knows but there may have been many other Worlds before and of another figure then this is nay if Nature be infinite there must also be infinite Worlds for I take with Epicurus this World but for a part of the Universe and as there is self-motion in Nature so there are also perpetual changes of particulars although God himself be immovable for God acts by his All-powerful Decree or Command and not after a natural way 3. The Soul of Animals says Epicurus is corporeal and a most tenuious and subtile body made up of most subtile particles in figure smooth and round not perceptible by any sense and this subtile contexture of the soul is mixed and compounded of four several natures as of something fiery something aerial something flatuous and something that has no name by means whereof it is indued with a sensitive faculty And as for reason that is likewise compounded or little bodies but the smoothest and roundest of all and of the quickest motion Thus he discourses of the Soul which I confess surpasses my understanding for I shall never be able to conceive how senseless and irrational Atomes can produce sense and reason or a sensible and rational body such as the soul is although he affirms it to be possible 'T is true different effects may proceed from one cause or principle but there is no principle which is senseless can produce sensitive effects nor no rational effects can flow from an irrational cause neither can order method and harmony proceed from chance or confusion and I cannot conceive how Atomes moving by chance should onely make souls in animals and not in other bodies for if they move by chance and not by knowledg and consent they might by their conjunction as well chance to make souls in Vegetables and Minerals as in Animals 4. Concerning Perception and in particular the Perception of sight Epicurus affirms that it is performed by the gliding of some images of external objects into our eyes to wit that there are certain effluxions of Atomes sent out from the surfaces of bodies preserving
Animal tell what perception a Vegetable or Mineral has We may perceive that the Air which is an Element doth pattern out sound for it is not done by reverberation as pressure and reaction by reason there will be in some places not onely two several Ecchoes of one sound but in some three or four but surely one sound cannot be in several distant places at one time Also a Looking-glass we see does pattern out the figure of an object but yet we cannot be certainly affirmed that either the Glass or the Air have the same perceptions which Animals have for although their patterns are alike yet their perceptions may be different As for example the picture of a Man may be like its original but yet who knows what perception it has for though it represents the exterior figure of an Animal yet it is not of the nature of an Animal and therefore although a man may perceive his picture yet he knows not what perception the picture has of him for we can but judg by our selves of the perceptions of our own kind that is of Animal kind and not of the perceptions of other Creatures for example I observe that the perception of my exterior senses is made by an easie way of patterning out exterior objects and so conclude of the rest of my own kind to wit that the perception of their exterior sensitive organs is made after the same manner or way nay I perceive that also some perceptions of several other sorts of Creatures are made by way of patterning as in the forementioned examples of the Air and Glass and in Infectious Diseases where several Creatures will be infected by one object which certainly is not by an immediate propagation on so many numerous parts proceeding from the object but by imitation of the perceiving parts but yet I cannot infer from thence that all perceptions in Nature are made by imitation or patterning for some may and some may not and although our rational perception being more subtil then the sensitive may perceive somewhat more and judg better of outward objects then the sensitive yet it cannot be infallibly assured that it is onely so and not otherwise for we see that some animals are produced out of Vegetables whose off-spring is not any ways like their producer which proves that not all actions of Nature are made by imitation or patterning In short our reason does observe that all perception in general whatsoever is made by corporeal figurative self-motion but it cannot perceive the particular figurative motions that make every perception and though some Learned are of opinion that all perceptions are made by pressure and reaction yet it is not probable to sense and reason for this being but one sort of action would not make such variety of perceptions in the infinite parts of Nature as we may perceive there are Whensoever I say that outward objects work or cause such or such effects in the body sentient I do not mean that the object is the onely immediate cause of the changes of those parts in the sentient body but that it is onely an external or occasional cause and that the effects in the sentient proceed from its own inherent natural motions which upon the perception of the exterior object cause such effects in the sentient as are either agreeable to the motions of the object and that by way of imitation which is called Sympathy or disagreeable which is call'd Antipathy When I say That the several senses of Animals pattern out the several proprieties of one object as for example the Tongue patterns out the taste the Nostrils the smell the Ears the noise the Eyes the exterior figure shape colour c. and do prove by this that they are different things dividable from each other and yet in other places do affirm that colour place figure quantity or magnitude c. are one and the same with body and inseparable from each other 't is no contradiction for to be dividable from such or such parts and to be dividable from Matter are several things Smell and Taste although they be material or corporeal and cannot be divided from Matter yet there is no necessity that all parts of Nature must be subject to smell or taste or that such parts must have such smells and such tastes for though Colour Place Taste Smell c. are material and cannot be without body yet may they be conceived by our sense and reason to be different and several figures parts or actions for as there is no such thing as single parts or single divisions in Nature but all compositions divisions changes and alterations are within the body of Nature and yet there is such a variety and difference of natural figures and actions that one figure is not another nor one action another so it is likewise with the mentioned proprieties or what you 'l call them which although they cannot be separated from body or matter yet they may be altered changed composed and divided with their parts several ways and be perceived as various and different actions of Nature as they are for as one body may have several different motions at one and the same time so it may also have several proprieties though not dividable from Matter for all that is in Nature is material nor can there be any such thing as Immaterial accidents qualities properties and the like yet discernable by their different actions and changeable by the self-moving power of Nature But mistake me not when I say they are several different figures parts or actions for my meaning is not as if body and they were different things separable from each other or as if Colour Place Figure Magnitude c. were several parts of matter for then it would follow that some parts could be without place some without figure some without colour c. which is impossible for could there be a single Atome yet that Atome would have Colour Place Figure Magnitude c. onely there would be no motion for want of Parts and consequently no Perception But my meaning is That the several properties of a Body as for example Tast Touch Smell Sound being perceived by the several senses of Animals to wit the Tast by the Tongue the Smell by the Nose and Colour and Figure by the Eye c. it proves that they are several corporeal actions for the Tast is not the Smell nor Smell the Sound nor Sound the Colour Nevertheless they are all proprieties of the same body and no more dividable from body then motion is from body or body from matter onely they are made according to the several compositions and divisions of parts And as for Colour Place Magnitude Figure c. as I said before could there be an Atome it would have Colour Place Figure and though parts be changed millions of ways yet they cannot lose Colour Place and Figure The truth is as there are no single finite parts in Nature so there
of light I cannot certainly tell The Emperess seeing the insufficiency of those Magnifying-glasses that they were not able to enlarge all sorts of objects asked the Bear-men whether they could not make glasses of a contrary nature to those they had shewed her to wit such as instead of enlarging or magnifying the shape or figure of an object could contract it beneath its natural proportion Which in obedience to her Majesties Commands they did and viewing through one of the best of them a huge and mighty Whale appear'd no bigger then a Sprat nay through some no bigger then a Vinegar-Eele and through their ordinary ones an Elephant seemed no bigger then a Flea a Camel no bigger then a Lowse and an Ostrich no bigger then a Mite To relate all their optick observations through the several sorts of their Glasses would be a tedious work and tire even the most patient Reader wherefore I 'le pass them by onely this was very remarkable and worthy to be taken notice of that notwithstanding their great skil industry and ingenuity in Experimental Philosophy they could yet by no means contrive such Glasses by the help of which they could spy out a Vacuum with all its dimensions nor Immaterial substances Non-beings and Mixt-beings or such as are between something and nothing which they were very much troubled at hoping that yet in time by long study and practice they might perhaps attain to it The Bird-and Bear-men being dismissed the Emperess called both the Syrenes or Fish-men and the Worm-men to deliver their observations which they had made both within the Seas and the Earth First she enquired of the Fish-men whence the saltness of the Sea did proceed To which they answered That there was a volatile salt in those parts of the Earth which as a bosom contain the Waters of the Sea which salt being imbibed by the Sea became fixt and this imbibing motion was that they call'd the Ebbing and Flowing of the Sea for said they the rising and swelling of the water is caused by those parts of the volatile salt as are not so easily imbibed which striving to ascend above the water bear it up with such a motion as Man or some other animal Creature in a violent certainly those may be said to be of such a mixt nature that is partly flesh and partly fish But how is it possible replied the Emperess that they should live both in Water and on the Earth since those Animals that live by the respiration of air cannot live within Water and those that live in Water cannot live by the respiration of Air as experience doth sufficiently witness They answered her Majesty That as there were different sorts of Creatures so they had also different ways of respirations for respiration said they was nothing else but a composition and division of parts and the motions of nature being infinitely various it was impossible that all Creatures should have the like motions wherefore it was not necessary that all animal Creatures should be bound to live either by the air or by water onely but according as Nature had ordered it convenient to their species The Emperess seem'd very well satisfied with their answer and desired to be further informed Whether all animal Creatures did continue their species by a successive propagation of particulars and whether in every species the off-spring did always resemble their Generator or Producer both in their interior and exterior figures They answered her Majesty That some species or sorts of Creatures were kept up by a successive propagation of an off-spring that was like the producer but some were not of the first rank said they are all those animals that are of different sexes besides several others but of the second rank are for the most part those we call insects whose production proceds from such causes as have no conformity or likeness with their produced effects as for example Maggots bred out of Cheese and several others generated out of Earth Water and the like But said the Emperess there is some likeness between Maggots and Cheese for Cheese has no blood and so neither have Maggots besides they have almost the same taste which Cheese has This proves nothing answered they for Maggots have a visible local progressive motion which Cheese hath not The Emperess replied That when all the Cheese was turned into Maggots it might be said to have local progressive motion They answered That when the Cheese by its own figurative motions was changed into Maggots it was no more Cheese The Emperess confessed that she observed Nature was infinitely various in her works and that though the species of Creatures did continue yet their particulars were subject to infinite changes But since you have informed me said she of the various sorts and productions of animal Creatures I desire you to tell me what you have observed of their sensitive perceptions Truly answered they Your Majesty puts a very hard question to us and we shall hardly be able to give a satisfactory answer to it for there are many different sorts of Creatures which as they have all different perceptions so they have also different organs which our senses are not able to discover onely in an Oyster-shell we have with admiration observed that the common sensorium of the Oyster lies just at the closing of the shells where the pressure and reaction may be perceived by the opening and shutting of the shells every tide After all this the Emperess desired the Worm-men to give her a true Relation how frost was made upon the Earth To which they answered That it was made much after the manner and description of the Fish and Bird-men concerning the Congelation of Water into Ice and Snow by a commixture of saline and acid particles which relation added a great light to the Ape-men who were the Chymists concerning their Chymical principles Salt Sulphur and Mercury But said the Emperess if it be so it will require an infinite multitude of saline particles to produce such a great quantity of Ice Frost and Snow besides said she when Snow Ice and Frost turn again into their former principle I would fain know what becomes of those saline particles But neither the Wor-men nor the Fish-and Bird-men could give her an answer to it Then the Emperess enquired of them the reason Why Springs were not as salt as the Sea is also why Springs did ebb and flow To which some answered That the ebbing and flowing of some Springs was caused by hollow Caverns within the Earth where the Sea-water crowding thorow did thrust forward and draw back-ward the Spring-water according to its own way of ebbing and flowing but others said That it proceeded from a small proportion of saline and acid particles which the Spring-water imbibed from the Earth and although it was not so much as to be perceived by the sense of Taste yet was it enough to cause an ebbing and flowing motion And as for the Spring-water being fresh
thus declared her mind to the Ape-men and given them better Instructions then perhaps they expected not knowing that her Majesty had such great and able judgment in Natural Philosophv had several conferences with them concerning Chymical Preparations which for brevities sake I 'le forbear to rehearse Amongst the rest she asked how it came that the Imperial Race appear'd so young and yet was reported to have lived so long some of them two some three and some four hundred years and whether it was by Nature or a special Divine blessing To which they answered That there was a certain Rock in the parts of that World which contained the Golden Sands which Rock was hollow within and did produce a Gum that was a hundred years before it came to its full strength and perfection this Gum said they if it be held in a warm hand will dissolve into an Oyl the effects whereof are following It being given every day for some certain time to an old decayed man in the bigness of a little Pea will first make him spit for a week or more after this it will cause Vomits of Flegm and after that it will bring forth by vomits humors of several colours first of a pale yellow then of a deep yellow then of a green and lastly of a black colour and each of these humors have a several taste some are fresh some salt some sower some bitter and so forth neither do all these Vomits make them sick but they come out on a sudden and unawares without any pain or trouble to the patient And after it hath done all these mentioned effects and clear'd both the stomack and several other parts of the body then it works upon the brain and brings forth of the nose such kind of humors as it did out of the mouth and much after the same manner then it will purge by stool then by urine then by sweat and lastly by bleeding at the nose and the Emerodes all which effects it will perform within the space of six weeks or a little more for it does not work very strongly but gently and by degrees Lastly when it has done all this it will make the body break out into a thick scab and cause both Hair Teeth and Nails to come off which scab being arrived to its full maturity opens first along the back and comes off all in a piece like an armour and all this is done within the space of four months After this the Patient is wrapt into a sear-cloth prepared of certain Gums and Juices wherein he continues until the time of nine Months be expired from the first beginning of the cure which is the time of a Childs formation in the womb In the mean while his diet is nothing else but Eagles-eggs and Hinds-milk and after the Sear-cloth is taken away he will appear of the age of Twenty both in shape and strength The weaker sort of this Gum is soveraign in healing of wounds and curing of slight distempers But this is also to be observed that none of the Imperial race does use any other drink but Lime-water or water in which Lime-stone is immerged their meat is nothing else but Fowl of several sorts their recreations are many but chiefly Hunting This Relation amazed the Emperess very much for though in the world she came from she had heard great reports of the Philosophers-stone yet had she not heard of any that had ever found it out which made her believe that it was but a Chymera she called also to mind that there had been in the same world a man who had a little Stone which cured all kinds of Diseases outward and inward according as it was applied and that a famous Chymist had found out a certain liquor called Alkahest which by the vertue of its own fire consumed all diseases but she had never heard of a Medicine that could renew old Age and render it beautiful vigorous and strong Nor would she have so easily believed it had it been a medicine prepared by Art for she knew that Art being Natures Changeling was not able to produce such a powerful effect but being that the Gum did grow naturally she did not so much scruple at it for she knew that Natures Works are so various and wonderful that no particular Creature is able to trace her ways The Conferences of the Chymists being finished the Emperess made an Assembly of her Galenical Physicians her Herbalists and Anatomists and first she enquired of her Herbalists the particular effects of several Herbs and Drugs and whence they proceeded To which they answered that they could for the most part tell her Majesty the vertues and operations of them but the particular causes of their effects were unknown onely thus much they could say that their operations and vertues were generally caused by their proper inherent corporeal figurative motions which being infinitely various in Infinite Nature did produce infinite several effects And it is observed said they that Herbs and Drugs are as wise in their operations as Men in their words and actions nay wiser and their effects are more certain then Men in their opinions for though they cannot discourse like Men yet have they sense and reason as well as Men for the discursive faculty is but a particular effect of sense and reason in some particular Creatures to wit Men and not a principle of Nature and argues often more folly then wisdom The Emperess asked Whether they could not by a composition and commixture of other Drugs make them work other effects then they did used by themselves They answered That they could make them produce artificial effects but not alter their inherent proper and particular natures Then the Emperess commanded her Anatomists to dissect such kinds of Creatures as are called Monsters But they answered her Majesty That it would be but an unprofitable and useless work and hinder their better imployments for when we dissect dead Animals said they it is for no other end but to observe what defects or distempers they had that we may cure the like in living ones so that all our care and industry concerns onely the preservation of Mankind but we hope your Majesty will not preserve Monsters which are most commonly destroyed except it be for novelty neither will the dissection of Monsters prevent the errors of Natures irregular actions for by dissecting some we cannot prevent the production of others so that our pains and labour will be to no purpose unless to satisfie the vain curiosities of inquisitive men The Emperess replied That such dissections would be very beneficial to Experimental Philosophers If Experimental Philosophers answer'd they do spend their time in such useless inspections they waste it in vain and have nothing but their labour for their pains Lastly her Majesty had some Conferences with the Galenick Physicians about several Diseases and amongst the rest desired to know the cause and nature of Apoplexy and the spotted Plague They answered
Besides many of their Writings are but parcels taken from the ancient but such Writers are like those unconscionable men in Civil Wars which endeavour to pull down the hereditary Mansions of Noble-men and Gentlemen to build a Cottage of their own for so do they pull down the learning of Ancient Authors to render themselves famous in composing Books of their own But though this Age does ruine Palaces to make Cottages Churches to make Conventicles and Universities to make private Colledges and endeavour not onely to wound but to kill and bury the Fame of such meritorious Persons as the Ancient were yet I hope God of his mercy will preserve State Church and Schools from ruine and destruction Nor do I think their weak works will be able to overcome the strong wits of the Ancient for setting aside some few of our Moderns all the rest are but like dead and withered leaves in comparison to lovely and lively Plants and as for Arts I am confident that where there is one good Art found in these latter ages there are two better old Arts lost both of the AEgyptians Grecians Romans and many other ancient Nations when I say lost I mean in relation to our knowledg not in Nature for nothing can be lost in Nature Truly the Art of Augury was far more beneficial then the lately invented Art of Micrography for I cannot perceive any great advantage this Art doth bring us Also the Ecclipse of the Sun and Moon was not found out by Telescopes nor the motions of the Loadstone nor the Art of the Card nor the Art of Guns and Gun-powder nor the Art of Printing and the like by Microscopes nay if it be true that Telescopes make appear the spots in the Sun and Moon or discover some new Stars what benefit is that to us Or if Microscopes do truly represent the exterior parts and superficies of some minute Creatures what advantages it our knowledg For unless they could discover their interior corporeal figurative motions and the obscure actions of Nature or the causes which make such or such Creatures I see no great benefit or advantage they yield to man Or if they discover how reflected light makes loose and superficial Colours such as no sooner percieved but are again dissolved what benefit is that to man For neither Painters nor Dyers can inclose and mix that Atomical dust and those reflections of light to serve them for any use Wherefore in my opinion it is both time and labour lost for the inspection of the exterior parts of Vegetables doth not give us any knowledg how to Sow Set Plant and Graft so that a Gardener or Husbandman will gain no advantage at all by this Art The inspection of a Bee through a Microscope will bring him no more Honey nor the inspection of a grain more Corn neither will the inspection of dusty Atomes and reflections of light teach Painters how to make and mix Colours although it may perhaps be an advantage to a decayed Ladies face by placing her self in such or such a reflection of Light where the dusty Atomes may hide her wrinkles The truth is most of these Arts are Fallacies rather then discoveries of Truth for Sense deludes more then it gives a true Information and an exterior inspection through an Optick glass is so deceiving that it cannot be relied upon Wherefore Regular Reason is the best guide to all Arts as I shall make it appear in this following Treatise It may be the World will judg it a fault in me that I oppose so many eminent and ingenious Writers but I do it not out of a contradicting or wrangling nature but out of an endeavour to find out truth or at least the probability of truth according to that proportion of sense and reason Nature has bestowed upon me for as I have heard my Noble Lord say that in the Art of Riding and Fencing there is but one Truth but many Falshoods and Fallacies So it may be said of Natural Philophy and Divinity for there is but one Fundamental Truth in each and I am as ambitious of finding out the truth of Nature as an honourable Dueller is of gaining fame and repute for as he will fight with none but an honourable and valiant opposite so am I resolved to argue with none but those which have the renown of being famous and subtil Philosophers and therefore as I have had the courage to argue heretofore with some famous and eminent Writers in Speculative Philosophy so have I taken upon me in this present work to make some reflections also upon some of our Modern Experimental and Dioptrical Writers They will perhaps think my self an inconsiderable opposite because I am not of their Sex and therefore strive to hit my Opinions with a side stroke rather covertly then openly and directly but if this should chance the impartial World I hope will grant me so much Justice as to consider my honesty and their fallacy and pass such a judgment as will declare them to be Patrons not onely to Truth but also to Justice and Equity for which Heaven will grant them their reward and time will record their noble and worthy Actions in the Register of Fame to be kept in everlasting Memory TO THE READER Curteous Reader I Do ingeniously confess that both for want of learning and reading Philosophical Authors I have not expressed my self in my Philosophical Works especially in my Philosophical and Physical Opinions so clearly and plainly as I might have done had I had the assistance of Art and the practice of reading other Authors But though my Conceptions seem not so perspicuous in the mentioned Book of Philosophical Opinions yet my Philosophical Letters and these present Observations will I hope render it more intelligible which I have writ not out of an ambitious humour to fill the World with useless Books but to explain and illustrate my own Opinions For what benefit would it be to me if I should put forth a work which by reason of its obscure and hard notious could not be understood especially it is knowil that Natural Philosophy is the hardest of all humane learning by reason it consists onely in Contemplation and to make the Philosophical Conceptions of ones mind known to others is more difffcult then to make them believe that if A. B. be equal to C. D. then E. F. is equal to A. B. because it is equal to C. D. But as for Learning that I am not versed in it no body I hope will blame me for it since it is sufficiently known that our Sex is not bread up to it as being not suffer'd to be instructed in Schools and Vniversities I will not say but many of our Sex may have as much wit and be capable of Learning as well as Men but since they want Instructions it is not possible they should attain to it for Learning is Artificial but Wit is Natural Wherefore when I began to read the Philosophical Works
By Discourse I do not mean speech but an Arguing of the mind or a Rational inquiry into the Causes of Natural effects for Discourse is as much as Reasoning with our selves which may very well be done without Speech or Language as being onely an effect or action of Reason When I say That Art may make Pewter Brass c. I do not mean as if these Figures were Artificial and not Natural but my meaning is That if Art imitates Nature in producing of Artificial Figures they are most commonly such as are of mixt Natures which I call Hermaphroditical When I say That Respiration is a Reception and Emission of parts through the pores or passages proper to each particular figure so that when some parts issue others enter I do not mean at one and the same time or always through the same passages for as there is variety of Natural Creatures and Figures and of their perceptions so of the manner of their perceptions and of their passages and pores all which no particular Creature is able exactly to know or determine And therefore when I add in the following Chapter That Nature has more ways of composing and dividing of parts then by the way of drawing in and sending forth by pores I mean that not all parts of Nature have the like Respirations The truth is it is enough to know in general That there is Respiration in all parts of Nature as a general or universal action and that this Respiration is nothing else but a composition and division of Parts but how particular Respirations are performed none but Infinite Nature is capable to know When I say That there is a difference between Respiration and Perception and that Perception is an action of figuring or patterning but Respiration an action of Reception and Emission of Parts First I do not mean that all Percaption is made by patterning or imitation but I speak onely of the Perception of the exterior senses in Animals at least in man which I observe to be made by patterning or imitation for as no Creature can know the infinite perceptions in Nature so he cannot describe what they are or how they are made Next I do not mean that Respiration is not a Perceptive action for if Perception be a general and universal action in Nature as well as Respiration both depending upon the composition and division of parts it is impossible but that all actions of Nature must be perceptive by reason perception is an exterior knowledg of forreign parts and actions and there can be no commerce or intercourse nor no variety of figures and actions no productions dissolutions changes and the like without Perception for how shall Parts work and act without having some knowledg or perception of each other Besides wheresoever is self-motion there must of necessity be also Perception for self-motion is the cause of all exterior Perception But my meaning is That the Animal at least Humane respiration which is a receiveing of forreign parts and discharging or venting of its own in an animal or humane Figure or Creature is not the action of Animal Perception properly so call'd that is the perception of its exterior senses as Seeing Hearing Tasting Touching Smelling which action of Perception is properly made by way of patterning and imitation by the innate figurative motions of those Animal Creatures and not by receiving either the figures of the exterior objects into the sensitive Organs or by sending forth some invisible rayes from the Organ to the Object nor by pressure and reaction Nevertheless as I said every action of Nature is a Knowing and Perceptive action and so is Respiration which of necessity presupposes a knowledg of exterior parts especially those that are concern'd in the same action and can no ways be perform'd without perception of each other When I say That if all mens Opinions and Fancies were Rational there would not be such variety in Nature as we perceive there is by Rational I mean Regular according to the vulgar way of expression by which a Rational Opinion is call'd That which is grounded upon regular sense and reason and thus Rational is opposed to Irregular Nevertheless Irregular Fancies and Opinions are made by the rational parts of matter as well as those that are regular and therefore in a Philosophical and strict sense one may call Irregular Opinions as well Rational as those that are Regular but according to the vulgar way of expression as I said it is sooner understood of Regular then of Irregular Opinions Fancies or Conceptions When I say that None of Natures parts can be call'd Inanimate or Soul-less I do not mean the constitutive parts of Nature which are as it were the Ingredients whereof Nature consists and is made up whereof there is an inanimate part or degree of matter as well as animate but I mean the parts or effects of this composed body of Nature of which I say that none can be call'd inanimate for though some Philosophers think that nothing is animate or has life in Nature but Animals and Vegetables yet it is probable that since Nature consists of a commixture of animate and inanimate matter and is self-moving there can be no part or particle of this composed body of Nature were it an Atome that may be call'd Inaminate by reason there is none that has not its share of animate as well as inanimate matter and the commixture of these degrees being so close it is impossible one should be without the other When enumerating the requisites of the Perception of Sight in Animals I say that if one of them be wanting there is either no perception at all or it is an imperfect perception I mean there is no Animal perception of seeing or else an irregular perception When I say that as the sensitive perception knows some of the other parts of Nature by their effects so the rational perceives some effects of the Omnipotent Power of God My meaning is not as if the sensitive part of matter hath no knowledg at all of God for since all parts of Nature even the inanimate have an innate and fixt self-knowledg it is probable that they may also have an interior self-knowledg of the existency of the Eternal and Omnipotent God as the Author of Nature But because the rational part is the subtilest purest finest and highest degree of matter it is most conformable to truth that it has also the highest and greatest knowledg of God as far as a natural part can have for God being Immaterial it cannot properly be said that sense can have a perception of him by reason he is not subject to the sensitive perception of any Creature or part of Nature and therefore all the knowledg which natural Creatures can have of God must be inherent in every part of Nature and the perceptions which we have of the Effects of Nature may lead us to some conceptions of that Supernatural Infinite and
Incomprehensible Deity not what it is in its Essence or Nature but that it is existent and that Nature has a dependance upon it as an Eternal Servant has upon an Eternal Master But some might say How is it possible that a Corporeal finite part can have a conception of an Incorporeal infinite Being by reason that which comprehends must needs be bigger then that which is comprehended Besides no part of Nature can conceive beyond it self that is beyond what is Natural or Material and this proves that at least the rational part or the mind must be immaterial to conceive a Deity To which I answer That no part of Nature can or does conceive the Essence of God or what God is in himself but it conceives onely that there is such a Divine Being which is Supernatural And therefore it cannot be said that a natural Figure can comprehend God for it is not the comprehending of the Substance of God or its patterning out since God having no Body is without all Figure that makes the knowledg of God but I do believe that the knowledg of the existency of God as I mentioned before is innate and inherent in Nature and all her parts as much as self-knowledg is Speaking of the difference between Oil and other liquors for the better understanding of that place I thought fit to insert this Note Flame is fluid but not liquid nor wet Oil is fluid and liquid but not wet but Water is both fluid liquid and wet Oil will turn into flame and encrease it but Water is so quite opposite to flame that if a sufficient quantity be poured upon it it will totally extinguish it When I say that Sense and Reason shall be the Ground of my Philosophy and not particular natural effects My meaning is that I do not intend to make particular Creatures or Figures the Principles of all the infinite effects of Nature as some other Philosophers do for there is no such thing as a Prime or principal Figure of Nature all being but effects of one Cause But my Ground is Sense and Reason that is I make self-moving matter which is sensitive and rational the onely cause and principle of all natural effects When 't is said That Ice Snow Hail c. return into their former Figure of Water whensoever they dissolve I mean when they dissolve their exterior Figures that is change their actions When I say That the Exterior Object is the Agent and the Sentient Body the Patient I do not mean that the Object does chiefly work upon the Sentient or is the immediate cause of the Perception in the Sentient body and that the Sentient suffers the Agent to act upon it but I retain onely those words because they are used in Schools But as for their actions I am quite of a contrary Opinion to wit That the sentient body is the principal Agent and the external body the Patient for the motions of the sentient in the act of perception do figure out or imitate the motions of the object so that the object is but as a Copy that is figured out or imitated by the sentient which is the chiefly Agent in all transforming and perceptive actions that are made by way of patterning or imitation When I say That one finite part can undergo infinite changes and alterations I do not mean one single part whereof there is no such thing in nature but I mean one part may be infinitely divided and composed with other parts for as there are infinite changes compositions and divisions in Nature so they must be of parts there being no variety but of parts and though parts be finite yet the changes may be infinite for the finiteness of parts is but concerning the bulk or quantity of their figures and they are call'd finite by reason they have limited and circumscribed figures nevertheless as for duration their parts being the same with the body of Nature are as eternal and infinite as Nature her self and thus are subject to infinite and eternal changes VVhen I say A World of Gold is as active interiously as a world of Air is exteriously I mean it is as much subject to changes and alterations as Air for Gold though its motions are not perceptible by our exterior senses yet it has no less motion then the activest body of Nature onely its motions are of another kind then the motions of Air or of some other bodies for Retentive motions are as much motions as dispersing or some other sorts of motions although not so visible to our perception as these and therefore we cannot say that Gold is more at rest than other Creatures of Nature for there is no such thing as Rest in Nature although there be degrees of Motion VVhen I say That the parts of Nature do not drive or press upon each other but that all natural actions are free and easie and not constrained My meaning is not as if there was no pressing or driving of parts at all in Nature but onely that they are not the universal or principal actions of Natures body as it is the opinion of some Philosophers who think there is no other motion in nature but by pressure of parts upon parts Nevertheless there is pressure and reaction in Nature because there are infinite sorts of motions Also when I say in the same place That Natures actions are voluntary I do not mean that all actions are made by rote and none by imitation but by voluntary actions I understand self-actions that is such actions whose principle of motion is within themselves and doth not proceed from such an exterior Agent as doth the motion of the inanimate part of matter which having no motion of it self is moved by the animate parts yet so that it receives no motion from them but moves by the motion of the animate parts and not by an infused motion into them for the animate parts in carrying the inanimate along with them lose nothing of their own motion nor impart no motion to the inanimate no more than a man who carries a stick in his hand imparts motion to the stick and loses so much as he imparts but they bear the inanimate parts along with them by vertue of their own self-motion and remain self-moving parts as well as the inanimate remain without motion Again when I make a distinguishment between voluntary actions and exterior perceptions my meaning is not as if voluntary actions were not made by perceptive parts for whatsoever is self-moving and active is perceptive and therefore since the voluntary actions of Sense and Reason are made by self-moving parts they must of necessity be perceptive actions but I speak of Perceptions properly so call'd which are occasioned by Forreign parts and to those I oppose voluntary actions which are not occasioned but made by rote as for example the perception of sight in Animals when outward Objects present themselves to the Optick sense
onely in the grossness but in the dulness of the Inanimate parts and that since the sensitive animate parts were labouring on and with the inanimate if these had self-motion and that-their motion was flower then that of the animate parts they would obstruct cross and oppose each other in all their actions for the one would be too slow and the other too quick The latter Thoughts replied that this slowness and quickness of motion would cause no obstruction at all for said they a man that rides on a Horse is carried away by the Horses motion and has nevertheless also his own motions himself neither does the Horse and Man transfer or exchange motion into each other nor do they hinder or obstruct one another The former Thoughts answer'd it was True that Motion could not be transferred from one body into another without Matter or substance and that several self-moving parts might be joined and each act a part without the least hinderance to one another for not all the parts of one composed Creature for example Man were bound to one and the same action and this was an evident proof that all Creatures were composed of parts by reason of their different actions nay not onely of parts but of self-moving parts also they confessed that there were degrees of motion as quickness and slowness and that the slowest motion was as much motion as the quickest But yet said they this does not prove that Nature consists not of Inanimate Matter as well as of Animate for it is one thing to speak of the parts of the composed and mixed body of Nature and another thing to speak of the constitutive parts of Nature which are as it were her ingredients of which Nature is made up as one intire self-moving body for sense and reason does plainly perceive that some parts are more dull and some more lively subtil and active the Rational parts are more agil active pure and subtil then the sensitive but the Inanimate have no activity subtilty and agility at all by reason they want self-motion nor no perception for self-motion is the cause of all perception and this Triumvirate of the degrees of Matter said they is so necessary to ballance and poise Natures actions that otherwise the creatures which Nature produces would all be produced alike and in an instant for example a Child in the Womb would as suddenly be framed as it is figured in the mind and a man would be as suddenly dissolved as a thought But sense and reason perceives that it is otherwise to wit that such figures as are made of the grosser parts of Matter are made by degrees and not in an instant of time which does manifestly evince that there is and must of necessity be such a degree of Matter in Nature as we call Inanimate for surely although the parts of Nature are infinite and have infinite actions yet they cannot run into extreams but are ballanced by their opposites so that all parts cannot be alike rare or dense hard or soft dilating or contracting c. but some are dense some rare some hard some soft fome dilative some contractive c. by which the actions of Nature are kept in an equal ballance from running into extreams But put the case said they it were so that Natures body consisted altogether of Animate Matter or corporeal self-motion without an intermixture of the inanimate parts we are confident that there would be framed as many objections against that opinion as there are now against the inanimate degree of Matter for disputes are endless and the more answers you receive the more objections you will find and the more objections you make the more answers you will receive and even shews that Nature is ballanced by opposites for put the case the Inanimate parts of Matter were self-moving then first there would be no such difference between the rational and sensitive parts as now there is but every part being self-moving would act of and in it self that is in its own substance as now the rational part of Matter does Next if the inanimate part was of a slower motion then the rational and sensitive they would obstruct each other in their actions for one would be too quick and the other too slow neither would the quicker motion alter the nature of the slower or the slower retard the quicker for the nature of each must remain as it is or else it would be thus then the animate part might become inanimate and the rational the sensitive c. which is impossible and against all sense and reason At this declaration of my former Thoughts the latter appear'd somewhat better satisfied and had almost yielded to them but that they had yet some scruples left which hindered them from giving a full assent to my former rational conceptions First they asked how it was possible that that part of Matter which had no innate self-motion could be moved for said they if it be moved it must either be moved by its own motion or by the motion of the animate part of Matter by its own motion it cannot move because it has none but if it be moved by the motion of the animate then the animate must of necessity transfer motion into it that so being not able to move by an innate motion it might move by a communicated motion The former Thoughts answered that they had resolved this question heretofore by the example of a Horse and a Man where the Man was moved and carried along by the Horse without any Communication or Translation of motion from the Horse into the Man also a Stick said they carried in a Man's hand goes along with the man without receiving any motion from his hand My latter Thoughts replied That a Man and a Stick were parts or Creatures of Nature which consist of a commixture of Animate or self-moving Matter and that they did move by their own motions even at the time when they were carried along by other parts but with the Inanimate part of Matter it was not so for it having no self-motion could no ways move You say well answered my former Thoughts that all the parts of Nature whensoever they move move by their own motions which proves that no particular Creature or effect of composed Nature can act upon another but that one can onely occasion another to move thus or thus as in the mentioned example the Horse does not move the man but occasions him onely to move after such or such a manner also the hand does not move the Stick but is onely an occasion that the Stick moves thus for the Stick moves by its own motion But as we told you before this is to be understood of the parts of the composed body of Nature which as they are Natures Creatures and Effects so they consist also of a commixture of the forementioned degrees of animate and inanimate Matter but our discourse is now of those parts which do compose the body
of Nature and make it what it is And as of the former parts none can be said moved but all are moving as having self-motion within them so the inanimate part of Matter considered as it is an ingredient of Nature is no ways moving but always moved The former parts being effects of the body of Nature for distinctions sake may be called Effective parts but these that is the Animate and Inanimate may be called constitutive parts of Nature Those follow the composition of Nature but these are the Essential parts which constitute the body of Nature whereof the Animate by reason of their self-motion are always active and perceptive but the Inanimate is neither active nor perceptive but dull and passive and you may plainly perceive it added my former thoughts by the alledged example for as the Stick has no animal motion and yet is carried along by and with the animal wheresoever it goes so the Inanimate Matter although it has no motion at all yet it goes along with the animate parts wheresoever they 'l have it the onely difference is this as we told you before that the Stick being composed of animate as well as inanimate Matter cannot properly be said moved but occasioned to such a motion by the animal that carries it when as the inanimate part cannot be said occasioned but moved My later Thoughts replied That the alledged example of the carried Stick could give them no full satisfaction as yet for said they put the case the Stick had its own motion yet it has not a visible exterior local progressive motion such as Animals have and therefore it must needs receive that motion from the animal that carries it for nothing can be occasioned to that which it has not in it self To which the former answered first that although animals had a visible exterior progressive motion yet not all progressive motion was an animal motion Next they said that some Creatures did often occasion others to alter their motions from an ordinary to an extraordinary effect and if it be no wonder said they that Cheese Roots Fruits c. produce Worms why should it be a wonder for an Animal to occasion a visible progressive motion in a vegetable or mineral or any other sort of Creature For each natural action said they is local were it no more then the stirring of a hairs breadth nay of an Atome and all composition and division contraction dilation nay even retention are local motions for there is no thing in so just a measure but it will vary more or less nay if it did not to our perception yet we cannot from thence infer that it does not at all for our perception is too weak and gross to perceive all the subtil actions of Nature and if so then certainly Animals are not the onely Creatures that have local motion but there is local motion in all parts of Nature Then my later Thoughts asked that if every part of Nature moved by its own inherent self-motion and that there was no part of the composed body of Nature which was not self-moving how it came that Children could not go so soon as born also if the self-moving part of Matter was of two degrees sensitive and rational how it came that Children could not speak before they are taught and if it was perceptive how it came that Children did not understand so soon as born To which the former answered That although there was no part of Matter that was figureless yet those figures that were composed by the several parts of Matter such as are named natural Creatures were composed by degrees and some compositions were sooner perfected then others and some sorts of such figures or Creatures were not so soon produced or strengthened as others for example most of four legg'd Creatures said they can go run and skip about so soon as they are parted from the Dam that is so soon as they are born also they can suck understand and know their Dam's when as a Bird can neither feed it self nor fly so soon as it is hatched but requires some time before it can hop on its leggs and be able to fly but a Butterfly can fly so soon as it comes out of the shell by which we may perceive that all figures are not alike either in their composing perfecting or dissolving no more then they are alike in their shapes forms understanding c. for if they were then little Puppies and Kitlings would see so soon as born as many other Creatures do when as now they require nine days after their birth before they can see and as for speech although it be most proper to the shape of Man yet he must first know or learn a language before he can speak it and although when the parts of his mind like the parts of his body are brought to maturity that is to such a regular degree of perfection as belongs to his figure he may make a language of his own yet it requires time and cannot be done in an instant The truth is although speech be natural to man yet language must be learned and as there are several self-active parts so there are several Languages and by reason the actions of some parts can be imitated by other parts it causes that we name learning not onely in Speech but in many other things Concerning the question why Children do not understand so soon as born They answered that as the sensitive parts of Nature did compose the bulk of Creatures that is such as were usually named bodies and as some Creatures bodies were not finished or perfected so soon as others so the self-moving parts which by conjunction and agreement composed that which is named the mind of Man did not bring it to the perfection of an Animal understanding so soon as some Beasts are brought to their understanding that is to such an understanding as was proper to their figure But this is to be noted said they that although Nature is in a perpetual motion yet her actions have degrees as well as her parts which is the reason that all her productions are done in that which is vulgarly named Time that is they are not executed at once or by one act In short as a House is not finished until it be throughly built nor can be thorowly furnished until it be throughly finished so is the strength and understanding of Man and all other Creatures and as perception requires Objects so learning requires practice for though Nature is self-knowing self-moving and so perceptive yet her self-knowing self-moving and perceptive actions are not all alike but differ variously neither doth she perform all actions at once otherwise all her Creatures would be alike in their shapes forms figures knowledges perceptions productions dissolutions c. which is contradicted by experience After this my later Thoughts asked how it came that the Inanimate part of Matter had more degrees then the Animate The former answered That as the Animate
digestion or expulsion and the actions of contraction from those of dilation so the actions of imitation or patterning are different from the voluntary actions vulgarly called Conceptions and all this to make an equal poise or ballance between the actions of Nature Also there is difference in the degrees of motions in swiftness slowness rarity density appetites passions youth age growth decay c. as also between several sorts of perceptions all which proves that Nature is composed of self-moving parts which are the cause of all her varieties But this is well to be observed said they that the Rational parts are the purest and consequently the most active parts of Nature and have the quickest actions wherefore to ballance them there must be a dull part of Matter which is the Inanimate or else a World would be made in an instant and every thing would be produced altered and dissolved on a sudden as they had mentioned before Well replied my later Thoughts if there be such oppositions between the parts of Nature then I pray inform us whether they be all equally and exactly poised and ballanced To which the former answered That though it was most certain that there was a poise and ballance of Natures corporeal actions yet no particular Creature was able to know the exactness of the proportion that is between them because they are infinite Then my later Thoughts desired to know whether Motion could be annihilated The former said no because Nature was Infinite and admitted of no addition nor diminution and consequently of no new Creation nor annihilation of any part of hers But said the later If Motion be an accident it may be annihilated The former answered They did not know what they meant by the word Accident The later said That an Accident was something in a body but nothing without a body If an Accident be something answered the former Then certainly it must be body for there is nothing but what is corporeal in Nature and if it be body then it cannot be nothing at no time but it must of necessity be something But it cannot subsist of and by it self replied my later Thoughts as a substance for although it hath its own being yet its being is to subsist in another body The former answered That if an Accident was nothing without a body or substance and yet something in a body then they desired to know how being nothing it could subsist in another body and be separated from another body for composition and division said they are attributes of a body since nothing can be composed or divided but what has parts and nothing has parts but what is corporeal or has a body and therefore if an accident can be in a body and be separated from a body it would be non-sense to call it nothing But then my later Thoughts asked that when a particular Motion ceased what became of it The former answered it was not annihilated but changed The later said How can motion be corporeal and yet one thing with body Certainly if body be material and motion too they must needs be two several substances The former answered That motion and body were not two several substances but motion and matter made one self-moving body and so was place colour figure c. all one and the same with body The later replied That a Man and his action were not one and the same but two different things The former answered That a Man and his actions were no more different then a man was different from himself for said they although a man may have many different actions yet were not that man existent the same actions would not be for though many men have the like actions yet they are not the same But then replied the later Place cannot be the same with body nor colour because a man may change his place and his colour and yet retain his body Truly said the former If Place be changed then Body must change also for wheresoever is Place there is Body and though it be a vulgar phrase That a man changes his place when he heremoves yet it is not a proper Philosophical expression for he removes onely from such parts to such parts so that it is a change or a division and composition of parts and not of place And as for colour though it changes yet that proves not that it is not a body or can be annihilated The truth is though Figure Motion Colour c. do change yet they remain still in Nature and it is impossible that Nature can give away or lose the least of her corporeal Attributes or Proprieties for Nature is infinite in power as well as in act we mean for acting naturally and therefore whatsoever is not in present act is in the power of Infinite Nature But said my later Thoughts if a body be divided into very minute parts as little as dust where is the colour then The Colour answered the former is divided as well as the body and though the parts thereof be not subject to our sensitive perception yet they have nevertheless their being for all things cannot be perceptible by our senses The later said That the Colour of a Man's face could change from pale to red and from red to pale and yet the substance of the face remain the same which proved that colour and substance was not the same The former answered That although the colour of a mans face did change without altering the substance thereof yet this proved no more that Colour was Immaterial then that Motion was Immaterial for a man may put his body into several postures and have several actions and yet without any change of the substance of his body for all actions do not necessarily import a change of the parts of a composed figure there being infinite sorts of actions We will leave Accidents said my later Thoughts and return to the Inanimate part of Matter and since you declare that all parts of Nature do worship and adore God you contradict your self in allowing an Inanimate degree of Matter by reason where there is no self-motion there can be no perception of God and consequently no Worship and Adoration The former answered That the knowledg of God did not consist in exterior perception for God said they being an Infinite Incomprehensible supernatural and Immaterial Essence void of all parts can no ways be subject to Perception Nevetheless although no part can have an exterior perception of the substance of God as it has of particular natural Creatures yet it has Conceptions of the Existence of God to wit that there is a God above Nature on which Nature depends and from whose Immutable and Eternal Decree it has its Eternal Being as God's Eternal Servant but what God is in his Essence neither Nature nor any of her parts or Creatures is able to conceive And therefore although the Inanimate part of Matter is not perceptive yet having an innate knowledg and life
7. The Worlds Olio now to be reprinted 8. Playes in Fol. 9. Orations in Fol. 10. Sociable Letters in Fol. There are some others that never were Printed yet which shall if God grant me Life and Health be Published ere long OBSERVATIONS UPON EXPERIMENTAL PHILOSOPHY 1. Of Humane Sense and Perception BEfore I deliver my observations upon that part of Philosophy which is call'd Experimental I thought it necessary to premise some discourse concerning the Perception of Humane Sense It is known that man has five Exterior Senses and every sense is ignorant of each other for the Nose knows not what the Eyes see nor the Eyes what the Ears hear neither do the Ears know what the Tongue tastes and as for Touch although it is a general Sense yet every several part of the body has a several touch and each part is ignorant of each others touch And thus there is a general ignorance of all the several parts and yet a perfect knowledg in each part for the Eye is as knowing as the Ear and the Ear as knowing as the Nose and the Nose as knowing as the Tongue and one particular Touch knows as much as another at least is capable thereof Nay not onely every several Touch Taste Smell Sound or Sight is a several knowledg by it self but each of them has as many particular knowledges or perceptions as there are objects presented to them Besides there are several degrees in each particular sense As for example some Men I will not speak of other animals their perception of sight taste smell touch or hearing is quicker to some sorts of objects then to others according either to the perfection or imperfection or curiosity or purity of the corporeal figurative motions of each sense or according to the presentation of each object proper to each sense for if the presentation of the objects be imperfect either through variation or obscurity or any other ways the sense is deluded Neither are all objects proper for one sense but as there are several senses so there are several sorts of objects proper for each several sense Now if there be such variety of several knowledges not onely in one Creature but in one sort of sense to wit the exterior senses of one humane Creature what may there be in all the parts of Nature 'T is true there are some objects which are not at all perceptible by any of our exterior senses as for example rarified air and the like But although they be not subject to our exterior sensitive perception yet they are subject to our rational perception which is much purer and subtiler then the sensitive nay so pure and subtil a knowledg that many believe it to be immaterial as if it were some God when as it is onely a pure fine and subtil figurative Motion or Perception it is so active and subtil as it is the best informer and reformer of all sensitive Perception for the rational Matter is the most prudent and wisest part of Nature as being the designer of all productions and the most pious and devoutest part having the perfectest notions of God I mean so much as Nature can possibly know of God so that whatsoever the sensitive Perception is either defective in or ignorant of the rational Perception supplies But mistake me not by Rational Perception and Knowledg I mean Regular Reason not Irregular where I do also exclude Art which is apt to delude sense and cannot inform so well as Reason doth for Reason reforms and instructs sense in all its actions But both the rational and sensitive knowledg and perception being divideable as well as composeable it causes ignorance as well as knowledg amongst Natures Creatures for though Nature is but one body and has no sharer or copartner but is intire and whole in it self as not composed of several different parts or substances and consequently has but one Infinite natural knowledg and wisdom yet by reason she is also divideable and composeable according to the nature of a body we can justly and with all reason say That as Nature is divided into infinite several parts so each several part has a several and particular knowledg and perception both sensitive and rational and again that each part is ignorant of the others knowledg and perception when as otherwise considered altogether and in general as they make up but one infinite body of Nature so they make also but one infinite general knowledg And thus Nature may be called both Individual as not having single parts subsisting without her but all united in one body and Divideable by reason she is partable in her own several corporeal figurative motions and not otherwise for there is no Vacuum in Nature neither can her parts start or remove from the Infinite body of Nature so as to separate themselves from it for there 's no place to flee to but body and place are all one thing so that the parts of Nature can onely joyn and disjoyn to and from parts but not to and from the body of Nature And since Nature is but one body it is intirely wise and knowing ordering her self-moving parts with all facility and ease without any disturbance living in pleasure and delight with infinite varieties and curiosities such as no single Part or Creature of hers can ever attain to 2. Of Art and Experimental Philosophy SOme are of opinion That by Art there can be a reparation made of the Mischiefs and Imperfections mankind has drawn upon it self by negligence and intemperance and a wilful and superstitious deserting the Prescripts and Rules of Nature whereby every man both from a derived Corruption innate and born with him and from his breediug and converse with men is very subject to slip into all sorts of Errors But the all-powerful God and his servant Nature know that Art which is but a particular Creature cannot inform us of the Truth of the Infinite parts of Nature being but finite it self for though every Creature has a double perception rational and sensitive yet each creature or part has not an Infinite perception nay although each particular creature or part of Nature may have some conceptions of the Infinite parts of Nature yet it cannot know the truth of those Infinite parts being but a finite part it self which finiteness causes errors in Perceptions wherefore it is well said when they confess themselves That the uncertainty and mistakes of humane actions proceed either from the narrowness and wandring of our senses or from the slipperiness or delusion of our memory or from the confinement or rashness of our understandiug But say they It is no wonder that our power over natural Causes and Effects is so slowly improved seeing we are not onely to contend with the obscurity and difficulty of the things whereon we work and think but even the forces of our minds conspire to betray us And these being the dangers in the process of Humane Reason the remedies can onely proceed
Creatures may cause several refractions reflections and inflections of the rayes of light Wherefore Mechanicks may very much be mistaken concerning the truth of the interior Nature of bodies or natural Creatures by judging them onely according to their exterior figures 24. Of Salt and of Sea or Salt-water THe reason why Salt is made or extracted out of Salt-water is that the Circular lines of Sea or Salt-water are pointed exteriously but not interiously which is the cause that the saltish parts may be easily divided from those watry lines and it is to be observed that those points when joyned to the watry circles are rare but being once separated either by Art or a more natural way by some sorts of dividing motions they become more dense yet not so dense but they may melt or return again into the first figure which is a rare figure and so become liquid salt and afterwards they may be densed or contracted again for there is no other difference between dry and liquid salt but what is made by the rarity or density of those sorts of points As for that sort of Salt which is named volatile it is when some of those rare points become more dilated or rarified then when they are joyned to the watry circle-lines I say some not all for as some points do condense or contract into fixt salt so others do dilate or arise into volatile salt But perchance some will say How can there be several sorts of points since a point is but a point I answer There may very well be several sorts considering the Nature of their substance for some sorts are rare some dense some contracting some dilating some retenting c. besides all points are not alike but there is great difference amongst several pointed figures for all are not like the point of a Pin or Needle but to alledg some gross examples there be points of Pyramids points of Knives points of Pins points of the flame of a Candle and numerous other sorts which are all several points and not one like another for I do not mean a Mathematical or imaginary point such as is onely made by the rational matter in the mind although even amongst those imaginary points there is difference for you cannot imagine or think of the several pointed figures of several sorts or kinds of Creatures or parts but you will have a difference in your mind but I mean pointed figures and not single points It is also to be observed that as some watry Circles will and may have points outwardly so some have also points inwardly for some watry Circles as I have mentioned in my Philosophical Opinions are edged to wit such as are in vitriol water others pointed as those in salt water and others are of other sorts of points as those in cordial or hot waters but those last are more artificial and all these are different in their sorts or kinds although a litttle difference in their own natures may appear great in our humane perception Concerning Oyl there is also difference between Oyl and other wet bodies for Oyl although it be rare liquid and moist yet we cannot say it is absolutely that which we name wet as other liquors are viz. Water and Wine or natural juices and since the interior natural figure of oyl is burning and hot it is impossible to divide those interior fiery points from the circle figure of Oyl without dissolving those liquid circle lines But as the Penetrations of other acid and salt liquors are caused by their exterior points so oyl whose points are interiously in the circle-lines cannot have such quick effects of penetration as those that are exteriously pointed But mistake me not I do not mean such exterior parts as are onely subject to our humane perception but such as cause those Creatures or parts to be of such a figure or nature 25. Of the Motions of Heat and Cold. THose which affim that Heat and Cold are the two primary and onely causes of the Productions of all natural things do not consider sufficiently the variety of Nature but think that Nature produces all by Art and since Art is found out and practised by Man Man conceits himself to be above Nature But as neither Art nor any particular Creature can be the cause or principle of all the rest so neither can heat and cold be the prime cause of all natural productions no more then paint can produce all the parts of a man's face as the Eyes Nose Forehead Chin Cheeks Lips and the like or a 〈◊〉 can produce a natural Head or a suit of Clothes can make the body of Man for then whensoever the fashioned Garments or Mode-dresses do change men would of necessity change also but Art causes gross mistakes and errors not onely in sensitive but also in rational perceptions for sense being deluded is apt to delude Reason also especially if Reason be too much indulgent to sense and therefore those judgments that rely much upon the perception of sense are rather sensitive then rational judgments for sense can have but a perception of the exterior figures of objects and Art can but alter the outward form or figure but not make or change the interior nature of any thing which is the reason that artificial alterations cause false at least uncertain and various judgments so that Nature is as various in mens judgments as in her other works But concerning heat and cold my opinion is that they are like several Colours some Natural and some Artificial of which the Artificial are very inconstant at least not so lasting as those that are not made by Art and they which say that both heat and cold are not made by the sensories or sensitive organs are in the right if their meaning be that both heat and cold in their natures and with all their proprieties as they are particular Creatures are not made or produced by humane or animal senses nevertheless the sensitive animal perception of heat and cold is made by the sensitive motions in their sensitive organs for what heat and cold soever an animal Creature feels the perception of it is made in the sense of touch or by those sensitive motions in the parts of its body for as the perception of any other outward object is not made by a real entrance of its parts into our sensories so neither is all perception of heat and cold made by the intermixture of their particles with our flesh but they are patterned and figured out by the sensitive motions in the exterior parts of the body as well as other objects I will not say that cold or heat may not enter and intermix with the parts of some bodies as fire doth intermix with fuel or enters into its parts but my meaning is that the animal perception of heat and cold is not made this way that is by an intermixture of the parts of the Agent with the parts of the Patient as the learned call them that
the interior Natures of several Creatures as their exterior figures and Phonomena's which makes them write many Paradoxes but few Truths supposing that Sense and Art can onely lead them to the knowledg of truth when as they delude rather their judgments instead of informing them But Nature has placed Sense and Reason together so that there is no part or particle of Nature which has not its share of reason as well as of sense for every part having self-motion hath also knowledg which is sense and reason and therefore it is fit we should not onely imploy our senses but chiefly our reason in the search of the causes of natural effects for Sense is onely a workman and Reason is the designer and surveigher and as reason guides and directs so ought sense to work But seeing that in this age sense is more in fashion then reason it is no wonder there are so many irregular opinions and judgments amongst men However although it be the mode yet I for my part shall not follow it but leaving to our Moderns their Experimental or Mode-Philosophy built upon deluding Art I shall addict my self to the study of Contemplative-Philosophy and Reason shall be my guide Not that I despise sense or sensitive knowledg but when I speak of sense I mean the perception of our five exterior senses helped or rather deluded by Art and Artificial instruments for I see that in this present Age Learned men are full of Art and Artificial trials and when they have found out something by them they presently judg that all natural actions are made the same way as for example when they find by Art that Salt will make Snow congeal into Ice they instantly conclude from thence that all natural congelations are made by saline particles and that the Primum Frigidum or the Principal cause of all natural cold must needs be salt by reason they have found by Art that salt will do the same effect in the aforesaid commixture with Snow But how grosly they are deceived rational men may judg If I were a Chymist and acknowledged their common Principles I might perchance have some belief in it but not whilest I follow reason nay I perceive that oftentimes our senses are deluded by their own irregularities in not perceiving always truly and rightly the actions of Art but mistaking them which is a double error and therefore that particular sensitive knowledg in man which is built meerly upon artificial experiments will never make him a good Philosopher but regular sense and reason must do it that is a regular sensitive and rational inquisition into the various actions of Nature For put the case a Microscope be true concerning the magnifying of an exterior object but yet the magnitude of the object cannot give a true information of its interior parts and their motions or else great and large bodies would be interiously known even without Microscopes The truth is our exterior senses can go no further then the exterior figures of Creatures and their exterior actions but our reason may pierce deeper and consider their inherent natures and interior actions and although it do sometimes erre for there can be no perfect or universal knowledg in a finite part concerning the Infinite actions of Nature yet it may also probably guess at them and may chance to hit the Truth Thus Sense and Reason shall be the ground of my Philosophy and no particular natural effects nor artificial instruments and if any one can shew me a better and surer ground or Principle then this I shall most willingly and joyfully embrace it 26. Of the Measures Degrees and different sorts of Heat and Cold. SOme Experimental Philosophers are much inquisitive into the measures of Heat and Cold and as we have setled standards for weight and magnitude and time so they endeavour to measure the varying temperature and gradual differences of heat and cold but do what they can their artificial measures or weights neither will nor can be so exact as the natural are to wit so as not to make them err in more or less Neither is it possible that all the degrees of heat and cold in Nature can be measured for no man can measure what he doth not know and who knows all the different sorts of heats and colds Nay if man did endeavour to measure onely one sort of heat or cold as for example the degrees of the heat or coldness of the air how is it possible that he should do it by reason of the continual change of the motions of heat or cold of the air which are so inconstant that it were surer to measure the fluidity of the air then to measure the degrees of heat or cold of the air for the temper of the air and of its heat and cold may vary so as many times we shall never find the same measure again Wherefore if we desire to have some knowledg of the degrees of some sorts of heat or cold my opinion is that we may more easily attain to it by the help of rational perception then by a sensitive inspection of artificial Weather-glasses or the like for reason goes beyond sense and although the sensitive perception is best next the rational yet the rational is above the sensitive But some of the learned conceive the degrees of heat and cold are made by bare divisions whenas in my opinion they are made by the several degrees of their corporeal figurative motions They do also imagine that there 's no degree but must ascend from one to two from two to three and so forth through all numbers and that from one to twenty there be so many degrees as there be numbers when as in my opinion there 's no more but one degree required from one to a Million or more for though both in Nature and Art there are degrees from one single figure to another yet there may also be but one degree from one to a million without reckoning any intermediate degrees or figures so that a body when it moves quick or slow needs not to go through all the intermediate degrees of quickness or slowness as to move quicker and quicker slower and slower but may immediately move from a very slow to a very quick degree the truth is no man is able to measure the infinite degrees of natural motions for though Nature consists of particular finites yet it doth also consist of infinite particulars finite in figure infinite in number and who can number from finite to infinite But having discoursed hereof elsewhere I return to heat and cold aud let others dispute whether the degrees of heat and cold in the air be the same with the degrees of animal perceptions or with the degrees of animal cold and heat my opinion is that there being several sorts and several particular heats and colds they cannot be just alike each other but there 's some difference betwixt them as for example there are shaking freezing chilly windy numb
thither to defend themselves from the coldness of the air but they being so deep in the Earth where the cold cannot enter are kept from the perception of cold so as they cannot imitate so well the motions of cold as other Creatures that are exposed to the open air The like may be said of the heat of the Sun in Summer which cannot penetrate deeper into the bowels of the Earth then cold can The truth is the Earth is to them like an Umbrello which defends or keeps men from the Sun rain wind dust c. but although it defends them from the heat of the Sun or coldness of wind yet they have those qualities naturally within themselves sometimes more and sometimes less and so has the Earth its natural temper of heat and cold But what Umbrello the middle region has whether it be some Planet or any thing else I am not able to determine unless I had been there and observed it nay ten to one but I might even then have been mistaken Wherefore all the contentions and disputes about the doctrine of Antiperistasis are in my judgment to little purpose since we are not able to know all the differences of heat and cold for if men conceive there is but one heat and cold in Nature they are mistaken and much more if they think they can measure all the several sorts of heat and cold in all Creatures by artificial experiments for as much as a Natural man differs from an artificial statue or picture of a man so much differs a natural effect from an artificial which can neither be so good nor so lasting as a natural one If Charles's Wain the Axes of the Earth and the motions of the Planets were like the pole or axes or wheels of a Coach they would soon be out of order Indeed artificial things are pretty toys to imploy idle time nay some are very useful for our conveniency but yet they are but Natures bastards or changelings if I may so call them and though Nature takes so much delight in variety that she is pleased with them yet they are not to be compared to her wise and fundamental actions for Nature being a wise and provident Lady governs her parts very wisely methodically and orderly also she is very industrious and hates to be idle which makes her imploy her time as a good Huswife doth in Brewing Baking Churning Spinning Sowing c. as also in Preserving for those that love Sweet-meats and in Distilling for those that take delight in Cordials for she has numerous imployments and being infinitely self-moving never wants work but her artificial works are her works of delight pleasure and pastime Wherefore those that imploy their time in Artificial Experiments consider onely Natures sporting or playing actions but those that view her wise Government in ordering all her parts and consider her changes alterations and tempers in particulars and their causes spend their time more usefully and profitably and truly to what purpose should a man beat his brains and weary his body with labours about that wherein he shall lose more time then gain knowledg But if any one would take delight in such things my opinion is that our female sex would be the fittest for it for they most commonly take pleasure in making of Sweet-meats Possets several sorts of Pyes Puddings and the like not so much for their own eating as to imploy their idle time and it may be they would prove good Experimental Philosophers and inform the world how to make artificial Snow by their Creams or Possets beaten into froth and Ice by their clear candied or crusted quiddinies or conserves of fruits and Frost by their candied herbs and flowers and Hail by their small comfits made of water and sugar with whites of Eggs and many other the like figures which resemble Beasts Birds Vegetables Minerals c. But the men should study the causes of those Experiments and by this society the Commonwealth would find a great benefit for the Woman was given to Man not onely to delight but to help and assist him and I am confident Women would labour as much with Fire and Furnace as Men for they 'l make good Cordials and Spirits but whether they would find out the Philosophers-stone I doubt for our sex is more apt to waste then to make Gold however I would have them try especially those that have means to spend for who knows but Women might be more happy in finding it out then Men and then would Men have reason to imploy their time in more profitable studies then in useless Experiments 27. Of Congealation and Freezing THe Congelation of Water into Ice Snow Hail and the like is made by its own corporeal figurative motions which upon the perception of the exterior object of cold by the way of imitation do contract and condense water into such or such a figure Some are of opinion that Water or the like liquors are not contracted but expanded or rarified by freezing which they prove both by the levity of congealed Water and the breaking of Glasses Earthen Bottles or other the like Vessels in which water is contained when it freezes But although I' mentioned in my former discourse that there are several sorts of colds as for example moist and dry colds whereof these contract and condense those dilate and rarifie so that there are cold dilations as well as cold contractions yet Freezing or Congelation being none of the sorts of moist but of dry colds it is not made by expanding or dilating but by contracting and condensing motions for that liquid bodies when frozen are more extended 't is not the freezing motions that cause those extensions but water being of a dilative nature its interior parts strive against the exterior which figurative motions do imitate the motions of cold or frost and in that strife the water becomes extended or dilated when congealed into Ice But the question is Whether solid bodies do dilate or extend when they freeze and my opinion is they do not for that solid bodies as Metal and the like are apt to break in a hard frost doth not prove an expansion but the division of their parts is rather made by contraction for though the motions of cold in metal are not so much exteriously contracting as to be perceived by our optick sense in its bulk or exterior magnitude as they are in the body of water whose interior nature is dilative yet by the division which cold causes it may well be believed that freezing hath an interior contractive effect otherwise it could not divide so as many times it doth Wherefore I believe that solid bodies break by an extream and extraordinary contraction of their interior parts and not by an extraordinary expansion Besides this breaking shews a strong self-motion in the action of congealing or freezing for the motions of cold are as strong and quick as the motions of heat Nay even those Experimental Philosophers which
irregularity or some other ways yet next to the rational they are the best informers we have for no man can naturally go beyond his rational and sensitive perception And thus in my opinion the nature of Congelation is not effected by expanding or dilating but contracting and condensing motions in the parts of the sentient body which motions in the congelation of water do not alter the interior nature of water but onely contract its exterior figure into the figure either of Ice Snow Hail Hoar-frost or the like which may be proved by their return into the former figure of water whensoever they dissolve for wheresoever is a total change or alteration of the interior natural motions of a Creature when once dissolved it will never regain its former figure and therefore although the exterior figures of congealed water are various and different yet they have all but one interior figure which is water into which they return as into their principle whensoever they change their exterior figures by dissolving and dilating motions for as a laughing and frowning countenance doth not change the nature of a man so neither do they the nature of water I do not speak of artificial but of natural congealed figures whose congelation is made by their own natural figurative motions But although all congelations are some certain kind of motions yet there may be as many particular sorts of congelations as there are several sorts of frozen or congealed bodies for though I name but one figure of Snow another of Ice another of Hail c. yet I do not deny but there may be numerous particular sorts and figures of Ice Snow Hail c. all which may have their several freezing or congealing motions nay freezing in this respect may very well be compared to burning as being opposite actions and as there are various sorts of burning much differing from each other so there are of freezing for although all burning is of the nature of fire yet not all burning is an elemental fire for example Lime and some Vegetables and other Creatures have burning effects and yet are not an Elemental fire neither doth the Sun and ordinary fire burn just alike The same may be said of Freezing and I observe that fluid and rare parts are more apt to freeze then solid and dense bodies for I do not believe all sorts of metal can freeze so as water or watery liquors unless they were made liquid I will not say that Minerals are altogether insensible of cold or frost but they do not freeze like liquid bodies nay not all liquid bodies will freeze as for example some sorts of spirituous liquors Oil Vinous spirits Chymical extracts c. which proves that not all that is to say the infinite parts of Nature are subject to one particular kind of action to wit the action of freezing for if Congelation did extend to the infinite parts of Nature it would not be a finite and particular but an infinite action but as I said liquid bodies are more apt to freeze especially water and watery liquors then dense and hard bodies or some sorts of oil and spirits for as we see that fire cannot have the same operation on all bodies alike but some it causes to consume and turn to ashes some it hardens some it softens and on some it hath no power at all So its opposite Frost or Cold cannot congeal every natural body but onely those which are apt to freeze or imitate the motions of cold Neither do all these bodies freeze alike but some slower some quicker some into such and some into another figure as for example even in one kind of Creatures as animals some Beasts as Foxes Bears and the like are not so much sensible of cold as Man and some other animal Creatures and dead animals or parts of dead animals will freeze much sooner then those which are living not that living animals have more natural life then those we call dead for animals when dissolved from their animal figure although they have not animal life yet they have life according to the nature of the figure into which they did change but because of their different perceptions for a dead or dissolved animal as it is of another kind of figure then a living animal so it has also another kind of perception which causes it to freeze sooner then a living animal doth But I cannot apprehend what some Learned mean by the powerful effects of cold upon inanimate bodies whether they mean that cold is onely animate and all other bodies inanimate or whether both cold and other bodies on which it works be inanimate if the later I cannot conceive how inanimate bodies can work upon each other I mean such bodies as have neither life nor motion for without life or motion there can be no action but if the former I would fain know whether Cold be self-moving if not I ask What is that which moves it Is it an Immaterial Spirit or some corporeal being If an Immaterial Spirit we must allow that this Spirit is either self-moving or must be moved by another if it be moved by another Being and that same Being again by another we shall after this manner run into infinite and conclude nothing But if that Imaterial Spirit have self-motion why may not a natural corporeal being have the like they being both Creatures of God who can as well grant self-motion to a corporeal as to an incorporeal Being nay I am not able to comprehend how Motion can be attributed to a Spirit I mean natural motion which is onely a propriety of a body or of a corporeal Being but if Cold be self-moving then Nature is self-moving for the cause can be no less then the effect and if Nature be self-moving no part of Nature can be inanimate for as the body is so are its parts and as the cause so its effects Thus some Learned do puzle themselves and the world with useless distinctions into animate and inanimate Creatures and are so much afraid of self-motion as they will rather maintain absurdities and errors then allow any other self-motion in Nature but what is in themselves for they would fain be above Nature and petty Gods if they could but make themselves Infinite not considering that they are but parts of Nature as all other Creatnres Wherefore I for my part will rather believe as sense and reason guides me and not according to interest so as to extoll my own kind above all the rest or above Nature her self And thus to return to Cold as Congelation is not a Universal or Infinite action which extends to the Infinite parts of Nature and causes not the like effects in those Creatures that are perceptible of it so I do also observe that not any other sorts of bodies but Water will congeal into the figure of Snow when as there are many that will turn into the figure of Ice besides I observe that air doth not freeze beyond
able certainly to determine of what substance it is yet to our perception it appears not to be a fluid but a solid body by reason it keeps constantly the same exterior figure and never appears either ebbing or flowing or flashing as lightning is nor does the whole figure of its body dissolve and change into another figure nevertheless it being a natural creature and consisting of self-moving parts there is no question but its parts are subject to continual changes and alterations although not perceptible by our sight by reason of its distance and the weakness of our organs for although this Terrestrial Globe which we inhabit in its outward figure nay in its interior nature remains still the same yet its parts do continually change by perpetual compositions and dissolutions as is evident and needs no proof The same may be said of the Sun Moon Stars and Planets which are like a certain kind or species of Creatures as for example Animal or Man-kind which species do always last although their particulars are subject to perpetual productions and dissolutions And thus it is with all composed figures or parts of Nature whose chief action is Respiration if I may so call it that is composition and division of parts caused by the self-moving power of Nature 34. Of Telescopes MAny Ingenious and Industrious Artists take much labour and pains in studying the natures and figures of Celestial objects and endeavour to discover the causes of their appearances by Telescopes and such like Optick Instruments but if Art be not able to inform us truly of the natures of those Creatures that are near us How may it delude us in the scarch and enquiry we make of those things that are so far from us We see how Multiplying-glasses do present numerous pictures of one object which he that has not the experience of the deceitfulness of such Glasses would really think to be so many objects The like deceits may be in other optick Instruments for ought man knows 'T is true we may perhaps through a Telescope see a Steeple a matter of 20 or 30 miles off but the same can a natural Eye do if it be not defective nor the medium obstructed without the help of any such Instrument especially if one stand upon a high place But put the case a man should be upon the Alps he would hardly see the City of Paris from thence although he looked through a Telescope never so perfect and had no obstruction to hinder his sight and truly the Stars and Planets are far more distant from us then Paris from the Alps. It is well known that the sense of sight requires a certain proportion of distance betwixt the Eye and the Object which being exceeded it cannot perform its office for if the object be either too near or too far off the sight cannot discern it and as I have made mention in my Philosophical Letters of the nature of those Guns that according to the proportion of the length of the barrel shoot either further or shorter for the Barrel must have its proportioned length which being exceeded the Gun will shoot so much shorter as the barrel is made longer so may Prospective-glasses perhaps direct the sense of seeing within a certain compass of distance which distance surely the Stars and Planets do far exceed I mean so as to discern their figures as we do of other objects that are near us for concerning their exterior progressive motions we may observe them with our natural eyes as well as through Artificial Tubes We can see the Suns rising and setting and the progressive motion of the Moon and other Planets but yet we cannot see their natural figures what they are nor what makes them move for we cannot perceive progressive local Motion otherwise then by change of distance that is by composition and division of Parts which is commonly though improperly called change of Place and no glasses or tubes can do more Some affirm they have discovered many new Stars never seen before by the help of Telescopes but whether this be true or not or whether it be onely a delusion of the glasses I will not dispute for I having no skill neither in the art of Opticks nor in Astronomy may chance to err and therefore I will not eagerly affirm what I do not certainly know I onely endeavour to deliver my judgment as reason directs me and not as sense informs or rather deludes me and I chose rather to follow the guidance of regular Reason then of deluding Art 35. Of Knowledg and Perception in General SInce Natural Knowledg and Perception is the Ground and Principle not onely of Philosophy both Speculative and Experimental but of all other Arts and Sciences nay of all the Infinite particular actions of Nature I thought it not amiss to joyn to the end of this part a full declaration of my opinion concerning that subject First It is to be observed That Matter Self-motion and Self-knowledg are inseparable from each other and make Nature one Material self-moving and self-knowing Body 2. Nature being Material is dividable into parts and being infinite in quantity or bulk her parts are infinite in number 3. No part can subsist singly or by it self precised from the rest but they are all parts of one infinite body for though such parts may be separated from such parts and joined to other parts and by this means may undergo infinite changes by infinite compositions and divisions yet no part can be separated from the body of Nature 4. And hence it follows That the parts of Nature are nothing else but the particular changes of particular figures made by self-motion 5. As there can be no annihilation so there can neither be a new Creation of the least part or particle of Nature or else Nature would not be infinite 6. Nature is purely corporeal or material and there is nothing that belongs to or is a part of Nature which is not corporeal so that natural and material or corporeal are one and the same and therefore spiritual beings non-beings mixt beings and whatsoever distinctions the Learned do make are no ways belonging to Nature Neither is there any such thing as an Incorporeal motion for all actions of Nature are corporeal being natural and there can no abstraction be made of Motion or Figure from Matter or Body but they are inseparably one thing 7. As Infinite Matter is divided into Infinite parts so Infinite knowledg is divided into Infinite particular knowledges and Infinite self-motion into Infinite particular self-self-actions 8. There is no other difference between self-knowledg and particular knowledges then betwixt self-motion and particular self-self-actions or betwixt a whole and its parts a cause and its effects for self-knowledg is the ground and principle of all particular knowledges as self-motion is the ground and principle of all particular actions changes and varieties of natural figures 9. As Infinite Nature has an infinite self-motion and self-knowledg so every
and inherent or innate knowledg yet the perceptions vary according to their objects and according to the changes and compositions of their own parts for as parts are composed with parts so are their perceptions nay not onely perceptions but also particular self-knowledges alter according to the alteration of their own parts or figures not from being self-knowledg for self-knowledg can be but self-knowledg but from being such or such a particular self-knowledg and since there is no part or particle of Nature but is self-knowing or has its particular self-knowledg it is certain that as the interior nature of the figure alters by the changes of motion the interior self-knowledg of that figure alters too for if a Vegetable should turn into a Mineral it cannot retain the self-knowledg of a Vegetable but it must of necessity change into the self-knowledg of a Mineral for nothing can have a knowledg of it self otherwise then what it is and because self-knowledg is the ground of Perception as self-knowledg alters so doth perception I mean that kind of perception that belonged to such a figure alters to another kind of perception proper to another figure so that it is with perception as it is with other Creatures For example as there are several kinds of Creatures as Elements Animals Minerals Vegetables c. so there are also several kinds of perceptions as Animal Vegetative Mineral Elemental perception and as there are different particular sorts of these mentioned kinds of Creatures so there are also of perceptions nay as one particular Creature of these sorts consists of different parts so every part has also different perceptions for self-motion as it is the cause of all the various changes of figures and parts of Nature so it is also of the variety of perceptions for put the case Matter were of one infinite figure it would have but self-knowledg or at least no variety of perceptions because it would have no variety of corporeal figurative motions and it is well to be observed that although numerous different parts may agree in perception that is their sensitive and rational figurative motions may all perceive one and the same object yet the manner of their perceptions are different according to the difference of their figures or rather of their interior corporeal figurative motions for example a Man a Tree and a Stone may all have perceptions of one object but yet their perceptions are not alike for the Tree has not an Animal or Mineral but a Vegetative perception and so has the Man not a Vegetative or Mineral but an Animal perception and the Stone not an Animal or Vegetative but a Mineral perception each according to the interior nature of its own figure Q. 10. Whether there could be Self-knowledg without Perception I answer Self-knowledg being the ground of all Perceptions which are nothing else but exterior knowledges might as well subsist without them as Matter would subsist without Motion but since self-motion is the cause of all the various changes of figures and parts and of all the orderly Productions Generations Transformations Dissolutions and all other actions of Nature These cannot be performed without Perception for all actions are knowing and perceptive and were there no perception there could not possibly be any such actions for how should parts agree either in the generation composition or dissolution of composed figures if they had no knowledg or perception of each other Therefore although self-knowledg is a fixt interior Being and the ground of all perceptions yet were there no self-motion there could be no action and consequently no perception at least no variety of perceptions in Nature but since Nature is one self-moving and self-knowing body self-knowledg can no more be separated from perception then motion can be divided from matter but every part and particle of Nature were it an Atome as it is self-moving so it is also self-knowing and perceptive But yet it is not necessary that Perception must onely be betwixt neighbouring or adjoining parts for some parts may very well perceive each other at a distance and when other parts are between nay some perceptions do require a distance of the object as for example the optick perception in Animals as I have declared before where I do mention the requisites of the Animal perception of sight whereof if one be wanting there is either no perception at all I mean no perception of seeing in that Animal or the perception is imperfect But some may ask Whether in such a case that is in the perception of an object which is distant from the sentient the intermediate parts are as well perceived as the object it self to which the perception directy tends I answer That if the intermediate parts be subject to that kind of perception they may as well be perceived as the object that is distant nay sometimes better but most commonly the intermediate parts are but slightly or superficially perceived For example in the forementioned sense of Seeing if the organ of sight be directed to some certain object that is distant and there be some parts between the organ and the object perceptible by the same sense but such as do not hinder or obstruct the perception of the said object not onely the object but also those intermediate parts will be perceived by the optick sense Also if I cast my eye upon an object that is before me in a direct line the eye will not onely perceive the object to which it is chiefly directed but also those parts that are joined to it either beneath or above or on each side of that object at the same point of time and by the same act the sole difference is that the said object is chiefly and of purpose patterned out by the sensitive and rational figurative motions of the eye when as the other intermediate or adjoining parts are but superficially and slghtly looked over And this proves first that Nature is composed of sensitive rational and inanimate matter without any separation or division from each other for could matter be divided into an atome that very atome would have a composition of these three degrees of matter and therefore although the parts of Nature do undergo infinite divisions and compositions so that parts may be composed and divided infinite ways yet these three degrees can never be separated or divided from one another because of their close union and commixture through infinite Nature Next it proves that there can be no single parts in Nature for what commonly are called parts of Nature are nothing else but changes of motion in the infinite body of Nature so that parts figures actions and changes of motion are one and the same no more differing from each other then body place magnitude figure colour c. for self-motion is the cause of the variety of figures and parts of Nature without which although there would nevertheless be parts for wheresoever is matter or body there are parts also yet
when the sensitive do not To which I answer 'T is probable that the rational do many times move to other perceptions then the sensitive as I have often declared but if their actions be orderly and regular then most commonly they move to one and the same perception but reason being the purer and freer part has a more subtil perception then sense for there is great difference between sense and reason concerning the subtilty of their actions sense does perceive as it were in part when as reason perceives generally and in whole for if there be an object which is to be patterned out with all its proprieties the colour of it is perceived onely by sight the smell of it is perceived by the Nose its Sound is perceived by the Ear its taste is perceived by the Tongue and its hardness or softness coldness or heat dryness or moisture is perceived by Touch so that every sense in particular patterns out that object which is proper for it and each has but so much knowledg of the said object as it patterns out for the sight knows nothing of its taste nor the taste of its touch nor the touch of its smell and so forth But the mind patterns out all those figures together so that they are but as one object to it without division which proves that the rational perception being more general is also more perfect then the sensitive and the reason is because it is more free and not incumbred with the burdens of other parts Wherefore the rational can judg better of objects then the sensitive as being more knowing and knows more because it has a more general perception and hath a more general perception because it is more subtile and active and is more subtil and active because it is free and not necessitated to labour on or with any other parts But some may say How is it possible that the rational part being so closely intermixed with the sensitive and the inanimate can move by it self and not be a labourer as well as the sensitive I answer The reason is because the rational part is more pure and finer then the sensitive or any other part of Matter which purity and fineness makes that it is so subtile and active and consequently not necessitated to labour with or on other parts Again Some may ask Whether those intermixed parts continue always together in their particulars as for example whether the same rational parts keep constantly to the same sensitive and inanimate parts as they are commixed I answer Nature is in a perpetual motion and her parts are parts of her own self-moving body wherefore they must of necessity divide and compose but if they divide and compose they cannot keep constantly to the same parts Nevertheless although particular parts are divideable from each other yet the Triumvirate of Nature that is the three chief degrees or parts of Matter to wit rational sensitive and inanimate which belong to the constitution of Nature cannot be separated or divided from each other in general so that rational matter may be divided from sensitive and inanimate and these again from the rational but they must of necessity continue in this commixture as long as Nature lasts In short rational sensitive and inanimate Matter are divideable in their particulars that is such a particular part of inanimate Matter is not bound to such a particular part of sensitive or rational Matter c. but they are individeable in general that is from each other for wheresoever is body there is also a commixture of these three degrees of Matter 4. Some may say How is it possible That Reason can be above Sense and that the rational perception is more subtile and knowing then the sensitive since in my Philosophical Opinions I have declared that the sensitive perception doth inform the rational or that Reason perceives by the information of the senses To which I answer My meaning is not that Reason has no other perception but by the information of the senses for surely the rational perception is more subtile piercing and penetrating or inspective then the sensitive and therefore more intelligent and knowing but when I say that sense informs reason I speak onely of such perceptions where the rational figurative motions take patterns from the sensitive and do not work voluntarily or by rote Besides It is to be observed That in the mentioned Book I compare Thoughts which are the actions of the rational figurative motions to the sensitive Touch so that Touch is like a Thought in sense and Thought like a Touch in reason But there is great difference in their purity for though the actions of Touch and Thought are much after the same manner yet the different degrees of sense and reason or of animate sensitive and rational matter cause great difference between them and as all sensitive perception is a kind of touch so all rational perception is a kind of thoughtfulness But mistake me not when I say Thought is like Touch for I do not mean that the rational perception is caused by the conjunction or joining of one part to another or that it is an exterior touch but an interior knowledg for all self-knowledg is a kind of thoughtfulness and that Thought is a rational Touch as Touch is a sensitive Thought for the exterior perceptions of reason resemble the interior actions or knowledg of sense Neither do I mean that the perception of touch is made by pressure and reaction no more then the perception of sight hearing or the like but the patterns of outward objects being actions of the body sentient are as it were a self-touch or self-feeling both in the sensitive and rational perceptions Indeed that subtile and learned Philosopher who will perswade us that Perception is made by pressure and reaction makes Perception onely a fantasme For says he Reaction makes a Fantasme and that is Perception 5. Some perhaps will say That if the Perception of the exterior animal senses be made by Patterning then that animal which hath two or more eyes by patterning out an exterior object will have a double or trebble perception of it according to the number of its eyes I answer That when the corporeal motions in each eye move irregularly as for example when one eye moves this and the other another way or when the eyes look asquint then they do not pattern out the object directly as they ought but when the eyes move regularly then they pattern out one and the same object alike as being fixt but upon one point and the proof thereof is if there be two eyes we may observe that both have their perceptions apart as well as jointly because those parts that are in the middle of each eye do not make at the same time the same perceptions with those that are the side or extream parts thereof but their perceptions are different from each other For example the eyes of a Man or some other Animal pattern
were just the same as its exterior figure as for example if an artificial eye or ear were of animal flesh and the like it would have the like perception otherways not Q. 17. How do we perceive Light Fire Air c I answer By their exterior figures as we do other objects As for example my Eye patterns out the exterior figure of Light and my Touch patterns out the exterior figure of Heat c. But then you will say If the Eye did pattern out the figure of Light it would become Light it self and if Touch did pattern out the figure of Heat it would become Fire I answer No more then when a Painter draws Fire or Light the copy should be a natural Fire or Light For there is difference betwixt the copy and the original and it is to be observed that in the Perception of sense especially of sight there must be a certain distance betwixt the object and the sentient parts for the further those are from each other the weaker is the perception by reason no corporeal figurative motion is infinite but finite and therefore it can have but fueh a degree of power strength or activity as belongs to such a figurative action or such a part or degree of Matter But as for Fire and Light it is a certain and evident proof that some perceptions at least those of the exterior animal senses are made by patterning for though the nature of Fire and of Light for any thing we know be ascending yet if Fire be made in such a manner that several may stand about underneath and above it yet they all have the perception of the heat of fire in what place soever provided they stand within a limited or determinate compass of it I say of the heat which is the effect of fire for that is onely patterned out and not the substance of the flame or fire it self But on the contrary if the heat of the fire did actually and really spread it self out to all the places nominated as well downwards upwards and sideways then certainly it would be wasted in a little time and leave its cause which is the fire heatless Besides that there are Copies and Originals and that some perceptions are made by patterning is evident by the appearance of one Candle in several distances which several appearances can be nothing else but several copies of that Candle made by those parts that take patterns from the Original which makes me also believe that after the same manner many Stars which we take for Originals may be but so many copies or patterns of one Star made by the figurative motions of those parts where they appear Q. 18. Whether the Optick Perception is made in the Eye or Brain or in both I answer The perception of Sight when awake is made on the outside of the Eye but in sleep on the inside and as for some sorts of Thoughts or Conceptions which are the actions of reason they are to my apprehension made in the inner part of the head although I am not able to determine properly what part it is for all the body is perceptive and has sense and reason and not onely the head the onely difference is that the several actions of several parts cause several sorts of perceptions and the rational parts being the most active and purest and moving within themselves can make more figures in the same compass or magnitude and in a much shorter time then the sensitive which being burthened with the inanimate parts cannot act so agily and freely Neverthess some of the sensitive actions are much agiler and nimbler then others as we may perceive in several sorts of productions But the rational parts being joined with the sensitive in the exterior parts of a figure do for the most part work together with the same otherwise when they move by themselves in Thoughts Conceptions Remembrance and the like they are more inward as within the head for there are Perceptions of interior parts as well as of exterior I mean within a composed figure by reason all parts are perceptive Neither does this prove that if there be so many perceptions in one composed figure there must be numerous several perceptions of one object in that same figure for every part knows its own work or else there would be a confusion in Natures actions Neither are all perceptions alike but as I said according as the several actions are so are the perceptions Q. 19. What is the reason that the nearer a stick or finger is held against a Concave-glass the more does the pattern of it made by the glass appear to issue out of the glass and meet with the object that is without it I answer 'T is not that something really issues out of the Glass but as in a plain Looking-glass the further the object goes from it the more does its copy or image seem to be within the glass So in the same manner does the length of the stick which is the measure of the object or distance that moves For as to a man that rides in a Coach or sails upon Water the Shore Trees Hedges Meadows and Fields seem to move when as yet 't is the man that moves from them so it is with the figure in a Looking-glass Wherefore it is onely a mistake in the animal sense to take the motion of one for the motion of the other Q. 20. Whether a Part or Figure repeated by the same Motions be the same part or figure as the former or onely like the former as also whether an action repeated be the same with the former I answer That if the Parts Figures and Actions be the same they will always remain the same although they be dissolved and repeated millions of times as for example if you make a figure of wax and dissolve it and make that figure again just as it was before and of the same parts and by the same action it will be the very same figure but if you alter either the parts or the figure it may be like the former figure but not the very same The like for action if one and the same action be repeated without any alteration it is nothing else but a repetition of the corporeal figurative motions but if there be any alteration in it it is not made by the same figurative motions and consequently 't is not the same action for though the self-moving parts be the same yet the figurative motions are not the same not that those figurative motions are not in the same parts but not repeated in the same manner Wherefore it is well to be observed that a Repetition is of the same parts figures and actions that were before but an alteration is not a repetition for wheresoever is but the least alteration there can be no exact repetition Q. 21. Whether there may be a Remembrance in Sense as well as there is in Reason I answer Yes for Remembrance is nothing else
works of Natural Philosophy 1. There is but one Matter and infinite Parts one self-motion and infinite Actions one Self-knowledg and infinite particular Knowledges and Perceptions 2. All parts of Nature are living knowing and perceptive because all are self-moving for self-motion is the cause of all particular effects figures actions varieties changes lives knowledges perceptions c. in Nature and makes the onely difference between animate and inanimate Matter 3. The chief and general actions of Nature are division and composition of parts both which are done but by one act for at the same time when parts separate themselves from such parts they join to other parts and this is the cause there can be no Vacuum nor no single parts in Nature 4. Every particular part of figure is infinitely divided and composed from and with other parts 5. The infinite divisions and compositions hinder that Nature cannot run into extreams in her particulars but keep the parts and actions of Nature in an equal ballance 6. The Inanimate part of Matter has life sense and self-knowledg as well as the animate but being not moving in it self or its own Nature it has not such a perceptive sense and self-knowledg nor such an active life as the animate hath 7. The parts of Inanimate Matter alter according to their commixture with the Animate and so do their particular self-knowledges 8. As parts alter by the changes of motions so do particular perceptions 9. Though all perceptions are figurative actions yet no particular Creature can undoubtedly affirm that all are made by patterning or imitation by reason as the parts and actions of Nature are infinite so are also particular perceptions and being infinite they cannot be known by any particular Creature 10. There are besides exterior perceptions voluntary actions both of sense and reason not made by imitation but freely and by rote and these may be called conceptions rather then perceptions 11. Those are much in the wrong who believe that man can know no more then what his five senses do inform him for the rational part which is the purest subtilest most active and inspective part of Nature does inform it self of things which the sensitive cannot as for example how was the new world and the Antipodes found out for they were neither seen nor heard of nor tasted nor smelled nor touched Truly our reason does many times perceive that which our senses cannot and some things our senses cannot perceive until reason informs them for there are many inventions which owe their rise and beginning onely to reason It is not sense but reason that knows or perceives there is something beyond it self and beyond Nature which is the Onely Eternal and Omnipotent God and there can be no higher conception then this for what is beyond it is supernatural and belongs to supernatural Creatures as for example those divine souls which God has given to men above their rational material souls but as for the wicked souls they come not from God but are irregularities of Nature which God certainly will punish as a Master does the evil actions of his Servant 12. Art is but a Natural Creature or effect and not a Creator of any thing 13. Colour Magnitude Figure Place Time Gravity Levity Density Rarity Compositions Divisions Alterations c. are all one and the same with self-moving Matter and nothing else but the various actions of Nature which actions can no more be separated from body then body can from Matter or parts from their whole for all that is natural is corporeal and therefore the distinction into substances and accidents is to no purpose since there cannot really be no not imagined such a thing as an incorporeal or substanceless motion or action in Nature But some perhaps will say If every part and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Nature has Magnitude Colour Figure Place c. How is it possible that they can be one and the same with body since they are subject to several perceptions To which I answer The several perceptions do not make them to be several bodies but they are patterned out or perceived as several proprieties or attributes of one body or as several effects of one cause for though there is but one cause in Nature which is self-moving matter yet that onely cause must of necessity have several effects or proprieties as Figure Colour Place Magnitude c. and if I may without offence make a comparison between the Creator and a Creature God is but one in his Essence as one Infinite and Eternal God and yet has several Divine Attributes and though the parts of Nature cannot comprehend conceive or perceive God yet they may conceive somewhat of his several Attributes after several manners or wayes In the like manner although there is but one matter yet that matter may be perceived after several manners or ways it being impossible that matter or any part of particle of matter although it were single should be without those several mentioned proprieties for can any one conceive or imagine a body without Figure Magnitude Place or Colour were it as little as an Atome and since there are no Natural Figures or Creatures but consist of parts those composed Figures may have a different Magnitude Place Colour c. from their parts and particles were they single but being self-moving those figures may alter by self-motion for 't is as impossible for a body to be without parts as for parts to be without body but if matter were not self-moving there would neither be alterations perceptions nor any natural actions although there might be a fixt self-knowledg in Natures parts And thus it is no wonder how there can be several perceptions of one figure by reason there 's no figure but is composed of parts and as we can conceive a whole and its parts which yet are one and the same thing several ways for a whole we conceive as a composition of parts and parts we conceive as a division of the whole so we may Figure Place Magnitude c. And as we cannot conceive nor perceive motion without body so neither can we conceive those mentioned proprieties without body or body without them they being nothing else but the corporeal figurative actions of Nature FURTHER OBSERVATIONS UPON EXPERIMENTAL PHILOSOPHY Reflecting withal upon some Principal Subjects in CONTEMPLATIVE PHILOSOPHY 1. Ancient Learning ought not to be exploded nor the Experimental part of Philosophy preferred before the Speculative IN this present age those are thought the greatest Wits that rail most against the ancient Philosophers especially Aristotle who is beaten by all but whether he deserve such punishment others may judg In my opinion he was a very subtil Philosopher and an ingenious Man 't is true he was subject to errors as well as other men are for there is no creature so perfect but may err nay not Nature her self but God onely who is Omnipotent but if all that err should be accounted fools and destitute of
into earth and of this again into vegetables minerals and animals proves no more but what our senses perceive every day to wit that there is a perpetual change and alteration in all natural parts caused by corporeal self-motion by which rare bodies change into dense and dense into rare water into slime slime into earth earth into animals vegetables and minerals and those again into earth earth into slime slime into water and so forth But I wonder why rational men should onely rest upon water and go no further since daily experience informs them that water is changed into vapour and vapour into air for if water be resolveable into other bodies it cannot be a prime cause and consequently no principle of Nature wherefore they had better in my opinion to make Air the principle of all things 'T is true Water may produce many creatures as I said before by a composition with other or change of its own parts but yet I dare say it doth kill or destroy as many nay more then it produces witness vegetables and others which Husbandmen and Planters have best experience of and though some animals live in water as their proper Element yet to most it is destructive I mean as for their particular natures nay if men do but dwell in a moist place or near marrish grounds or have too much watery humors in their bodies they 'l sooner die then otherwise But put the case water were a principle of Natural things yet it must have motion or else it would never be able to change into so many figures and this motion must either be naturally inherent in the substance of water or it must proceed from some exterior agent if from an exterior agent then this agent must either be material or immaterial also if all motion in Nature did proceed from pressure of parts upon parts then those parts which press others must either have motion inherent in themselves or if they be moved by others we must at last proceed to something which has motion in it self and is not moved by another but moves all things and if we allow this Why may not we allow self-motion in all things for if one part of Matter has self-motion it cannot be denied of all the rest but if immaterial it must either be God himself or created supernatural spirits As for God he being immoveable and beyond all natural motion cannot actually move Matter neither is it Religious to say God is the Soul of Nature for God is no part of Nature as the soul is of the body And immaterial spirits being supernatural cannot have natural attributes or actions such as is corporeal natural motion Wherefore it remains that Matter must be naturally self-moving and consequently all parts of Nature all being material so that not onely Water Earth Fire and Air but all other natural bodies whatsoever have natural self-motion inherent in themselves by which it is evident that there can be no other principle in Nature but this self-moving Matter and that all the rest are but effects of this onely cause Some are of opinion That the three Catholick or Universal principles of Nature are Matter Motion and Rest and others with Epicure that they are Magnitude Figure and Weight but although Matter and Motion or rather self-moving Matter be the onely principle of Nature yet they are mistaken in dividing them from each other and adding rest to the number of them for Matter and Motion are but one thing and cannot make different principles aud so is figure weight and magnitude 'T is true Matter might subsist without Motion but not Motion without Matter for there is no such thing as an immaterial Motion but Motion must necessarily be of something also if there be a figure it must of necessity be a figure of something the same may be said of magnitude and weight there being no such thing as a mean between something and nothing that is between body and no body in Nature If Motion were immaterial it is beyond all humane capacity to conceive how it could be abstracted from something much more how it could be a principle to produce a natural being it might easier be believed that Matter was perishable or reduceable into nothing then that motion figure and magnitude should be separable from Matter or be immaterial as the opinion is of those who introduce a Vacuum in Nature and as for Rest I wonder how that can be a principle of any production change or alteration which it self acts nothing Others are for Atomes and insensible particles consisting of different figures and particular natures not otherwise united but by a bare apposition as they call it by which although perhaps the composed body obtains new qualities yet still the ingredients retain each their own Nature and in the destruction of the composed body those that are of one sort associate and return into Fire Water Earth c. as they were before But whatever their opinion of Atoms be first I have heretofore declared that there can be no such things as single bodies or Atomes in Nature Next if there were any such particles in composed bodies yet they are but parts or effects of Matter and not principles of Nature or Natural beings Lastly Chymists do constitute the principles of all natural bodies Salt Sulphur and Mercury But although I am not averse from believing that those ingredients may be mixt with other parts of Nature in the composition of natural figures and that especially Salt may be extracted out of many Creatures yet that it should be the constitutive principle of all other natural parts or figures seems no ways conformable to truth for salt is no more then other effects of Nature and although some extractions may convert some substances into salt figures and some into others for Art by the leave of her Mistress Nature doth oftentimes occasion an alteration of natural Creatures into artificial yet these extractions cannot inform us how those natural creatures are made and of what ingredients they consist for they do not prove that the same Creatures are composed of Salt or mixt with Salt but cause onely those substances which they extract to change into saline figures like as others do convert them into Chymical spirits all which are but Hermaphroditical effects that is between natural and artificial Just as a Mule partakes both of the nature or figure of a Horse and an Ass Nevertheless as Mules are very beneficial for use so many Chymical effects provided they be discreetly and seasonably used for Minerals are no less beneficial to the life and health of Man then Vegetables and Vegetables may be as hurtful and destructive as Minerals by an unseasonable and unskilful application besides there may be Chymical extracts made of Vegetables as well as of Minerals but these are bestused in the height or extremity of some diseases like as cordial waters in fainting fits and some Chymical spirits are as far beyond cordial waters