different from the natural colours of Beasts Birds Fish Worms Flies c. Concerning their interior Natures I 'le alledg but few examples although a Peacock Parrot Pye or the like are gay Birds yet there is difference in their Gayety Again although all men have flesh and blood and are all of one particular kind yet their interior natures and dispositions are so different as seldom any two men are of the same complexion and as there is difference in their complexions so in the exterior shapes and features of their exterior parts in so much as it is a wonder to see two men just alike nay as there is difference in the corporeal parts of their bodies so in the corporeal parts of their minds according to the old Proverb So many Men so many Minds For there are different Understandings Fancies Conceptions Imaginations Judgments Wits Memories Affections Passions and the like Again as in some Creatures there is difference both in their exterior features and interior natures so in others there is found a resemblance onely in their exterior and a difference in their interior parts and in others again a resemblance in their interior and a difference in their exterior parts as for example black Ebony and black Marble are both of different natures one being Wood and the other Stone and yet they resemble each other in their exterior colour and parts also white black and gray Marble are all of one interior Nature and yet to differ in their exterior colour and parts The same may be said of Chalk and Milk which are both white and yet of several natures as also of a Turquois and the Skie which both appear of one colour and yet their natures are different besides there are so many stones of different colours nay stones of one sort as for example Diamonds which appear of divers colours and yet are all of the same Nature also Man's flesh and the flesh of some other animals doth so much resemble as it can hardly be distinguished and yet there is great difference betwixt Man and Beasts Nay not onely particular Creatures but parts of one and the same Creature are different as for example every part of mans body has a several touch and every bit of meat we eat has a several taste witness the several parts as legs wings breast head c. of some Fowl as also the several parts of Fish and other Creatures All which proves the Infinite variety in Nature and that Nature is a perpetually self-moving body dividing composing changing forming and transforming her parts by self-corporeal figurative motions and as she has infinite corporeal figurative motions which are her parts so she has an infinite wisdom to order and govern her infinite parts for she has Infinite sense and reason which is the cause that no part of hers is ignorant but has some knowledg or other and this Infinite variety of knowledg makes a general Infinite wisdom in Nature And thus I have declared how Colours are made by the figurative corporeal motions and that they are as various and different as all other Creatures and when they appear either more or less it is by the variation of their parts But as for the experiment of Snow which some do alledg that in a darkned room it is not perceived to have any other light then what it receives doth not prove that the whiteness of Snow is not an inherent and natural colour because it doth not reflect light or because our eye doth not see it no more then we can justly say that blood is not blood or flesh is not flesh in the dark if our eye do not perceive it or that the interior parts of Nature are colourless because the exterior light makes no reflexion upon them Truly in my judgment those opinions that no parts have colour but those which the light reflects on are neither probable to sense nor reason for how can we conceive any corporeal part without a colour In my opinion it is as impossible to imagine a body without colour as it is impossible for the mind to conceive a natural immaterial substance and if so pure a body as the mind cannot be colourless much less are grosser bodies But put the case all bodies that are not subject to exterior light were black as night yet they would be of a colour for black is as much a colour as green or blew or yellow or the like but if all the interior parts of Nature be black then in my opinion Nature is a very sad and melancholy Lady and those which are of such an opinion surely their minds are more dark then the interior parts of Nature I will not hope that clouds of dusty Atomes have obscured them But if not any Creature can have imagination without figure and colour much less can the optick sensitive parts for the exterior sensitive parts are more gross then the rational and therefore they cannot be without colour no more then without figure and although the exterior parts of Animals are subject to our touch yet the countenances of those several exterior parts are no more perceptible by our touch then several colours are By Countenances I mean the several exterior postures motions or appearances of each part for as there is difference betwixt a face and a countenance for a face remains constantly the same when as the countenance of a face may and doth change every moment as for example there are smiling frowning joyful sad angry countenances c. so there is also a difference between the exterior figure or shape of a Creature and the several and various motions appearances or postures of the exterior parts of that Creatures exterior figure whereof the former may be compared to a Face and the later to a Countenance But leaving this nice distinction If any one should ask me Whether a Barbary-horse or a Gennet or a Turkish or an English-horse can be known and distinguished in the dark I answer They may be distinguished as much as the blind man whereof mention hath been made before may discern colours nay more for the figure of a gross exterior shape of a body may sooner be perceived then the more fine and pure countenance of Colours To shut up this my discourse of Colours I will briefly repeat what I have said before viz. that there are natural and inherent colours which are fixt and constant and superficial colours which are changeable and inconstant as also Artificial colours made by Painters and Dyers and that it is impossible that any constant colour should be made by inconstant Atomes and various lights 'T is true there are streams of dust or dusty Atomes which seem to move variously upon which the Sun or light makes several reflections and refractions but yet I do not see nor can I believe that those dusty particles and light are the cause of fixt and inherent colours and therefore if Experimental Philosophers have no firmer grounds and principles then
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
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
parts of animal bodies after eating them would swell and burn more then the exterior onely by touching them And as for stings of Bees whether they be poysonous or not I will not certainly determine any thing nor whether their stings be of no other use as some say then onely for defence or revenge but this I know that if a Bee once looseth its sting it becomes a Drone which if so then surely the sting is useful to the Bee either in making Wax and Honey or in drawing mixing and tempering the several sorts of juices or in penetrating and piercing into Vegetables or other bodies after the manner of broaching or tapping to cause the Liquor to issue out or in framing the structure of their comb and the like for surely Nature doth not commonly make useless and unprofitable things parts or creatures Neither doth her design tend to an evil effect although I do not deny but that good and useful instruments may be and are often imployed in evil actions The truth is I find that stings are of such kind of figures as fire is and fire of such a kind of figure as stings are but although they be all of one general kind nevertheless they are different in their particular kinds for as Animal kind contains many several and different particular kinds or sorts of animals so the like do Vegetables and other kinds of Creatures 8. Of the beard of a wild Oat THose that have observed through a Microscope the beard of a wild Oat do relate that it is onely a small black or brown bristle growing out of the side of the inner husk which covers the grain of a wild Oat and appears like a small wreath'd sprig with two clefts if it be wetted in water it will appear to unwreath it self and by degrees to streighten its knee and the two clefts will become streight but if it be suffered to dry again it will by degrees wreath it self again and so return into its former posture The cause of which they suppose to be the differing texture of its parts which seeming to have two substances one very porous loose and spongy into which the watry steams of air may very easily be forced which thereby will grow swell'd and extended and a second more hard and close into which the water cannot at all or very little penetrate and this retaining always the same dimensions but the other stretching and shrinking according as there is more or less water or moisture in its pores 't is thought to produce this unwreathing and wreathing But that this kind of motion whether it be caused by heat and cold or by dryness and moisture or by any greater or less force proceeding either from gravity and weight or from wind which is the motion of the air or from some springing body or the like should be the very first foot-step of sensation and animate motion and the most plain simple and obvious contrivance that Nature has made use of to produce a motion next to that of rarefaction and condensation by heat and cold as their opinion is I shall not easily be perswaded to believe for if Animate motion was produced this way it would in my opinion be but a weak and irregular motion Neither can I conceive how these or any other parts could be set a moving if Nature her self were not selfmoving but onely moved Nor can I believe that the exterior parts of objects are able to inform us of all their interior motions for our humane optick sense looks no further then the exterior and superficial parts of solid or dense bodies and all Creatures have several corporeal figurative motions one within another which cannot be perceived neither by our exterior senses nor by their exterior motions as for example our Optick sense can perceive and see through a transparent body but yet it cannot perceive what that transparent bodies figurative motions are or what is the true cause of its transparentness neither is any Art able to assist our sight with such optick instruments as may give us a true information thereof for what a perfect natural eye cannot perceive surely no glass will be able to present 9. Of the Eyes of Flies I Cannot wonder enough at the strange discovery made by the help of the Microscope concerning the great number of eyes observed in Flies as that for example in a gray Drone-flie should be found clusters which contain about 14000 eyes which if it be really so then those Creatures must needs have more of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sense then those that have but two or one eye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot believe that so many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be made for no more use then one or two eyes are for though Art the emulating Ape of Nature makes often vain and useless things yet I cannot perceive that Nature her self doth so But a greater wonder it is to me that Man with the twinkling of one eye can observe so many in so small a Creature if it be not a deceit of the optick instrument for as I have mentioned above Art produces most commonly hermaphroditical figures and it may be perhaps that those little pearls or globes which were taken for eyes in the mentioned Flie are onely transparent knobs or glossie shining spherical parts of its body making refractions of the rayes of light and reflecting the pictures of exterior objects there being many Creatures that have such shining protuberances and globular parts and those full of quick motion which yet are not eyes Truly my reason can hardly be perswaded to believe that this Artificial Informer I mean the Microscope should be so true as it is generally thought for in my opinion it more deludes then informs It is well known that if a figure be longer broader and bigger then its nature requires it is not its natural figure and therefore those Creatures or parts of Creatures which by Art appear bigger then naturally they are cannot be judged according to their natural figure since they do not appear in their natural shape but in an artificial one that is in a shape or figure magnified by Art and extended beyond their natural figure and since Man cannot judg otherwise of a figure then it appears besides if the Reflections and Positious of Light be so various and different as Experimental Philophers confess themselves and the instrument not very exact for who knows but hereafter there may be many faults discovered of our modern Microscopes which we are not able to perceive at the present how shall the object be truly known Wherefore I can hardly believe the Truth of this Experiment concerning the numerous Eyes of Flies they may have as I said before glossy and shining globular protuberances but not so many eyes as for example Bubbles of Water Ice as also Blisters and watry Pimples and hundreds the like are shining and transparent Hemispheres reflecting light but yet not eyes Nay if Flies should have so many numerous Eyes why can
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
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
intermediate temper which heat being heightened by the burning motions of fire beyond its natural degree causes a burning and smarting pain in the same part and therefore as the fire did occasion an immoderate heat by an intermixture of its own parts with the parts of the flesh so a moderate heat of the fire may reduce again the natural heat of the same parts and that by a sympathetical agreement betwixt the motions of the Elemental and Animal heat But it is to be observed first that the burning must be done by an intermixture of the fire with the parts of the body Next that the burning must be but skin deep as we use to call it that is the burned part must not be totally overcome by fire or else it will never be restored again Neither are all burned bodies restored after this manner but some for one and the same thing will not in all bodies occasion the like effects as we may see by Fire which being one and the same will not cause all fuels to burn alike and this makes true the old saying One Mans Meat is another Mans Poyson The truth is it cannot be otherwise for though Nature and natural self-moving Matter is but one body and the onely cause of all natural effects yet Nature being divided into infinite corporeal figurative self-moving parts these parts as the effects of that onely cause must needs be various and again proceeding from one infinite cause as one matter they are all but one thing because they are infinite parts of one Infinite body But some may say If Nature be but one body and the Infinite parts are all united into that same body How comes it that there is such an opposition strife and war betwixt the parts of Nature I answer Nature being Material is composeable and divideable and as Composition is made by a mutual agreement of parts so division is made by an opposition or strife betwixt parts which opposition or division doth not obstruct the Union of Nature but on the contrary rather proves that without an opposition of parts there could not be a union or composition of so many several parts and creatures nor no change or variety in Nature for if all the parts did unanimously conspire and agree in their motions and move all but one way there would be but one act or kind of motion in Nature when as an opposition of some parts and a mutual agreement of others is not onely the cause of the Miraculous variety in Nature but it poyses and ballances as it were the corporeal figurative motions which is the cause that Nature is steady and fixt in her self although her parts be in a perpetual motion 29. Several Questions resolved concerning Cold and Frozen Bodies c. FIrst I will give you my answer to the question which is much agitated amongst the Learned concerning Cold to wit Whether it be a Positive quality or a bare Privation of Heat And my opinion is That Cold is both a Positive quality and a privation of heat For whatsoever is a true quality of Cold must needs be a privation of Heat since two opposites cannot subsist together in one and the same part at one point of time By Privation I mean nothing else but an alteration of Natures actions in her several parts or which is all one a change of natural corporeal motions and so the death of Animals may be called a privation of animal life that is a change of the animal motions in that particular Creature which made animal life to some other kind of action which is not animal life And in this sense both Cold and Heat although they be positive qualities or natural beings yet they are also privations that is changes of corporeal figurative motions in several particular Creatures or parts of Nature But what some Learned mean by Bare Privation I cannot apprehend for there 's no such thing as a bare Privation or bare Motion in Nature but all Motion is Corporeal or Material for Matter Motion and Figure are but one thing Which is the reason that to explain my self the better 〈…〉 of Motion I do always add the word corporeal 〈◊〉 â—â—gurative by which I exclude all bare or immaterial Motion which expression is altogether against sense and reason The second Question is Whether Winds have the power to change the Exterior temper of the Air To which I answer That Winds will not onely occasion the Air to be either hot or cold according to their own temper but also Animals and Vegetables and other sorts of Creatures for the sensitive corporeal Motions in several kinds of Creatures do often imitate and figure out the Motions of exterior objects some more some less some regularly and some irregularly and some not at all according to the nature of their own perceptions By which we may observe that the Agent which is the external object has onely an occasional power and the Patient which is the sentient works chiefly the effect by vertue of the perceptive figurative motions in its own sensitive organs or parts Quest. 3. Why those Winds that come from cold Regions are most commonly cold and those that come from hot Regions are for the most part hot I answer The reason is That those Winds have more constantly patterned out the motions of cold or heat in those parts from which they either separated themselves or which they have met withal But it may be questioned Whether all cold and hot winds do bring their heat and cold along with them out of such hot and cold Countries And I am of opinion they do not but that they proceed from an imitation of the nearest parts which take patterns from other parts and these again from the remoter parts so that they are but patterns of other patterns and copies of other copies Quest. 4. Why Fire in some cold Regions will hardly kindle or at least not burn freely I answer This is no more to be wondered at then that some men do die with cold for cold being contrary to fire if it have a predominate power it will without doubt put out the fire not that the cold corporeal motions do destroy fire by their actual power over it but that fire destroys it self by an imitation of the motions of cold so that cold is onely an occasional cause of the fires destruction or at least of the alteration of its motions and the diminution of its strength But some might ask What makes or causes this imitation in several sorts of Cretures I answer The wisdom of Nature which orders her corporeal actions to be always in a mean so that one extream as one may call it does countervail another But then you 'l say There would always be a right and mean temper in all things I answer So there is in the whole that is in Infinite Nature although not in every particular for Natures Wisdom orders her particulars to the best of the whole and although
Elements cannot subsist without other Creatures All which proves that there are no single Parts nor Vacuum nor no 〈◊〉 of loose Atomes in Nature for if such a whole and perfect figure should be divided into millions of other parts and figures yet it is impossible to divide it into single parts by reason there is as much composition as there is division in Nature and as soon as parts are divided from such or such parts at that instant of time and by the same act of division they are joyned to other parts and all this because Nature is a body of a continued infiniteness without any holes or vacuities Nay were it possible that there could be a single part that is a part separated from all the rest yet being a part of Nature it must consist of the same substance as Nature her self but Nature is an Infinite composition of rational sensitive and inanimate matter which although they do constitute but one body because of their close and inseparable conjunction and commixture nevertheless they are several parts for one part is not another part and therefore every part or particle of Nature consisting of the same commixture cannot be single or individable Thus it remains firm that self-motion is the onely cause of the various parts and changes of figures and that when parts move or separate themselves from parts they move and joyn to other parts at the same point of time I do not mean that parts do drive or press upon each other for those are forced and constraint actions when as natural self-motions are free and voluntary and although there are pressures and re-actions in Nature yet they are not universal actions Neither is there any such thing as a stoppage in the actions of Nature nor do parts move through Empty spaces but as some parts joyn so others divide by the same act for although some parts can quit such or such parts yet they cannot quit all parts for example a man goes a hundred miles he leaves or quits those parts from whence he removed first but as soon as he removes from such parts he joyns to other parts were his motion no more then a hairs breadth so that all his journey is nothing else but a division and composition of parts wheresoever he goes by water or by land for it is impossible for him to quit parts in general although it be in his choice to quit such or such particular parts and to join to what parts he will When I speak of Motion I desire to be understood that I do not mean any other but corporeal motion for there is no other motion in Nature so that Generation Dissolution Alteration Augmentation Diminution Transformation nay all the actions of Sense and Reason both interior and exterior and what motions soever in Nature are corporeal although they are not all perceptible by our exterior senses for our senses are too gross to perceive all the curious and various actions of Nature and it would be but a folly to deny what our senses cannot perceive for although Sense and Reason are the same in all Creatures and parts of Nature not having any degrees in themselves no more then self-knowledg hath for self-knowledg can but be self-knowledg and sense and reason can but be sense and reason yet they do not work in all parts of Nature alike but according as they are composed and therefore it is impossible for any humane eye to see the exterior motions of all Creatures except they be of some grosser bodies For who can see the motion of the Air and the like Nay I believe not that all exterior motions of grosser bodies can be perceived by our sight much less their interior actions and by this I exclude Rest for if Matter or corporeal Nature be in a perpetual motion there can be no rest in Nature but what others call rest is nothing else but retentive motions which retentive motions are as active as dispersing motions for Mr. Des Cartes says well that it requires as much action or force to stay a Ship as to set it a float and there is as much action required in keeping parts together as in dispersing them Besides interior motions are as active as some exterior nay some more and I believe if there were a World of Gold whose parts are close and dense it would be as active interiously as a world of air which is fluid and rare would be active exteriously But some may say How is it possible that there can be a motion of bodies without an empty space for one body cannot move in another body I answer Space is change of division as Place is change of magnitude but division and magnitude belong to body therefore space and place cannot be without body but wheresoever is body there is place also Neither can a body leave a place behind it so that the distinction of interior and exterior place is needless because no body can have two places but place and body are but one thing and whensoever the body changes its place changes also But some do not consider that there are degrees of Matter for Natures body doth not consist of one degree as to be all hard or dense like a stone but as there are infinite changes of Motion so there are in Nature infinite degrees of density rarity grossness purity hardness softness c. all caused by self-motion which hard gross rare fluid dense subtil and many other sorts of bodies in their several degrees may more easily move divide and join from and with each other being in a continued body then if they had a Vacuum to move in for were there a Vacuum there would be no successive motions nor no degrees of swiftness and slowness but all Motion would be done in an instant The truth is there would be such distances of several gaps and holes that Parts would never join if once divided in so much as a piece of the world would become a single particular World not joyning to any part besides it self which would make a horrid confusion in Nature contrary to all sense and reason Wherefore the opinion of Vacuum is in my judgment as absurd as the opinion of senseless and irrational Atomes moving by chance for it is more probable that atomes should have life and knowledg to move regularly then that they should move regularly and wisely by chance and without life and knowledg for there can be no regular motion without knowledg sense and reason and therefore those that are for Atomes had best to believe them to be self-moving living and knowing bodies or else their opinion is very irrational But the opinion of Atomes is fitter for a Poetical fancy then for serious Philosophy and this is the reason that I have waved it in my Philosophical Works for if there can be no single parts there cannot be Atomes in Nature or else Nature would be like a Beggars coat full of lice Neither would she be able
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
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
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
wicked Man or the Devil hath power over God for although one Part may have power over another yet not over Nature no more then one man can have power over all Mankind One Man or Creature may over-power another so much as to make him quit his natural form or figure that is to die and be dissolved and so to turn into another figure or creature but he cannot over-power all Creatures nay if he could and did yet he would not be an absolute destroyer and Creator but onely some weak and simple Transformer or rather some artificial disfigurer and misformer which cannot alter the world though he may disorder it But surely as there was always such a perpetual Motion in Nature which did and doth still produce and dissolve other Creatures which Production and Dissolution is nam'd birth and death so there is also a Motion which produces and dissolves Arts and this is the ordinary action and work of Nature which continues still and onely varies in the several ways or modes of dissolving and composing 6. Whether there be any Prime or Principal Figures in Nature and of the true Principles of Nature SOme are of opinion that the Prime or Principal figures of Nature are Globes or Globular figures as being the most perfect but I cannot conceive why a globular or spherical figure should be thought more perfect then any other for another figure may be as perfect in its kind as a round figure is in its kind for example we cannot say a Bird is a more perfect figure then a Beast or a Beast a more perfect figure then a Fish or Worm neither can we say Man is a more perfect figure then any of the rest of the Animals the like of Vegetables Minerals and Elements for every several sort has as perfect a figure as another according to the nature and propriety of its own kind or sort But put the case man's figure were more perfect then any other yet we could not say that it is the Principle out of which all other figures are made as some do conceive that all other figures are produced from the Globular or Spherical for there is no such thing as most or least perfect because there is no most nor least in Nature Others are of opinion that the Principle of all natural Creatures is salt and that when the World dissolves it must dissolve into salt as into its first Principle but I never heard it determined yet whether it be fixt or volatile salt Others again are of opinion that the first principle of all Creatures is Water which if so then seeing that all things must return into their first principle it will be a great hinderance to the conflagration of the world for there will be so much water produced as may chance to quench out the fire But if Infinite Nature has Infinite parts and those Infinite parts are of Infinite figures then surely they cannot be confined to one figure Sense and Reason proves that Nature is full of variety to wit of corporeal figurative motions which as they do not ascribe their original to one particular so neither do they end in one particular figure or creature But some will wonder that I deny any Part or Creature of Nature should have a supremacy above the rest or be called Prime or Principal when as yet I do say that Reason is the Prime Part of Nature To which I answer That when I say no Creature in Nature can be called Prime or Principal I understand Natural effects that is Natural composed Parts or Creatures as for example all those finite and particular Creatures that are composed of Life Soul and Body that is of the Animate both Rational and Sensitive and the Inanimate parts of Matter and none of those composed Creatures I mean has any superiority or supremacy above the rest so as to be the Principle of all other composed Creatures as some do conceive Water other Fire others all the four Elements to be simple bodies and the principles of all other Natural Creatures and some do make Globous bodies the perfectest figures of all others for all these being but effects and finite particulars can be no principles of their fellow-creatures or of Infinite Nature But when I say that Reason or the Rational part of Matter is the Prime Part of Nature I speak of the Principles of Nature out of which all other Creatures are made or produced which Principle is but one viz. Matter which makes all effects or Creatures of Nature to be material for all the effects must be according to their principle but this matter being of two degrees viz. animate and inanimate the animate is nothing but self-motion I call it animate matter by reason I cannot believe as some do that Motion is Immaterial there being nothing belonging to Nature which is not material and therefore corporeal self-motion or animate matter is to me one and the same and this animate matter is again subdivided into two degrees to wit the rational and sensitive the rational is the soul the sensitive the life and the inanimate the body of Infinite Nature all which being so intermixed and composed as no separation can be made of one from the other but do all constitute one Infinite and self-moving body of Nature and are found even in the smallest particles thereof if smallest might be said they are justly named the Principles of Nature whereof the rational animate matter or corporeal self-motion is the chief designer and surveigher as being the most active subtil and penetrating part and the sensitive the workman but the inanimate part of Matter being thorowly intermixed with this animate self-moving Matter or rather with this corporeal self-motion although it have no motion in it self that is in its own nature yet by vertue of the commixture with the animate is moving as well as moved for it is well to be observed that although I make a distinction betwixt animate and inanimate rational and sensitive Matter yet I do not say that they are three distinct and several matters for as they do make but one body of Nature so they are also but one Matter but as I mentioned before when I speak of self-motion I name it animate matter to avoid the mistake lest self-motion might be taken for immaterial for my opinion is that they are all but one matter and one material body of Nature And this is the difference between the cause or principle and the effects of Nature from the neglect of which comes the mistake of so many Authors to wit that they ascribe to the effects what properly belongs to the cause making those figures which are composed of the foresaid animate and inanimate parts of matter and are no more but effects the principles of all other Creatures which mistake causes many confusions in several mens brains and their writings But it may be they will account it paradoxical or absurd that I say Infinite Matter consists of
of variety then men of arguments which variety is the cause there are so many extravagant and irregular opinions in the world and I observe that most of the great and famous especially our modern Authors endeavour to deduce the knowledg of causes from their effects and not effects from their causes and think to find out Nature by Art not Art by Nature whereas in my opinion Reason must first consider the cause and then Sense may better perceive the effects Reason must judg Sense execute for Reason is the prime part of Nature as being the corporeal soul or mind of Nature But some are so much in love with Art as they endeavour to prove not onely Nature but also Divinity which is the knowledg of God by Art thus preferring Art before Nature when as Art is but Natures foolish changeling Child and the reason is that some parts of Nature as some Men not knowing all other parts believe there is no reason and but little sense in any part of Nature but themselves nay that it is irreligious to say that there is not considering that God is able to give Sense and Reason to Infinite Nature as well as to a finite part But those are rather irreligious that believe Gods power is confined or that it is not Infinite 8. Of Animal Spirits I am not of the opinion of those that place the cause of all Sense and Motion in the animal Spirits which they call the Purest and most aethereal particles of all bodies in the World whatsoever and the very top and perfection of all Natures operations For Animal Spirits in my opinion are no more then other effects of Nature onely they are not so gross as some but are parts of a most pure refined and rare sort of Inanimate Matter which being intermixed with the parts of Animate Matter and enlivened by them become very subtil and active I will not say that they are of the highest and last degree of Inanimate Matter nearest to the Animate as they do say they have the neerest alliance to spiritualities which in my opinion is as much as to say they are almost nothing or of the first degree of sensitive matter there being no such thing as first and last in Nature but that they are onely such pure and rare parts of Inanimate Matter as are not subject to the exterior perception of humane sense for example as the matter of respiration or the like for as there are Infinite parts of Inanimate Matter so there are also infinite degrees of strength weakness purity impurity hardness softness density rarity swiftness slowness knowledg ignorance c. as also several sorts and degrees of complexions statures constitutions humors wits understanding judgment life death and the like all which degrees although they be in and of the infinite body of Nature yet properly they belong to particular Creatures and have onely a regard to the several parts of Nature which being Infinite in number are also of Infinite degrees according to the Infinite changes of self-motion and the propriety and nature of each figure wherefore that opinion which makes Animal Spirits the prime or principal motion of all things and the chief Agent in Natures three Kingdoms Mineral Animal and Vegetable reduces Infinite Nature to a finite Principle whereas any one that enjoys but so much of humane sense and reason as to have the least perception or insight into Natural things may easily conceive that the Infinite effects of Nature cannot proceed from a finite particular cause nay I am firmly perswaded that they who believe any finite part to be the cause and Principle of Infinite self-moving Nature do in my opinion not onely sin against Nature but against God the Author of Nature who out of his Infinite bounty gave Nature the Power of self-motion But if any one desire to know what then the true cause and Principle of all Natures Creatures and Figures be I answer In my opinion it is not a Spirit or Immaterial substance but Matter but yet not the Inanimate part of Matter but the Animate which being of two degrees rational and sensitive both of them are the Infinite Life and Soul of the Infinite body of Nature and this Animate Matter is also the cause of all infinite works changes figures and parts of Nature as I have declar'd above more at large Now as great a difference as there is between Animate and Inanimate Body and Soul Part and Whole Finite and Infinite so great a difference there is also between the Animal Spirits and the Prime Agent or Movent of Nature which is Animate Matter or which is all one thing corporeal self-motion and as it would be paradoxical to make Inanimate Matter to be the cause of Animate or a part to be the cause of the whole whose part it is or a finite to be the cause of Infinite so paradoxical would it also be to make Animal Spirits the top and perfection of all Natures operations nay so far are they from being the Prime Movent of other bodies as they are but moved themselves for to repeat what I mentioned in the beginning Animal Spirits are onely some sorts of rare and pure Inanimate Matter which being thorowly intermixt with the animate parts of Matter are more active then some sorts of more dense and grosser parts of Inanimate Matter I say some for I do believe that some of the most solid bodies are as active as the most rare and fluid parts of Matter if not exteriously yet interiously and therefore we cannot say that rare and fluid parts are more active then fixt and solid or that fixt and solid are less active then fluid bodies because all parts are self-moving But if I was to argue with those that are so much for Animal Spirits I would ask them first whether Animal Spirits be self-moving If they say they are I am of their opinion and do infer thence that if animal spirits which are but a small part of Nature have self-motion much more has Nature her self But if not I would ask what gives them that motion they have If they say Nature then Nature must be self-moving Perchance they 'l say God moves Nature 'T is true God is the first Author of Motion as well as he is of Nature but I cannot believe that God should be the Prime actual Movent of all natural Creatures and put all things into local motion like as one wheel in a Clock turns all the rest for Gods Power is sufficient enough to rule and govern all things by an absolute Will and Command or by a Let it be done and to impart self-motion to Nature to move according to his order and decree although in a natural way Next I would ask whether any dead Creature have such Animal Spirits If they affirm it I am of their mind if not then I would ask what causes in dead bodies that dissolution which we see Thirdly I would ask whether those animal spirits
can neither be always assured of knowing the Truth for particular Reason may sometimes be deceived as well as sense but when the Perceptions both of sense and reason agree then the information is more true I mean regular sense and reason not irregular which causes mistakes and gives false informations also the Presentation of the objects ought to be true and without delusion 19. Of preserving the Figures of Animal Creatures I Am absolutely of the opinion of those who believe Natural Philosophy may promote not onely Anatomy but all other Arts for else they would not be worth the taking of pains to learn them by reason the rational perceptions are beyond the sensitive I am also of opinion that there may be an Art to preserve the exterior shapes of some animal bodies but not their interior forms for although their exterior shapes even after the dissolution of the animal figure may be some what like the shapes and figures of their bodies when they had the life of an animal yet they being transformed into some other Creatures by the alteration of their interior figurative motions can no ways keep the same interior figure which they had when they were living animals Concerning the preserving of blood by the means of spirit of Wine as some do probably believe my opinion is That spirit of Wine otherwise call'd Hot-water if taken in great quantity will rather dry up or putrifie the blood then preserve it nay not onely the blood but also the more solid parts of an animal body insomuch as it will cause a total dissolution of the animal figure and some animal Creatures that have blood will be dissolved in Wine which yet is not so strong as extracts or spirit of Wine But blood mingled with spirit of Wine may perhaps retain somewhat of the colour of blood although the nature and propriety of blood be quite altered As for the instance of preserving dead fish or flesh from putrifying and stinking alledged by some we see that ordinary salt will do the same with less cost and as spirits of Wine or hot Waters may like salt preserve some dead bodies from corruption so may they by making too much or frequent use of them also cause living bodies to corrupt and dissolve sooner then otherwise they would do But Chymists are so much for extracts that by their frequent use and application they often extract humane life out of humane bodies instead of preserving it 20. Of Chymistry and Chymical Principles IT is sufficiently known and I have partly made mention above what a stir Natural Philosophers do keep concerning the principles of Nature and natural Beings and how different their opinions are The Schools following Aristotle are for the Four Elements which they believe to be simple bodies as having no mixture in themselves and therefore fittest to be principles of all other mixt or compounded bodies But my Reason cannot apprehend what they mean by simple bodies I confess that some bodies are more mixt then others that is they consist of more differing parts such as the learned call Heterogeneous as for example Animals consist of flesh blood skin bones muscles nerves tendons gristles and the like all which are parts of different figures Other bodies again are composed of such parts as are of the same nature which the learned call Homogeneous as for example Water Air c. whose parts have no different figures but are all alike each other at least to our perception besides there are bodies which are more rare and subtile than others according to the degrees of their natural figurative motions and the composion of their parts Nevertheless I see no reason why those Homogeneous bodies should be called simple and all others mixt or composed of them much less why they should be principles of all other natural bodies for they derive their origine from matter as well as the rest so that it is onely the different composure of their parts that makes a difference between them proceeding from the variety of self-motion which is the cause of all different figures in nature for as several work-men join in the building of one house and several men in the framing of one Government so do several parts in the making or forming of one composed figure But they 'l say it is not the likeness of parts that makes the Four Elements to be principles of natural things but because there are no natural bodies besides the mentioned Elements that are not composed of them as is evident in the dissolution of their parts for example A piece of Green wood that is burning in a Chimney we may readily discern the Four Elements in its dissolution out of which it is composed for the fire discovers it self in the flame the smoak turns into air the water hisses and boils at the ends of the wood and the ashes are nothing but the Element of earth But if they have no better arguments to prove their principles they shall not readily gain my consent for I see no reason why wood should be composed of the Four Elements because it burns smoaks hisses and turns into ashes Fire is none of its natural ingredients but a different figure which being mixt with the parts of the wood is an occasion that the Wood turns into ashes neither is Water a principle of Wood for Water is as much a figure by it self as Wood or Fire is which being got into the parts of the wood and mixt with the same is expelled by the fire as by its opposite but if it be a piece of dry and not of green wood where is then the water that boils out Surely dry wood hath no less principles then green wood and as for smoak it proves no more that it is the Element of Air in Wood then that Wood is the Element of Fire for Wood as experience witnesses may last in water where it is kept from the air and smoak is rather an effect of moisture occasioned into such a figure by the commixture of fire Others as Helmont who derives his opinion from Thales and others of the ancient Philosophers are only for the Element of Water affirming that that is the sole principle out of which all natural things consist for say they the Chaos where of all things were made was nothing else but water which first setled into slime and then condensed into solid earth nay some endeavour to prove by Chymical Experiments that they have disposed water according to their Chymical way so that it visibly turn'd into earth which earth produced animals vegetables and minerals But put the case it were so yet this doth not prove water to be the onely principle of all natural beings for first we cannot think that animals vegetables and minerals are the onely kinds of creatures in Nature and that there are no more but them for nature being infinitely various may have infinite Worlds and so infinite sorts of Creatures Next I say that the change of water
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
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
seasonably applied can work good effects so they may also produce ill effects if they be used improperly and unseasonably and therefore wise Physicians and Surgeons know by experience as well as by learning and reason what is best for their Patients in all kind of distempers Onely this I will add concerning diseases that in the productions of diseases there must of necessity be a conjunction of the Agent and Patient as is evident even in those diseases that are caused by conceit for if a man should hear of an infectious disease and be apprehensive of it both the discourse of him that tells it and the mind of him that apprehends it are Agents or causes of that disease in the body of the Patient and concur in the production of the disease the difference is onely that the discourse may be called a remoter cause and the rational motions or the mind of the Patient a nearer or immediate cause for as soon as the mind doth figure such a disease the sensitive corporeal motions immediately take the figure from the mind and figure the disease in the substance or parts of the body of the Patient the Rational proving the Father the Sensitive the Mother both working by consent Whereby we may also conclude that diseases as well as other sorts of Creatures are made by Natures corporeal figurative motions and those parts that occasion others to alter their natural motions are most predominant for although Nature is free and all her parts self-moving yet not every part is free to move as it pleases by reason some parts over-power others either through number strength slight shape opportunity or the like advantages and natural Philosophy is the onely study that teaches men to know the particular natures figures and motions of the several composed parts of Nature and the rational perception is more intelligent then the sensitive 23. Of several sorts of Drink and Meat SOme Physicians when they discourse of several sorts of Drinks and Meats do relate several wonderful Cures which some Drinks have effected And truly I am of opinion that they may be both beneficial and hurtful according as they are used properly and temperately or improperly and excessively but I find there are more several sorts for curiosity and luxury then for health and necessity Small Ale or Beer is a soveraign remedy to quench drought and one Glass of Wine proves a Cordial but many Glasses may prove a kind of poyson putting men oftentimes into Feavers and the like diseases And for Diet-drinks I believe they are very good in some sorts of diseases and so may Tea and Coffee and the water of Birches for any thing I know for I never had any experience of them but I observe that these latter drinks Tea and Coffee are now become mode-drinks and their chief effects are to make good fellowship rather then to perform great cures for I can hardly believe that such weak liquors can have such strong effects Concerning several sorts of Meats I leave them to experienced Physicians for they know best what is fit for the bodies of their Patients Onely as for the preservation or keeping of several sorts of meats from putrefaction I will say this That I have observed that what will keep dead Flesh and Fish as also Vegetables from putrefaction will destroy living Animals for if living Animals should like dead flesh be pickled up and kept from air they would soon be smother'd to death and so would Fire which yet is no Animal Neither can Ladies and Gentlewomen preserve their lives as they do several sorts of fruit Nevertheless both this and several other Arts are very necessary and profitable for the use of man if they be but fitly and properly imployed but we may observe that when as other Creatures have no more then what is necessary for their preservation Man troubles himself with things that are needless nay many times hurtful Which is the cause there are so many unprofitable Arts which breed confusion instead of proving beneficial and instructive 24. Of Fermentation FErmentation of which Helmont and his followers make such a stir as 't is enough to set all the world a fermenting or working is nothing else but what is vulgarly called digestion so that it is but a new term for an old action And these digestions or Fermentations are as various and numerous as all other actions of Nature to wit Respiration Evacuation Dilation Contraction c. for action and working are all one But there are good and ill Fermentations those are done by a sympathetical agreement of parts but these by an antipathetical disagreement Those tend to the preservation of the subject these to its destruction Those are regular these irregular So that there are numerous sorts of fermentations not onely in several sorts of Creatures but in several parts of one and the same Creature for Fermentation or Digestion is according to the composition of the fermenting or digestive parts and their motions 25. Of the Plague IHave heard that a Gentleman in Italy fancied he had so good a Microscope that he could see Atomes through it and could also perceive the Plague which he affirmed to be a swarm of living animals as little as Atomes which entred into mens bodies through their mouths nostrils ears c. To give my opinion hereof I must confess That there are no parts of Nature how little soever which are not living and self-moving bodies nay every Respiration is of living parts and therefore the Infection of the Plague made by the way of respiration cannot but be of living parts but that these parts should be animal Creatures is very improbable to sense and reason for if this were so not onely the Plague but all other infectious diseases would be produced the same way and then fruit or any other surfeiting meat would prove living Animals But I am so far from believing that the Plague should be living animals as I do not believe it to be a swarm of living Atomes flying up and down in the Air for if it were thus then those Atomes would not remain in one place but infect all the places they passed through when as yet we observe that the Plague will often be but in one Town or City of a Kingdom without spreading any further Neither do I believe as some others say that it is always the heat of the Sun or Air that causes or at least increases the Plague for there are Winterplagues as well as Summer-plagues and many times the Plague decreases in Summer when it is hot and increases in Winter when it is cold Besides the air being generally hot over all the Country or Kingdom would not onely cause the infection in one Town or City but in all other parts Therefore my opinion is that as all other diseases are produced several manners or ways so likewise the Plague and as they generally do all proceed from the irregularities of corporeal natural motions so does also
ingenuity and learning in the least but onely to shew by the difference of their opinions and mine that mine are not borrowed from theirs as also to make mine the more intelligible and clear and if possible to find out the truth in Natural Philosophy for which were they alive I question not but I should easily obtain their pardon 1. Vpon the Principles of Thales THales according to Historical Relation was the first that made disquisitions upon Nature and so the first Natural Philosoper His chief points in Philosophy are these 1. He says That Water is the Principle of all natural bodies 2. That Nature is full of Daemons and spiritual substances 3. That the Soul is a self-moving Nature and that it both moves it self and the body 4. That there is but one World and that finite 5. That the World is animate and God is the soul thereof diffused through every Part 6. That the World is contained in a place 7. That Bodies are divisible into infinite Concerning the First viz. That Water is the Principle of all natural things Helmont doth embrace this opinion as I have declared in my Philosophical Letters and in the foregoing part of this Book and have given withal my reasons why water cannot be a principle of natural things because it is no more but a natural effect for though humidity may be found in many parts or Creatures of Nature yet this doth not prove that water is a principle of all natural bodies no more then fire earth air or any other Creature of Nature and though most Philosophers are of opinion that Elements are simple bodies and all the rest are composed of them yet this is no ways probable to reason because they consist of the same matter as other bodies do and are all but effects of one cause or principle which is infinite Matter Next That Nature is full of Daemons or Spiritual substances is against sense and reason for what is incorporeal is no part of Nature and upon this account the soul cannot be immaterial although he makes her to be a self-moving Nature for what has a natural motion has also a natural body because Matter and Motion are but one thing neither can a Spiritual substance move a corporeal they being both of different natures As for the World That there is but one I do willingly grant it if by the World he did mean Nature but then it cannot be finite But Thales seems to contradict himself in this Theoreme when as he grants that Bodies are divisible in infinite for if there be infinite actions as infinite divisions in Nature then surely the body of Nature it self must be infinite Next he says That God is the Soul of the World which if so God being Infinite he cannot have a Finite body to animate it for a Finite Body and an Infinite Soul do never agree together but that God should be the Soul of the World no regular Reason can allow because the Soul of Nature must be corporeal as well as the Body for an incorporeal substance cannot be mixed with a corporeal Next the World as the body of Nature being dividable it would follow that God which is the Soul would be dividable also Thirdly Every part of the world would be a part of God as partaking of the same nature for every part if the Soul be diffused through all the Body would be animate Lastly Concerning Place as that the World is contained in a place my opinion is that place is nothing else but an affection of body and in no ways different or separable from it for wheresoever is body or matter there is place also so that place cannot be said to contain the world or else it would be bigger then the world it self for that which contains must needs in compass or extent exceed that which it contains 2. Some few Observations on Plato's Doctrine 1. PLato says That Life is two fold Contemplative and Active and that Contemplation is an office of the Intellect but Action an operation of the Rational soul To which I answer first That I know no other difference between Intellect and Reason but that Intellect is an effect or rather an Essential Propriety of Reason if Reason be the Principle of Nature for the Rational part is the most Intelligent part of animate Matter Next I say That Contemplation is as much an action as any other action of Nature although it be not so gross as the action of the body for it is onely an action of the mind which is more pure and subtile then either the sensitive or inanimate parts of matter are and acts within it self that is in its own substance or degree of Matter 2. He says That Sense is a passion of the Soul I answer There is as much difference between Sense and the Soul as there is between Sense and Reason or a sensitive life and a rational soul for the Rational parts of Matter are not the Sensitive nor the Sensitive the Rational a Fool may have his sense regular and his reason irregular and therefore sense and reason are not one and the same although they have an inseparable Communion in the body or substance of Nature 3. He argues thus That which moves in it self as being the principle of Motion in those things which are moved is always moved and consequently Immortal Ungenerable and Incorruptible but the Soul is so Ergo c. I answer Natural Matter being thus self-moving is the same 4. From says he is joined to Matter I answer Form and Matter are but one thing for it is impossible to separate Matter from Form or Form from Matter but what is not dividable is not composable and what cannot be separated cannot be joined 5. Qualities says he are incorporeal because they are accidents I answer If Qualities be Incorporeal they do not belong to Nature for since the Principle of Nature is Matter all that is natural must also be material or corporeal and therefore all natural qualities or accidents must of necessity be corporeal by reason quality can no more be divided from Matter then figure magnitude colour place and the like all which are but one and the same with body without any separation or abstraction 6. What Plato affirms of that which never is and never had a Beginning and of that which has a Beginning and not a Being is more then he or any body can rationally prove for what never was nor is no man can know or imagine because all what is known or imagined has its real being if not without yet within the Mind and all thoughts have not onely a being but a material being in Nature nay even the Thought of the existence of a Deity although Deity it self is Immaterial 7. I wonder so witty a Philosopher as Plato can believe that Matter in it self as it is the Principle of Nature is void of all form for he affirms himself That whatsoever hath parts hath also figure but Matter
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
Aristotle makes the Principles of Nature Matter Form and Privation and leaves out the chief which is Motion for were there no motion there would be no variety of figures besides Matter and Form are but one thing for wheresoever is Matter there is also form or figure but privation is a non-being and therefore cannot be a principle of natural bodies 4. There is no such thing as simple bodies in Nature for if Nature her self consists of a commixture of animate and inanimate Matter no part can be called simple as having a composition of the same parts besides no part can subsist single or by it self wherefore the distinction into simple and mixt bodies is needless for Elements are as much composed bodies as other parts of Nature neither do I understand the difference between perfect and imperfect mixt bodies for Nature may compose mix and divide parts as she pleaseth 5. The primary Qualities of the Elements as Heat and Cold Humidity and Siccity says Aristotle are the cause of Generation when heat and cold overcome the Matter I wonder he makes qualities to be no substances or bodies but accidents which is something between body and no body and yet places them above Matter and makes Generation their effect But whatsoever he calls them they are no more but effects of Nature and cannot be above their cause which is Matter neither is it probable there are but eighteen passive qualities he might have said as well there are but eighteen sorts of motions for natural effects go beyond all number as being infinite 6. Concerning the Soul Aristotle doth not believe That it moves by it self but is onely moved accidentally according to the Motion of the body but he doth not express from whence the motion of the Soul proceeds although he defines it to be that by which we live feel and understand Neither says he is there a Soul diffused through the World for there are inanimate bodies as well as animate but sense and reason perceives the contrary to wit that there is no part of Nature but is animate that is has a soul. Sense says he is not sensible of it self nor of its organ nor of any interior thing for sense cannot move it self but is a mutation in the organ caused by some sensible object But the absurdity of this opinion I have declared heretofore for it is contrary to humane Reason to believe first that sense should be sensible of an outward object and not of it self or which is all one have perception of exterior parts and not self-knowledg Next that an external object should be the cause of sense when as sense and reason are the chief principles of Nature and the cause of all natural effects Again Sense says he is in all Animals but Fancy is not for Fancy is not Sense Fancy acts in him that sleeps Sense not To which I answer first Fancy or Imagination is a voluntary action of Reason or of the rational parts of Matter and if reason be in all Animals nay in all Creatures Fancy is there also Next it is evident that Sense acts as much asleep as awake the difference I have expressed elsewhere viz. That the sensitive motions Work inwardly in sleep and outwardly awake The Intellect to Aristotle is that part of the Soul by which it knows and understands and is onely proper to man when as sense is proper to animals It is twofold Patient and Agent whereof this is Immortal Eternal not mixt with the body but separable from it and ever in action The Patient Intellect is mortal and yet void of corruptive passion not mixt with the body nor having any corporeal organs But these and many other differences of Intellects which he rehearses are more troublesome to the understanding then beneficial for the knowledg of Nature And why should we puzzle our selves with multiplicity of terms and distinctions when there 's no need of them Truly Nature's actions are easie and we may easily apprehend them without much ado If Nature be material as it cannot be proved otherwise sense and reason are material also and therefore we need not to introduce an incorporeal mind or intellect Besides if sense and reason be a constitutive principle of Nature all parts of Nature do partake of the same nor hath man a prerogative before other Creatures in that case onely the difference and variety of motions makes different figures and consequently different knowledges and perceptions and all Fancies Imaginations Judgment Memory Remembrance and the like are nothing else but the actions of reason or of the rational parts of Animate Matter so that there is no necessity to make a Patient and Agent Intellect much less to introduce incorporeal substances to confound and disturb corporeal Nature 6. Of Scepticisme and some other Sects of the Ancient THere are several sorts of Scepticks different from each other for though almost every one of the ancient Philosophers has his own opinions in Natural Philosophy and goes on his own grounds or principles yet some come nearer each other then others do and though Heraclitus Democritus Protagoras and others seem to differ from the Scepticks yet their opinions are not so far asunder but they may all be referred to the same sect Heraclitus is of opinion That contraries are in the same thing and Scepticks affirm That contraries appear in the same thing but I believe they may be partly both in the right and partly both in the wrong If their opinion be that there are or appear contraries in Nature or in the essence of Matter they are both in the wrong but if they believe that Matter has different and contrary actions they are both in the right for there are not onely real but also apparent or seeming contraries in Nature which are her irregularities to wit when the sensitive and rational parts of Matter do not move exactly to the nature of their particulars As for example Honey is sweet to those that are sound and in health but bitter to those that have the over-flowing of the Gall where it is to be observed that Honey is not changed from its natural propriety but the motions of the Gall being irregular make a false copy like as mad men who think their flesh is stone or those that apprehend a Bird for a Stone a Man for a Tree c. neither the Flesh nor Stone nor Tree are changed from their own particular natures but the motions of humane sense in the sentient are irregular and make false copies of true objects which is the reason that an object seems often to be that which really it is not However those irregularities are true corporeal motions and thus there are both real and seeming contraries in Nature but as I mentioned before they are not contrary matters but onely contrary actions Democritus says That Honey is neither bitter nor sweet by reason of its different appearance to differently affected persons but if so then he is like those that make
I have declared before for particular motions are but effects of self-moving Matter But I call them principal because to our humane sense they seem to be some chief sorts of motions in those natural bodies that are subject to our perception but there may be infinite other sorts of motions which we know not of the same may be said when I speak of the ground of Infinite compositions which is symmetry and infinite divisions which is number for to speak properly there 's no other ground but self-moving Matter in Nature When I make a distinction between forced or Artificial and Natural Motions as that for example the motion of a Watch or a Clock is artificial and not natural my meaning is not as if artificial motions were something super or praeter-natural and had no relation to Nature but by the word Natural I understand the particular nature of some certain figure or Creature and when such a figure has some other exterior motions besides those which are proper to its particular nature caused by Art I call them artificial and do distinguish them from such motions as are proper and natural to it as for example mans exterior natural local motions are going leaping dancing running c. but not flying which is a motion to Birds and winged Creatures Now if a man should by some Artacquire this motion of flying and imitate such winged Creatures to whom it is natural then it would be an artificial or forced action to him and not a natural also the nature of Iron or Steel is not to have an exterior progressive local motion such as animals and other Creatures have and therefore the motion of the wheels of a Watch is forced or artificial Nevertheless I say that all these motions although they be forced or artificial do not proceed from some exterior agent any otherwise but occasionally and that all motions whatsoever are intrinsecally inherent in the body or which is in motion for motion cannot be transferred out of one body into another but every body moves by its own motion Thus the intrinsecal principle and cause of all particular both interior and exterior motions or actions is in the body which is in motion even of those we call forced or artificial and proceeds not from some exterior agent but occasionally for every part and particle of Nature is self-moving as consisting of a commixture of animate Matter and no motion can be imparted without body by reason there 's no such thing as an incorporeal motion When I say There is no rest in Nature I mean that all parts are either moving or moved for although the inanimate part of Matter has no self-motion yet it is moved and consequently never at rest Nor can we say that things do rest or have no motion at all when they have not exterior progressive motion such as is perceptible by our sight for this is but a gross exterior motion and a world of Gold may be as active interiously as a world of Air is exteriously that is the actions of Gold are as alterable as those of air When contradicting the opinion of Mr. Hobbes concerning voluntary motions who says That voluntary motions as going speaking moving our lips depend upon a precedent thought of whither which way and what c. I answer that it implies a contradiction to call them Voluntary Motions and yet say they depend on our imagination for if the imagination draws them this or that way how can they be voluntary My meaning is not as if those actions were not self-actions nor as if there were no voluntary actions at all for to make a balance between Natures actions there are voluntary as well as occasioned actions both in sense and reason but because Mr Hobbs says that those actions are depending upon Imagination and Fancy and that Imagination is the first internal beginning of them which sets them a going as the prime wheel of a Watch does the rest My opinion is that after this rate they cannot properly be called voluntary but are rather necessitated at least occasioned by the Mind or Fancy for I oppose voluntary actions to those that are occasioned or forced which voluntary actions are made by the self-moving parts by rote and of their own accord but occasioned actions are made by imitation although they are all self-actions that is move by their own inherent self-motion When I say That Animals by their shapes are not tied or bound to any other kind of Creature either for support or nourishment as Vegetables are but are loose and free of themselves from all others My opinion is not as if the animal figure were a single figure precised from all the rest of natural parts or figures or from the body of Nature and stood in no need either of nourishment or support but could subsist of it self without any respect or relation to other Creatures But I speak comparatively that in comparison to Vegetables or such like Creatures it is more free in its exterior progressive local motions then they which as we see being taken out of the ground where they grow wither and change their interior natural figures for animals may by a visible progressive motion remove from such parts to other parts which Vegetables cannot do nevertheless Animals depend as much upon other parts and Creatures as others depend on them both for nourishment and respiration c. although they may subsist without being fixt to some certain parts of ground The truth is some animals can live no more without air then fishes can live without water or Vegetables without ground so that all parts must necessarily live with each other and none can boast that it needs not the assistance of any other part for they are all parts of one body When discoursing of the growth of an Animal I say that attractive motions do gather and draw substance proper to and for that figure I mean that such sorts of corporeal motions attract and invite by sympathy other parts to help to form that Creature so that every where by several substances I mean several parts which are particular substances that is corporeal particular figures and by several places in the same Chapter I understand several distances of parts When in my Philosophical Letters I do mention that all Perception is made by Patterning I mean chiefly the perception of the exterior sensitive organs in animals as smelling hearing seeing tasting touching whose perception I mean is made by that sort of motion which is call'd patterning for in my Book of Philosophical Letters I do onely prove that all perceptions cannot be made by one sort of motion as also that perception is not immediately made by the exterior object but by the perceiving or sentient parts Nor do I treat in it of all kinds or sorts of perceptions belonging to all kinds or sorts of Creatures in Infinite Nature for they are too numerous to be known by one particular How can an
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
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
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
of it self it is not improbable but it may also have an interior fixt and innate knowledg of the Existency of God as that he is to be adored and worshipped And thus the Inanimate part may after its own manner worship and adore God as much as the other parts in their way for it is probable that God having endued all parts of Nature with self-knowledg may have given them also an Interior knowledg of himself that is of his Existency how he is the God of Nature and ought to be worshipped by her as his Eternal servant My later Thoughts excepted That not any Creature did truly know it self much less could it be capable of knowing God The former answered That this was caused through the variety of self-motion for all Creatures said they are composed of many several parts and every part has its own particular self-knowledg as well as self-motion which causes an ignorance between them for one parts knowledg is not another parts knowledg nor does one part know what another knows but all knowledg of exterior parts comes by perception nevertheless each part knows it self and its own actions and as there is an ignorance between parts so there is also an acquaintance especially in the parts of one composed Creature and the rational parts being most subtile active and free have a more general acquaintance then the sensitive besides the sensitive many times inform the rational and the rational the sensitive which causes a general agreement of all the parts of a composed figure in the execution of such actions as belong to it But how is it possible replied my later Thoughts that the inanimate part of matter can be living and self-knowing and yet not self-moving for Life and Knowledg cannot be without self-motion and therefore if the inanimate parts have Life and Knowledg they must necessarily also have self-motion The former answered That Life and Knowledg did no ways depend upon self-motion for had Nature no motion at all yet might she have Life and Kowledg so that self-motion is not the cause of Life and Knowledg but onely of Perception and all the various actions of Nature and this is the reason said they that the inanimate part of matter is not perceptive because it is not self-moving for though it hath life and self-knowledg as well as the Animate part yet it has not an active life nor a perceptive knowledg By which you may see that a fixt and interior self-knowledg may very well be without exterior perception for though perception presupposes an innate self-knowledg as its ground and principle yet self-knowledg does not necessarily require perception which is onely caused by self-motion for self-motion as it is the cause of the variety of Natures parts and actions so it is also of their various perceptions If it was not too great a presumtion said they we could give an instance of God who has no local self-motion and yet is infinitely knowing But we 'l forbear to go so high as to draw the Infinite Incomprehensible God to the proofs of Material Nature My later Thoughts replied first That if it were thus then one and the same parts of matter would have a double life and a double knowledg Next they said That if perception were an effect of self-motion then God himself must necessarily be self-moving or else he could not perceive Nature and her parts and actions Concerning the first objection my former thoughts answered That the parts of Nature could have a double life and knowledg no more then one man could be call'd double or treble You might as well said they make millions of men of one particular man nay call every part or action of his a peculiliar man as make one and the same part of matter have a double life and knowledg But mistake us not added my former thoughts when we say that one and the same part cannot have a double life and knowledg for we mean not the composed creatures of Nature which as they consist of several degrees of matter so they have also several degrees of lives and knowledges but it is to be understood of the essential or constitutive parts of Nature for as the rational part is not nor can be the sensitive part so it can neither have a sensitive knowledg no more can a sensitive part have a rational knowledg or either of these the knowledg of the inanimate part but each part retains its own life and knowledg Indeed it is with these parts as it is with particular creatures for as one man is not another man nor has another mans knowledg so it is likewise with the mentioned parts of matter and although the animate parts have an interior innate self-knowledg and an exterior perceptive knowledg yet these are not double knowledges but perception is onely an effect of interior self-knowledg occasioned by self-motion And as for the second they answered That the Divine Perception and Knowledg was not any ways like a natural Perception no more than God was like a Creature for Nature said they is material and her perceptions are amongst her infinite parts caused by their compositions and divisions but God is a Supernatural Individable and Incorporeal Being void of all Parts and Divisions and therefore he cannot be ignorant of any the least thing but being Infinite he has an Infinite Knowledg without any Degrees Divisions or the like actions belonging to Material Creatures Nor is he naturally that is locally self-moving but he is a fixt unalterable and in short an incomprehensible Being and therefore no comparison can be made between Him and Nature He being the Eternal God and Nature his Eternal Servant Then my later Thoughts said That as for the knowledg of God they would not dispute of it but if there was a fixt and interior innate knowledg in all Natures parts and Creatures it was impossible that there could be any error or ignorance between them The former answered that although Errors belonged to particulars as well as ignorance yet they proceeded not from interior self-knowledg but either from want of exterior particular knowledges or from the irregularity of motions and Ignorance was likewise a want not of interior but exterior knowledg otherwise called Perceptive knowledg for said they Parts can know no more of other parts but by their own perceptions and since no particular Creature or part of Nature can have an Infallible Universal and thorow perception of all other parts it can neither have an infallible and universal knowledg but it must content it self with such a knowledg as is within the reach of its own perceptions and hence it follows that it must be ignorant of what it does not know for Perception has but onely a respect to the exterior figures and actions of other parts and though the Rational part is more subtil and active then the Sensitive and may have also some perceptions of some interior parts and actions of other Creatures yet it cannot have an
infallible and thorow perception of all their interior parts and motions which is a knowledg impossible for any particular Creature to attain to Again my later Thoughts objected That it was impossible that the parts of one and the same degree could be ignorant of each others actions how various soever since they were capable to change their actions to the like figures The former answered first That although they might make the like figures yet they could not make the same because the parts were not the same Next they said that particular parts could not have infinite perceptions but that they could but perceive such objects as were subject to that sort of perception which they had no not all such for oftentimes objects were obscured and hidden from their perceptions that although they could perceive them if presented or coming within the compass and reach of their perceptive faculty or power yet when they were absent they could not besides said they the sensitive parts are not so subtile as to make perceptions into the interior actions of other parts no not the rational are able to have exact perceptions thereof for Perception extends but to adjoining parts and their exterior figures and actions and if they know any thing of their interior parts figures or motions it is onely by guess or probable conclusions taken from their exterior actions or figures and made especially by the rational parts which as they are the most inspective so they are the most knowing parts of Nature After these and several other objections questions and answers between the later and former thoughts and conceptions of my mind at last some Rational thoughts which were not concerned in this dispute perceiving that they became much heated and fearing they would at last cause a Faction or Civil War amongst all the rational parts which would breed that which is called a Trouble of the Mind endeavoured to make a Peace between them and to that end they propounded that the sensitive parts should publickly declare their differences and controversies and refer them to the Arbitration of the judicious and impartial Reader This proposition was unanimously embraced by all the rational parts and thus by their mutual consent this Argumental Discourse was set down and published after this manner In the mean time all the rational parts of my Mind inclined to the opinion of my former conceptions which they thought much more probable then those of the later and since now it is your part Ingenious Readers to give a final decision of the Cause consider well the subject of their quarrel and be impartial in your judgment let not Self-love or Envy corrupt you but let Regular Sense and Reason be your onely Rule that you may be accounted just Judges and your Equity and Justice be Remembred by all that honour and love it THE TABLE OF All the Principal Subjects contained and discoursed of in this BOOK Observations upon Experimental Philosophy 1. OF Humane Sense and Perception 2. Of Art and Experimental Philosophy 3. Of Micrography and of Magnifying and Multiplying Glasses 4. Of the production of Fire by Flint and Steel 5. Of Pares 6. Of the Effluviums of the Loadstone 7. Of the Stings of Nettles and Bees 8. Of the Beard of a wild Oat 9. Of the Eyes of Flyes 10. Of a Butter-Flye 11. Of the walking Motions of Flyes and other Creatures 12. Whether it be possible to make man and some other Animal Creatures flye as Birds do 13. Of Snails and Leeches and whether all Animals haue Blood 14. Of Natural Productions 15. Of the Seeds of Vegetables 16. Of the Providence of Nature and some Opinions concerning Motion 17. Des Cartes Opinion of Motion Examined 18. Of the blackness of a Charcoal and of Light 19. Of the Pores of a Charcoal and of Emptiness 20. Of Colours 21. Whether an Idea haue a Colour and of the Idea of of a Spirit 22. Of Wood petrified 23. Of the Nature of Water 24. Of Salt and of Sea or Salt-water 25. Of the motions of Heat and Cold. 26. Of the Measures Degrees and different sorts of Heat and Cold. 27. Of Congelation or Freezing 28. Of Thawing or dissolving of frozen Bodies 29. Several Questions resolved concerning Cold and Frozen Bodies 30. Of Contraction and Dilation 31. Of the Parts of Nature and of Atomes 32. Of the Celestial parts of this World and whether they be alterable 33. Of the Substance of the Sun and of Fire 34. Of Telescopes 35. Of Knowledge and Perception in general 36. Of the different Perceptions of Sense and Reason 37. Several Questions and Answers concerning Knowledg and Perception Further Observations upon Experimental Philosophy reflecting withall 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 2. Whether Artificial Effects may be called Natural and in what sense 3. Of Natural Matter and Motion 4. Nature cannot be known by any of her Parts 5. Art cannot produce new Forms in Nature 6. Whether there be any Prime or Principal Figures in Nature and of the true Principles of Nature 7. Whether Nature be self-moving 8. Of Animal Spirits 9. Of the Doctrine of the Scepticks concerning the Knowledg of Nature 10. Of Natural Sense and Reason 11. Of a general Knowledg and Worship of God given him by all Natural Creatures 12. Of a particular Worship of God given him by those that are his Chosen and Elect People 13. Of the Knowledg of man 14. A Natural Philosopher cannot be an Atheist 15. Of the Rational Soul of Man 16. Whether Animal Parts separated from their Bodies have life 17. Of the Spleen 18. Of Anatomy 19. Of preserving the Figures of Animal Creatures 20. Of Chymistry and Chymical Principles 21. Of the Vniversal Medicine and of Diseases 22. Of outward Remedies 23. Of several sorts of Drink and Meat 24. Of Fermentation 25. Of the Plague 26. Of Respiration Observations upon the Opinions of some Ancient Philosophers 1. Vpon the Principles of Thales 2. Some few Observations on Plato's Doctrine 3. Vpon the Doctrine of Pythagoras 4. Of Epicurus his Principles of Philosophy 5. On Aristotle's Philosophical Principles 6. Of Scepticism and some other Sects of the Ancient An Explanation of some obscure and doubtful Passages occurring in the Philosophical Works hitherto Publish'd by the Authoress A CATALOGUE OF ALL THE WORKS Hitherto Published by the AUTHORESSE SInce it is the fashion to declare what Books one has put forth to the publick view I thought it not amiss to follow the Mode and set down the Number of all the Writings of mine which hitherto have been Printed 1. Poems in Fol. Printed twice whereof the last Impression is much mended 2. Natures Pictures or Tales in Verse and Prose in Fol. 3. A Little Tract of Philosophy in 8º 4. Philosophical and Physical Opinions in Fol. 5. The same much Enlarged and Altered in Fol. 6. Philosophical Letters in Fol.
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
they not see the approach of a Spider until it be just at them also how comes it that sometimes as for example in cold weather they seem blind so as one may take or kill them and they cannot so much as perceive their enemies approach surely if they had 14000 Eyes all this number would seem useless to them since other Creatures which have but two can make more advantage of those two eyes then they of their vast number But perchance some will say That Flies having so many eyes are more apt to be blind then others that have but few by reason the number is the cause that each particular is the weaker To which I answer That if two Eyes be stronger then a Thousand then Nature is to be blamed that she gives such numbers of Eyes to so little a Creature But Nature is wiser then we or any Creature is able to conceive and surely she works not to no purpose or in vain but there appears as much wisdom in the fabrick and ftructure of her works as there is variety in them Lastly I cannot well conceive the truth of the opinion of those that think all eyes must have a transparent liquor or humor within them for in Crabs and Lobsters Eyes I can perceive none such and there may also be many other animal Creatures which have none for Nature is not tied to one way but as she makes various Creatures so she may and doth also make their parts and organs variously and not the same in all or after one and the same manner or way 10. Of a Butter-flie COncerning the Generation of Butter-flies whether they be produced by the way of Eggs as some Experimental Philosophers do relate or any other ways or whether they be all produced after one and the same manner shall not be my task now to determine but I will onely give my Readers a short account of what I my self have observed When I lived beyond the Seas in Banishment with my Noble Lord one of my Maids brought upon an old piece of wood or stone which it was I cannot perfectly remember something to me which seemed to grow out of that same piece it was about the length of half an inch or less the tail was short and square and seemed to be a Vegetable for it was as green as a green small stalk growing out of the aforesaid piece of stone or wood the part next the tail was like a thin skin wherein one might perceive a perfect pulsation and was big in proportion to the rest of the parts The part next to that was less in compass and harder but of such a substance as it was like Pewter or Tin The last and extreme part opposite to the first mentioned green tail or stalk seem'd like a head round onely it had two little points or horns before which head seem'd to the eye and touch like a stone so that this Creature appeared partly a Vegetable Animal and Mineral But what is more it was in a continual motion for the whole body of it seemed to struggle as if it would get loose from that piece of wood or stone the tail was joyned to or out of which it grew But I cutting and dividing its tail from the said piece it ceased to move and I did not regard it any further After some while I found just such another insect which I laid by upon the window and one morning I spied two Butter-flies playing about it which knowing the window had been close shut all the while and finding the insect all empty and onely like a bare shell or skin I supposed had been bred out of it for the shell was not onely hollow and thin but so brittle as it straight fell into pieces and did somewhat resemble the skin of a Snake when it is cast and it is observable that two Butter-flies were produced out of one shell which I supposed to be male and female But yet this latter I will not certainly affirm for I could not discern them with my eyes except I had had some Microscope but a thousand to one I might have been also deceived by it and had I opened this insect or shell at first it might perhaps have given those Butter-flies an untimely death or rather hinder'd their production This is all I have observed of Butter-flies but I have heard also that Caterpillars are transformed into Butter-flies whether it be true or not I will not dispute onely this I dare say that I have seen Caterpillers spin as Silk-worms do an oval ball about their seed or rather about themselves 11. Of the Walking Motions of Flies and other Creatures WHat Experimental Writers mention concerning the feet of Flies and their structure to wit that they have two claws or talons and two palms or soles by the help of which they can walk on the sides of glass or other smooth bodies perpendicularly upwards If this be the onely reason they can give then certainly a Dormouse must have the same structure of feet for she will as well as a flie run streight upwards on the sharp edg of a glazed or well-polished Sword which is more difficult then to run up the sides of Glass And as for Flies that they can suspend themselves against the undersurface of many bodies I say not onely Flies but many other Creatures will do the same for not onely great Caterpillers or such worms as have many leggs as also Spiders but a Neut which is but a little Creature will run up a wall in a perpendicular line nay walk as Flies do with its back down and its leggs upwards Wherefore it is not in my opinion the Pores of the surface of the body on which those Creatures walk as for example that a Flie should run the tenters or points of her feet which some have observed through a Microscope into the pores of such bodies she walks on or make pores where she finds none for I cannot believe that in such close and dense bodies where no pores at all can be perceived a small and weak legg of a Flie should pierce a hole so suddenly and with one step Nor an Imaginary Glue nor a dirty or smoaky substance adhering to the surface of glass as some do conceive nor so much the lightness of their bodies that makes those Creatures walk in such a posture for many can do the same that are a thousand times heavier then a little Flie but the chief cause is the shape of their bodies which being longer then they are deep one counterpoises the other for the depth of their bodies has not so much weight as their length neither are their heads and leggs just opposite Besides many have a great number of feet which may easily bear up the weight of their bodies and although some Creatures as Horses Sheep Oxon c. have their leggs set on in the same manner as Mice Squirrels Cats c. yet they cannot run or climb upwards and downwards in a
I have declared more at large elsewhere 17. Des Cartes Opinion of Motion examined I Cannot well apprehend what Des Cartes means by Matter being at first set a moving by a strong and lively action and by his extraordinary swift rotation or whirling motion about the Center as also by the shavings of his aethereal subtil Matter which fill'd up all vacuities and pores and his aethereal globules I would ask whether this kind of motion did still continue if so then not onely the rugged and uneven parts but also the aethereal globules would become less by this continual rotation and would make this world a very weak dizzie and tottering world and if there be any such shaving and lessening then according to his principles there must also be some reaction or a reacting and resisting motion and then there would be two opposite motions which would hinder each other But I suppose he conceived that Nature or the God of Nature did produce the world after a Mechanical way and according as we see Turners and such kind of Artificers work which if so then the Art of Turning is the prime and fundamental of all other Mechanical Arts and ought to have place before the rest and a Turner ought to be the prime and chief of all Mechanicks and highly esteemed but alas that sort of people is least regarded and though by their turning Art they make many dusty shavings yet they get but little profit by them for all they get is by their several wooden figures they make as Spoons Ladles Cups Bowls Trenchers and the like and not by their shavings Wherefore as all other Mechanicks do not derive their Arts from Turners so neither is it probable that this world and all natural Creatures are produced by a whirling Motion or a spherical rotation as if some spirits were playing at Bowls or Foot-ball for as I have often mentioned Nature has infinite ways of Motions whereof none is prime or principal but self-motion which is the producer of all the varieties Nature has within her self Next as for his Opinion of transferring and imparting Motion to other bodies and that that body which imparts Motion to another body loses as much as it gives I have answer'd in my Philosophical Letters to wit that it is most improbable by reason Motion being material and inseparable from Matter cannot be imparted without Matter and if not then the body that receives Motion would increase in bulk and the other that loses Motion would decrease by reason of the addition and diminution of the parts of Matter which must of necessity increase and lessen the bulk of the body the contrary whereof is sufficiently known 18. Of the blackness of a Charcoal and of Light I Cannot in reason give my consent to those Dioptrical Writers who conceive that the blackness of a Charcoal proceeds from the Porousness of its parts and the absence of light viz. that light not being reflected in the Pores of a Charcoal doth make it obscure and consequently appear black for the opinion which holds that all Colours are caused by the various reflexion of Light has but a weak and uncertain Ground by reason the refraction or reflection of light is so inconstant as it varies and alters continually and there being so many reflexions and positions of Light if they were the true cause of Colours no Colour would appear constantly the same but change variously according to the various reflexion of Light whereas on the contrary we see that natural and inherent Colours continue always the same let the position and reflection of Light be as it will besides there being different coloured Creatures if all had the same position and reflexion of light they would not appear of divers but all of one colour the contrary whereof is proved by experience I will not say but the refraction and various position of light may vary and alter a natural and inherent colour exteriously so as to cause for example a natural blew to appear green or a natural green to appear red c. but those figures which light makes being but superficially and loosely spread upon other natural and substantial figures are so uncertain inconstant and momentary that they do change according as the reflexion and position of light alters and therefore they cannot cause or produce any natural or inherent colours for these are not superficial but fixt and remain constantly the same And as for blackness that it should be caused by the absence of light I think it to be no more probable then that light is the cause of our sight for if the blackness of a Charcoal did proceed from the absence of light in its pores then a black Horse would have more or deeper pores then a white one or a sorrel or any other coloured Horse also a black Moor would have larger Pores then a man of a white complexion and black Sattin or any black Stuff would have deeper pores then white Stuff But if a fair white Lady should bruise her arm so as it did appear black can any one believe that light would be more absent from that bruised part then from any other part of her arm that is white or that light should reflect otherwise upon that bruised part then on any other Also can any body believe that the reflexion of light on a decayed Ladies face should be the cause that her complexion is altered from what it was when she was young and appeared beautiful and fair Certainly Light is no more the cause of her Complexion then of her Wrinkles or else she would never complain of Age but of Light But to prove further that the entering of light into the pores of exterior bodies can neither make perception nor colours if this were so then the entering of light into the pores of the Eye would make it perceive all things of as many colours as a Rain-bow hath besides if several Eyes should have several shaped Pores none would agree in the perception of the colour of an exterior object or else it would so dazle the sight as no object would be truly perceived in its natural colour for it would breed a confusion between those reflexions of light that are made in the pores of the eye and those that are made in the pores of the object as being not probable they would agree since all pores are not just alike or of the same bigness so as what with Air Light Particles and Pores jumbled together and thrust or crowded into so small a compass it would make such a confusion and Chaos of colours as I may call it that no sight would be able to discern them wherefore it is no more probable that the perception of sight is caused by the entering of light into the pores of the Eye then that the perception of smoak is caused by its entrance into the Eye And I wonder rational men do believe or at least conceive Natures actions to be so confused
and disordered when as yet sense and reason may perceive that Nature works both easily and orderly and therefore I rather believe that as all other Creatures so also light is patterned out by the corporeal figurative and perceptive motions of the optick sense and not that its perception is made by its'entrance into the eye or by pressure and reaction or by confused mixtures by reason the way of Patterning is an easie alteration of parts when as all others are forced and constrained nay unsetled inconstant and uncertain for how should the fluid particles of air and light be able to produce a constant and setled effect being so changeable themselves what instances soever of Geometrical figures be drawn hither to evince it if Man knew Natures Geometry he might perhaps do something but his artificial figures will never find out the architecture of Nature which is beyond his perception or capacity But some may object That neither colour nor any other object can be seen or perceived without light and therefore light must needs be the cause of colours as well as of our optick perception To which I answer Although we cannot regularly see any other bodies without light by reason darkness doth involve them yet we perceive darkness and night without the help of light They will say We perceive darkness onely by the absence of light I answer If all the Perception of the optick sense did come from light then the Perception of night or darkness would be no perception at all which is a Paradox and contrary to common experience nay to sense and reason for black requires as much Perception as white and so doth darkness and night Neither could we say it is dark or it is night if we did not perceive it to be so or had no perception at all of it The truth is we perceive as much darkness as we do light and as much black as we do white for although darkness doth not present to our view other objects so as light doth but conceals them yet this doth not infer that darkness is not perceived for darkness must needs do so by reason it is opposite to light and its corporeal figurative motions are quite contrary to the motions of light and therefore it must also of necessity have contrary effects wherefore the error of those that will not allow darkness to be a corporeal figurative motion as well as light but onely a privation or absence of light cannot make it nothing but it is on the contrary well known that darkness has a being as well as light has and that it is something and not nothing by reason we do perceive it but he that perceives must needs perceive something for no perception can be of nothing besides I have declared elsewhere that we do see in dreams and that mad men see objects in the dark without the help of light which proves it is not the presence or entering of light into the eye that causes our seeing nor the absence of light which takes away our optick Perception but light onely doth present exterior objects to our view so as we may the better perceive them Neither is a colour lost or lessened in the dark but it is onely concealed from the ordinary perception of humane sight for truly if colours should not be colours in the dark then it might as rationally be said that a man's flesh and blood is not flesh and blood in the dark when it is not seen by a humane eye I will not say that the smalness and fineness of parts may not make colours appear more glorious for colours are like artificial Paintings the gentler and finer their draughts and lines are the smoother and glossier appear their works but smalness and fineness is not the true cause of colours that is it doth not make colours to be colours although it makes colours fine And thus black is not black through the absence of Light no more then white can be white by the presence of light but blackness is one sort of colour whiteness another redness another and so of the rest Whereof some are superficial and changeable to wit such as are made by the reflection of light others fixt and inherent viz. such as are in several sorts of Minerals Vegetables and Animals and others again are produced by Art as by Dying and Painting which Artists know best how to order by their several mixtures 19. Of the Pores of a Charcoal and of Emptiness ALthough I cannot believe that the absence of Light in the Pores of a Charcoal is the cause of its blackness yet I do not question the truth of its Pores for that all or most Creatures have Pores I have declared before which Pores are nothing else but passages to receive and discharge some parts of matter and therefore the opinion of those that believe an entering of some Particles of exterior bodies through the Pores of animal Creatures and an intermixing with their interior parts as that for example in the bathing in Mineral Waters the liquid and warm vehicles of the Mineral Particles do by degrees insinuate themselves into the pores of the skin and intermix with the inner parts of the body is very rational for this is a convenient way of conveighing exteterior parts into the body and may be effectual either to good or bad and although the pores be very small yet they are numerous so that the number of the pores supplies the want of their largeness But yet although Pores are passages for other bodies to issue or enter nevertheless they are not empty there being no such thing as an emptiness in Nature for surely God the fulness and Perfection of all things would not suffer any Vacuum in Nature which is a Pure Nothing Vacuum implies a want and imperfection of something but all that God made by his All-powerful Command was good and perfect Wherefore although Charcoals and other bodies have Pores yet they are fill'd with some subtile Matter not subject to our sensitive perception and are not empty but onely call'd so by reason they are not fill'd up with some solid and gross substance perceptible by our senses But some may say if there be no emptiness in Nature but all fulness of body or bodily parts then the spiritual or divine soul in Man which inhabits his body would not have room to reside in it I answer The Spiritual or Divine Soul in Man is not Natural but Supernatural and has also a Supernatural way of residing in man's body for Place belongs onely to bodies and a Spirit being bodiless has no need of a bodily place But then they will say That I make Spirit and Vacuum all one thing by reason I describe a Spirit to be a Natural Nothing and the same I say of Vacuum and hence it will follow that particular Spirits are particular Emptinesses and an Infinite Spirit an Infinite Vacuum My answer is That although a Spirit is a Natural nothing yet it is
a Supernatural something but a Vacnum is a Pure nothing both Naturally and Supernaturally and God forbid I should be so irreligious as to compare Spirits and consequently God who is an Infinite Spirit to a Vacuum for God is All-fulfilling and an Infinite Fulness and Perfection though not a Corporeal or Material yet a Supernatural Spiritual and Incomprehensible fulness when as Vacuum although it is a corporeal word yet in effect or reality is nothing and expresses a want or imperfection which cannot be said of any supernatural Creature much less of God 20. Of Colours ALthough the sensitive perception doth pattern out the exterior figure of Colours as easily as of any other object yet all perceptions of Colours are not made by Patterning for as there are many perceptions which take no patterns from outward objects so there are also perceptions of Colours which never were presented to our sensitive organs Neither is any perception made by exterior objects but by interior corporeal figurative motions for the object doth not print or act any way upon the eye but it is the sensitive motions in the eye which pattern out the figure of the object and it is to be observed that as the parts of some bodies do consist of several different figures which the learned call Heterogeneous one figure being included within another and some again their parts are but of one kind of figure which they call Homogeneous bodies as for example Water so it may be with Colours for some their parts may be quite thorow of one colour and others again may be of several colours and indeed most Creatures as they have different parts so those different parts have also different colours and as those parts do alter so do their colours For example a Man that is in good health looks of a sanguine complexion but being troubled with the Yellow or black Jaundies his complexion is of the colour of the humor either black or yellow yet it doth not proceed always from the over-flowing of the humor towards the exterior parts for many times when the humor is obstructed it will cause the same effect but then the corporeal motions in the extream parts alter by way of Imitation or Metamorphosing as from a sanguine colour into the colour of the predominant humor Wherefore it is no more wonder to see colours change in the tempering of Steel as some are pleased to alledg this experiment then to see Steel change and rechange its temper from being hard to soft from tough to brittle c. which changes prove that colours are material as well as steel so that the alteration of the corporeal parts is the alteration of the corporeal figures of colours They also prove that Light is not essential to colours for although some colours are made by several Reflexions Refractions and Positions of Light yet Light is not the true and natural cause of all colours but those colours that are made by light are most inconstant momentany and alterable by reason light and its effects are very changeable Neither are colours made by a bare motion for there is no such thing as a bare or immaterial Motion in Nature but both Light and Colours are made by the corporeal figurative motions of Nature and according to the various changes of those Motions there are also various and different Lights and Colours and the perception of light and Colours is made and dissolved by the sensitive figurative motions in the optick sensorium without the exchange of exterior objects but as the slackest loosest or rarest parts are of least solid or composed corporeal figures so are they most apt to change and rechange upon the least disorder as may well be observed in colours raised by Passions as fear anger or the like which will change not onely the complexion and countenance but the very features will have some alteration for a short time and many times the whole body will be so altered as not to be rightly composed again for a good while nay often there follows a total dissolution of the whole figure which we call death And at all this we need not wonder if we do but consider that Nature is full of sense and reason that is of sensitive and rational perception which is the cause that oftentimes the disturbance of one part causes all other parts of a composed figure to take an alarum for as we may observe it is so in all other composed bodies even in those composed by Art as for example in the Politick body of a Common-wealth one Traytor is apt to cause all the Kingdom to take armes and although every member knows not particularly of the Traytor and of the circumstances of his crime yet every member if regular knows its particular duty which causes a general agreement to assist each other and as it is with a Common-wealth so it is also with an animal body for if there be factions amongst the parts of an animal body then straight there arises a Civil War Wherefore to return to Colours a sudden change of Colours may cause no wonder by reason there is oftentimes in Nature a sudden change of parts that is an alteration of figures in the same parts Neither is it more to be admired that one colour should be within another then one figurative part is within another for colours are figurative parts and as there are several Creatures so there are also several Colours for the Colour of a Creature is as well corporeal as the Creature it self and to express my self as clearly as I can Colour is as much a body as Place and Magnitude which are but one thing with body wherefore when the body or any corporeal part varies whether solid or rare Place Magnitude Colour and the like must of necessity change or vary also which change is no annihilation or perishing for as no particle of Matter can be lost in Nature nor no particular motion so neither can Colour and therefore the opinion of those who say That when Flax or Silk is divided into very small threads or fine parts those parts lose their colours and being twisted regain their colours seems not conformable to Truth for the division of their parts doth not destroy their colours nor the composing of those parts regain them but they being divided into such small and fine parts it makes their colours which are the finest of their exterior parts not to be subject to our optick perception for what is very small or rare is not subject to the humane optick sense wherefore there are these following conditions required to the optick perception of an exterior object First The object must not be too subtil rare or little but of a certain degree of magnitude Next It must not be too far distant or without the reach of our sight then the medium must not be obstructed so as to hinder our perception And lastly our optick sensorium must be perfect and the sensitive motions regular of
which conditions if any be wanting there is either no perception at all or it is an imperfect perception for the perception of seeing an exterior object is nothing else but a patterning out of the figure of that same object by the sensitive figurative and perceptive motions but there are infinite parts that are beyond our humane perception and it would be but a folly for us to deny that which we cannot see or perceive and if the perceptive motions be not regular in our optick sense we may see different colours in one object nay the corporeal figurative motions in the eye may make several figurative colours even without the patterns of outward objects and as there are several colours so there are also several corporeal figurative motions that make several colours in several parts and the more solid the parts are the more fixt are their inherent natural colours But superficial colours are more various though not so various as they would be if made by dusty Atomes flying about as Flies in Sun-shine for if this opinion were true all colours and other Creatures would be composed or made by chance rather then by reason and chance being so ignorantly inconstant not any two parts would be of the like colour nor any kind or species would be preserved but Wise Nature although she be full of variety yet she is also full of reason which is knowledg for there is no part of Nature that has not sense and reason which is life and knowledg and if all the infinite parts have life and knowledg Infinite Nature cannot be a fool or insensible But mistake me not for I do not mean that her parts in particular are infinitely knowing but I say Infinite Nature hath an Infinite knowledg and by reason Nature is material she is divideable as well as composeable which is the cause that there is an obscurity in her Parts in particular but not in general that is in Nature her self nay if there were not an obscurity in the Particulars men would not endeavour to prove inherent and natural figures by superficial Phaenomena's But as for Colour some do mention the example of a blind man who could discover colours by touch and truly I cannot account it a wonder because colours are corporeal figurative motions and touch being a general sence may well perceive by experience which is gained by practice some Notions of other sensitive perceptions as for example a blind man may know by relation the several touches of Water Milk Broth Jelly Vinegar Vitriol c. as well as what is hot cold rare dense hard soft or the like and if he have but his touch hearing speaking and smelling perfectly he may express the several knowledges of his several senses by one particular sense or he may express one senses knowledg by another but if the senses be imperfect he cannot have a true knowledg of any object The same may be said of Colours for several Colours being made by several corporeal figurative motions may well be perceived by a general sense which is Touch I will not say that touch is the principle of all sensitive knowledg for then I should be of the opinion of those Experimental Philosophers which will have one principal motion or figure to be the cause of all Natural things but I onely say animal touch may have some Notion of the other animal senses by the help of rational perception all which proves that every part is sensible and every sense knowing not onely in particular but that one sense may have some general notion or knowledg of the rest for there are particular and general perceptions in sensitive and rational matter which is the cause both of the variety and order of Nature's Works and therefore it is not necessary that a black figure must be rough and a white figure smooth Neither are white and black the Ground-figures of Colours as some do conceive or as others do imagine blew and yellow for no particular figure can be a principle but they are all but effects and I think it is as great an error to believe Effects for Principles as to judg of the Interior Natures and Motions of Creatures by their Exterior Phaenomena or appearances which I observe in most of our modern Authors whereof some are for Incorporeal Motions others for Prime and Principal Figures others for First Matter others for the figures of dusty and insensible Atomes that move by chance when as neither Atomes Corpuscles or Particles nor Pores Light or the like can be the cause of fixt and natural colours for if it were so then there would be no stayed or solid colour insomuch as a Horse or any other Creature would be of more various colours then a Rain-bow but that several colours are of several figures was always and is still my opinion and that the change of colours proceeds from the alteration of their figures as I have more at large declared in my other Philosophical Works Indeed Art can no more force certain Atomes or Particles to meet and join to the making of such a figure as Art would have then it can make by a bare command Insensible Atomes to join into a Uniform World I do not say this as if there could not be Artificial Colours or any Artificial Effects in Nature but my meaning onely is that although Art can put several parts together or divide and disjoyn them yet it cannot make those parts move or work so as to alter their proper figures or interior natures or to be the cause of changing and altering their own or other parts any otherwise then they are by their Natures Neither do I say that no Colours are made by Light but I say onely that fixt colours are not made by Light and as for the opinion that white bodies reflect the Light outward and black bodies inward as some Authors do imagine I answer 'T is probable some bodies may do so but all white and black Colours are not made by such reflexions the truth is some conceive all Colours to be made by one sort of Motion like as some do believe that all sensation is made by pressure and reaction and all heat by parts tending outward and all cold by parts tending inward when as there are not onely several kinds of heat and cold as Animal Vegetable Mineral and Elemental heat and cold but several sorts in each kind and different particulars in each sort for there is a moist heat a dry heat a burning a dissolving a composing a dilating a contracting heat and many more The like for colds all which several kinds sorts and particulars are made by the several changes of the corporeal figurative Motions of Nature and not by Pressure and Reaction or by tending inward and outward And as there is so great a variety and difference amongst natural Creatures both in their Perceptions and interior natures so there are also varieties of their colours the natural colours of men being
their Colours have and if their opinions be as changeable as inconstant Atomes and variable Lights then their experiments will be of no great benefit and use to the world Neither will Artificial Characters and Geometrical Figures be able to make their opinions and experiments more probable for they appear to me like Dr. Dee's numbers who was directed by I know not what spirits which Kelley saw in his holy stone which neither of them did understand much less will Dioptrical glasses give any true Information of them but they rather delude the sight for Art is not onely intricate and obscure but a false informer and rather blinds then informs any particular Creature of the Truth of Nature but my reason perceives that Nature loves sometimes to act or work blind-fold in the actions of Art for although they be natural yet they are but Natures blind at least her winking or jugling actions causing some parts or Creatures to deceive others or else they are her politick actions by which she deceives her Creatures expectations and by that means keeps them from knowing and understanding her subtile and wise Government 21. Whether an Idea haue a Colour and of the Idea of a Spirit I Have declared in my former discourse that there is no Colour without body nor a body without colour for we cannot think of a body without we think of colour too To which some may object That if colour be as proper to a body as matter and if the mind be corporeal then the mind is also coloured I answer The Mind in my opinion has as much colour as other parts of Nature But then perhaps they will ask me what colour the Mind is of My answer is That the Mind which is the rational part of Nature is no more subject to one colour then the Infinite parts of Nature are subject to one corporeal figurative motion for you can no more confine the corporeal mind to a particular complexion then you can confine Infinite matter to one particular colour or all colours to one particular figure Again they may ask Whether an Idea have a colour and if so whether the Idea of God be coloured To which I answer If the Ideas be of corporeal finite figures they have colours according to the nature or property or figure of the original but as for the Idea of God it is impossible to have a corporeal Idea of an infinite incorporeal Being for though the finite parts of Nature may have a perception or knowledg of the existence of God yet they cannot possibly pattern or figure him he being a Supernatural Immaterial and Infinite Being But put the case although it is very improbable nay against sense and reason there were natural immaterial Idea's if those Idea's were finite and not infinite yet they could not possibly express an infinite which is without limitation by a finite figure which hath a Circumference Some may say An Immaterial Idea hath no Circumference But then I answer It is not a finite Idea and it is impossible for an Idea to be Infinite for I take an Idea to be the picture of some object and there can be no picture without a perfect form neither can I conceive how an immaterial can have a form not having a body wherefore it is more impossible for Nature to make a picture of the Infinite God then for Man which is but a part of Nature to make a picture of infinite Nature for Nature being material has also a figure and matter they being all one so that none can be without the other no more then Nature can be divided from her self Thus it is impossible for Man to make a figure or picture of that which is not a part of Nature for pictures are as much parts of Nature as any other parts nay were they monstrous as we call them for Nature being material is also figurative and being a self-moving matter or substance is divideable and composeable and as she hath infinite corporeal figurative motions and infinite parts so she hath infinite figures of which some are pictures others originals and if any one particular Creature could picture out those infinite figures he would picture out Nature but Nature being Infinite cannot be pictured or patterned by any finite and particular Creature although she is material nevertherless she may be patterned in parts And as for God He being individeable and immaterial can neither be patterned in part nor in whole by any part of Nature which is material nay not by infinite Nature her self Wherefore the notions of God can be no otherwise but of his existence to wit that we know there is something above Nature who is the Author and God of Nature for though Nature hath an infinite natural knowledg of the Infinite God yet being divideable as well as composeable her parts cannot have such an infinite knowledg or perception and being composeable as much as divideable no part can be so ignorant of God as not to know there is a God Thus Nature hath both an infinite and finite perceptions infinite in the whole as I may say for better expressions sake and finite in parts But mistake me not I do not mean that either the infinite perception of Nature or the finite perceptions of natural parts and Creatures are any otherwise of that supernatural and divine being then natural but yet they are the most purest parts being of the rational part of Nature moving in a most elevating and subtile manner as making no exact figure or form because God hath neither form nor figure but that subtile matter or corporeal perceptive motion patterns out onely an over-ruling power which power all the parts of Nature are sensible of and yet know not what it is like as the perception of Sight seeeth the ebbing and flowing of the Sea or the motion of the Sun yet knows not their cause and the perception of Hearing hears Thunder yet knows not how it is made and if there be such ignorance of the corporeal parts of Nature what of God But to conclude my opinion is 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 which effects are perceptible by finite Creatures but not his Infinite Nature nor Essence nor the cause of his Infiniteness and Omnipotency Thus although Gods Power may be perceived by Natures parts yet what God is cannot be known by any part and Nature being composeable there is a general acknowledgment of God in all her parts but being also divideable it is the cause there are particular Religions and opinions of God and of his divine Worship and Adoration 22. Of Wood Petrified I Cannot admire as some do that Wood doth turn into stone by reason I observe that Slime Clay Dirt nay Water may and doth often the same which is further off from the nature of Stone then Wood is as being less dense and its
is of the exterior object and the sentient or else the perception of all exterior objects would be made by such an intermixture which is against sense and reason and therefore even in such a commixture where the parts of the object enter into the body of the sentient as fire doth into fuel the perception of the motions of fire in the fuel and the fuels consumption or burning is not made by the fire but by the fuels own perceptive motions imitating the motions of the fire so that fire doth not turn the fuel into ashes but the fuel doth change by its own corporeal figurative motions and the fire is onely an occasion of it The same may be said of Cold. Neither is every Creatures perception alike no more then it can be said that one particular Creature as for example Man hath but one perception for the perception of sight and smelling and so of every sence are different nay one and the same sense may have as many several perceptions as it hath objects and some sorts of peceptions in some Creatures are either stronger or weaker then in others for we may observe that in one and the same degree of heat or cold some will have quicker and some slower perceptions then others for example in the perception of touch if several men stand about a fire some will sooner be heated then others the like for Cold some will apprehend cold weather sooner then others the reason is that in their perception of Touch the sensitive motions work quicker or slower in figuring or patterning out heat or cold then in the perception of others The same may be said of other objects where some sentient bodies will be more sensible of some then of others even in one and the same kind of perception But if in all perceptions of cold cold should intermix with the bodies of animals or other Creatures like as several Ingredients then all bodies upon the perception of cold would dissolve their figures which we see they do not for although all dissolving motions are knowing and perceptive because every particular motion is a particular knowledg and perception yet not every perception requires a dissolution or change of its figure 'T is true some sorts or degrees of exterior heat and cold may occasion some bodies to dissolve their interior figures and change their particular natures but they have not power to dissolve or change all natural bodies Neither doth heat or cold change those bodies by an intermixture of their own particles with the parts of the bodies but the parts of the bodies change themselves by way of imitation like as men put themselves into a mode-fashion although oftentimes the senses will have fashions of their own without imitating any other objects for not all sorts of perceptions are made by Imitation or patterning but some are made voluntarily or by rote as for example when some do hear and see such or such things without any outward objects Wherefore it is not certain steams or agitated particles in the air nor the vapours and effluviums of exterior objects insinuating themselves into the pores of the sentient that are the cause of the Perception of Heat and Cold as some do imagine for there cannot probably be such differences in the pores of animal Creatures of one sort as for example of Men which should cause such a different perception as is found in them for although exterior heat or cold be the same yet several animals of the same sort will have several and different perceptions of one and the same degrees of exterior heat and cold as above mentioned which difference would not be if their perception was caused by a real entrance of hot and cold particles into the pores of their bodies Besides Burning-Fevers and Shaking-Agues prove that such effects can be without such exterior causes Neither can all sorts of Heat and Cold be expressed by Wind Air and Water in Weather-glasses for they being made by Art cannot give a true information of the Generation of all natural heat and cold but as there is great difference between Natural and Artificial Ice Snow Colours Light and the like so between Artificial and Natural Heat and Cold and there are so many several sorts of heat and cold that it is impossible to reduce them all to one certain cause or principle or confine them to one sort of Motions as some do believe that all sorts of Heat and Cold are made by motions tending inward and outward and others that by ascending and descending or rising and depressing motions which is no more probable then that all Colours are made by the reflexion of Light and that all White is made by reflecting the beams of light outward and all black by reflecting them inward or that a Man when he is on Horse-back or upon the top of an House or Steeple or in a deep Pit or Mine should be of another figure then of the figure and nature of man unless he were dissolved by death which is a total alteration of his figure for neither Gravity nor Levity of Air nor Almospherical Pillars nor any Weather-glasses can give us a true information of all natural heat and cold but the several figurative corporeal motions which make all things in Nature do also make several sorts of heat and cold in several sorts of Creatures But I observe experimental Philosophers do first cry up several of their artificial Instruments then make doubts of them and at last disapprove them so that there is no trust nor truth in them so much as to be relied on for it is not an age since Weather-glasses were held the onely divulgers of heat and cold or change of weather and now some do doubt they are not such infallible Informers of those truths by which it is evident that Experimental Philosophy has but a brittle inconstant and uncertain ground and these artificial Instruments as Microscopes Telescopes and the like which are now so highly applauded who knows but may within a short time have the same fate and upon a better and more rational enquiry be found deluders rather then true Informers The truth is there 's not any thing that has and doth still delude most mens understandings more then that they do not consider enough the variety of Natures actions and do not imploy their reason so much in the search of natures actions as they do their senses preferring Art and Experiments before Reason which makes them stick so close to some particular opinions and particular sorts of Motions or Parts as if there were no more Motions Parts or Creatures in Nature then what they see and find out by their Artificial Experiments Thus the variety of Nature is a stumbling-block to moft men at which they break their heads of understanding like blind men that run against several posts or walls and how should it be otherwise since Natures actions are Infinite and Mans understanding finite for they consider not so much
stiff rare dense moist dry contracting dilating ascending descending and other numerous sorts of colds nay there are some sorts of candied figures made by heat which appear as if they were frozen Also there are fluid colds which are not wet as well as fluid heats that are not dry for Phlegm is fluid and yet not wet and some sorts of air are fluid and not wet I say some not all for some are hot and moist others hot and dry The same may be said of some sorts of heat and cold for some are moist and some dry and there may be at one and the same time a moist cold in the air and a dry cold in water which in my opinion is the reason that in sealed Weather-glasses according to some Experimenters relations sometimes the air doth not shrink but rather seems to be expanded when the weather grows colder and that the water contracts not that the cold contraction of water causes an expansion of the air to prevent a Vacuum for there cannot be any such thing as a Vacuum in Nature but that there is a moist cold in the air and a dry cold in the water whereof the dry cold causes a contraction and the moist cold an expansion nay there is often a moist and dry cold in the air at one and the same time so that some parts of the air may have a moist cold and the next adjoying parts a dry cold and that but in a very little compass for there may be such contractions and dilations in Nature which make not a hairs breadth difference Nature being so subtil and curious as no particular can trace her ways and therefore when I speak of contractions and dilations I do not mean they are all such gross actions perceptible by our exterior senses as the works of Art but such as the curiosity of Nature works Concerning the several sorts of animal heat and cold they are quite different from the Elemental and other sorts of heat and cold for some men may have cold fits of an Ague under the Line or in the hottest Climates and others Burning-Feavers under the Poles or in the coldest climates 'T is true that Animals by their perceptions may pattern out the heat or cold of the air but these perceptions are not always regular or perfect neither are the objects at all times exactly presented as they should which may cause an obscurity both in Art and in particular sensitive perceptions and through this variety the same sort of Creatures may have different perceptions of the same sorts of heat and cold Besides it is to be observed that some parts or Creatures as for example Water and the like liquors if kept close from the perception either of heat or cold will neither freeze nor grow hot and if Ice and Snow be kept in a deep Pit from the exterior object of heat it will never thaw but continne Ice or Snow whenas being placed near the perception of the Sun Fire or warm Air its exterior figure will alter from being Ice to Water and from being cold to hot or to an intermediate temper betwixt both nay it may alter from an extream degree of cold to an extream degree of heat according as the exterior object of heat doth occasion the sensitive perceptive motions of Water or Ice to work for extreams are apt to alter the natural temper of a particular Creature and many times so as to cause a total dissolution of its interior natural figure when I name extreams I do not mean any uttermost extreams in Nature for Nature being Infinite and her particular actions being poised and ballanced by opposites can never run into extreams but I call them so in reference onely to our perception as we use to say it is extream hot or extream cold And the reason of it is that Water by its natural perceptive motions imitates the motions of heat or cold but being kept from the perception of them it cannot imitate them The same reason may be given upon the experiment that some bodies being put into water will be preserved from being frozen or congealed for they being in water are not onely kept from the perception of cold but the water doth as a guard preserve them which guard if it be overcome that is if the water begin to freeze then they will do so too But yet all colds are not airy nor all heats sunny or fiery for a man as I mentioned before may have shaking fits of an Ague in the hottest climate or season and burning fits of a Fever in the coldest climate or season and as there is difference between elemental and animal cold and heat so betwixt other sorts so that it is but in vain to prove all sorts of heat and cold by Artificial Weather-glasses suppressions and elevations of water Atmosphaerical parts and the like for it is not the air that makes all cold no not that cold which is called Elementary no more then it makes heat but the corporeal figurative self-moving perceptive rational and sensitive parts of Nature which make all other Creatures make also heat and cold Some Learned make much ado about Antiperistasis and the flight of those two contrary qualities heat and cold from each other where according to their opinion one of them being surrounded and besieged by the other retires to the innermost parts of the body which it possesses and there by recollecting its forces and animating it self to a defence is intended or increased in its degree and so becomes able to resist its adversary which they prove by the cold expelled from the Earth and Water by the Sun-beams which they say retires to the middle region of the Air and there defends it self against the heat that is in the two other viz. the upper and the lower Regions and so it doth in the Earth for say they we find in Summer when the air is sultry hot the cold retreats into Cellars and Vaults and in Winter when the air is cold they are the Sanctuary and receptacle of heat so that the water in wells and springs and the like places under ground is found warm and smoaking when as the water which is exposed to the open air by cold is congealed into Ice But whatsoever their opinion be I cannot believe that heat and cold run from each other as Children at Boe-peep for concerning the Earths being warm in Winter and cold in Summer it is not in my opinion caused by hot or cold Atoms flying like Birds out of their nests and returning to the same nor is the Earth like a Store-house that hoards up cold and heat at several seasons in the year but there is a natural temper of cold and heat as well in the Earth as in other Creatures and that Vaults Wells and Springs under ground are warm in Winter when the exterior air is cold the reason is not that the heat of the air or the Calorifick atomes as they call them are retired
are so much for expansion confess themselves that water is thicker and heavier in Winter then in Summer and that Ships draw less water and that the water can bear greater burdens in Winter then in Summer which doth not prove a rarefaction and expansion but rather a contraction and condensation of water by cold They likewise affirm that some spirituous liquors of a mixt nature will not expand but on the contrary do visibly contract in the act of freezing Concerning the levity of Ice I cannot believe it to be caused by expansion for expansion will not make it lighter but 't is onely a change of the exterior shape or figure of the body Neither doth Ice prove Light because it will float above water for a great Ship of wood which is very heavy will swim when as other sorts of bodies that are light and little will sink Nor are minute bubbles the cause of the Ice's levity which some do conceive to stick within the Ice and make it light for this is but a light and airy opinion which has no firm ground and it might as well be said that airy bubles are the cause that a Ship keeps above water but though wind and sails make a Ship swim faster yet they will not hinder it from sinking The truth is the chief cause of the levity or gravity of bodies is quantity of bulk shape purity and rarity or grosness and density and not minute bubles or insensible atomes or pores unless porous bodies be of less quantity in water then some dense bodies of the same magnitude And thus it is the Triangular figure of Snow that makes it light and the squareness that makes Ice heavier then Snow for if Snow were porous and its pores were fill'd with atomes it would be much heavier then its principle Water Besides It is to be observed that not all kind of Water is of the same weight by reason there are several sorts of Circle-lines which make water and therefore those that measure all water alike may be mistaken for some Circle-lines may be gross some fine some sharp some broad some pointed c. all which may cause a different weight of water Wherefore freezing in my opinion is not caused by rarifying and dilating but by contracting condensing and retenting motions and truly if Ice were expanded by congelation I would fain know whether its expansions be equal with the degrees of its hardness which if so a drop of water might be expanded to a great bigness nay if all frozen liquors should be inlarged or extended in magnitude according to the strength of the freezing motions a drop of water at the Poles would become I will not say a mountain but a very large body Neither can rarefaction in my opinion be the cause of the Ice's expansion for not all rarified bodies do extend and therefore I do rather believe a clarefaction in Ice then a rarefaction which are different things But some may object That hot and swelling bodies do dilate and diffuse heat and scent without an expansion of their substance I answer That is more then any one is able to prove the truth is when a fiery-coal and an odoriferous body cast heat and scent as we use to say 't is not that they do really and actually expand or dilate heat or scent without body for there can be no such thing as an immaterial heat or scent neither can Nothing be dilated or expanded but both heat and scent being one thing with the hot and smelling body are as exterior objects patterned out by the sensitive motions of the sentient body and so are felt and smelt not by an actual emission of their own parts or some heating and smelling atomes or an immaterial heat and smell but by an imitation of the perceptive motions in the sentient subject The like for cold for great shelves or mountains of Ice do not expand cold beyond their icy bodies but the air patterns out the cold and so doth the perception of those Seamen that sail into cold Countries for it is well to be observed that there is a stint or proportion in all natures corporeal figurative motions to wit in her particulars as we may plainly see in every particular sort or species of Creatures and their constant and orderly productions for though particular Creatures may change into an infinite variety of figures by the infinite variety of natures corporeal figurative motions yet each kind or sort is stinted so much as it cannot run into extreams nor make a confusion although it makes a distinguishment between every particular Creature even in one and the same sort And hence we may conclude that Nature is neither absolutely necessitated nor has an absolute free-will for she is so much necessitated that she depends upon the All-powerfull God and cannot work beyond her self or beyond her own nature and yet hath so much liberty that in her particulars she works as she pleaseth and as God has given her power but she being wise acts according to her infinite natural wisdom which is the cause of her orderly Government in all particular productions changes and dissolutions so that all Creatures in their particular kinds do move and work as Nature pleases orders and directs and therefore as it is impossible for Nature to go beyond her self so it is likewise impossible that any particular body should extend beyond it self or its natural figure I will not say that heat or cold or other parts and figures of Nature may not occasion other bodies to dilate or extend but my meaning is that no heat or cold can extend without body or beyond body and that they are figured and patterned out by the motions of the sentient which imitating or patterning motions of the sentient body cannot be so perfect or strong as the original motions in the object it self Neither do I say that all parts or bodies do imitate but some and at some times there will be more Imitators then at others and sometimes none at all and the imitations are according as the imitating or patterning parts are disposed or as the object is presented Concerning the degrees of a visible expansion they cannot be declared otherwise then by the visibly extended body nor be perceived by us but by the optick sense But mistake me not I do not mean that the degrees of heat and cold can onely be perceived by our optick sense but I speak of bodies visibly expanded by heat and cold for some degrees and sorts of heat and cold are subject to the humane perception of sight some to the perception of touch some to both and some to none of them there being so many various sorts and degrees both of heat and cold as they cannot be altogether subject to our grosser exterior senses but those which are are perceived as I said by our perception of sight and touch for although our sensitive perceptions do often commit errors and mistakes either through their own
either forwards onely or in an undulating motion which opinion in my judgment is as erroneous as any of the former and infers another absurdity which is that all Winds are of the same nature when as there are as many several sorts and differences of Winds as of other Creatures for there are several Winds in several Creatures Winds in the Earth are of another kind then those in the Air and the Wind of an animal breath is different from both nay those that are in the air are of different sorts some cold and dry some hot and moist and some temperate c. which how they can all produce the effect of cold or freezing by the compression of the air I am not able to judg onely this I dare say that if Wind causes cold or frost then in the midst of the Summer or in hot Climates a vehement wind would always produce a great Frost besides it would prove that there must of necessity be far greater winds at the Poles then under the AEquinoctial there being the greatest cold Neither will this principle be able to resolve the question why a man that has an Ague feels a shaking cold even under the Line and in the coldest weather when there is no stirring of the least wind All which proves that it is very improbable that Wind should be the principle of all Natural Cold and therefore it remains firm that self-moving Matter or corporeal figurative self-motion as it is the Prime and onely cause of all natural effects so it is also of Cold and Heat and Wind and of all the changes and alterations in Nature which is and hath always been my constant and in my simple judgment the most probable and rational opinion in Natural Philosophy 28. Of Thawing or dissolving of Frozen bodies AS Freezing or Congelation is caused by contracting condensing and retentive Motions so Thawing is nothing else but dissolving dilating and extending motions for Freezing and Thawing are two contrary actions and as Freezing is caused several ways according to the various disposition of congelable bodies and the temper of exterior cold so Thawing or a dissolution of frozen bodies may be occasioned either by a sympathetical agreement as for example the thawing of Ice in water or other liquors or by some exterior imitation as by hot dilating motions And it is to be observed That as the time of freezing so the time of dissolving is according to the several natures and tempers both of the frozen bodies themselves and the exterior objects applied to frozen bodies which occasion their thawing or dissolution for it is not onely heat that doth cause Ice or Snow or other frozen bodies to melt quicker or slower but according as the nature of the heat is either more or less dilative or more or less rarifying for surely an exterior actual heat is more rarifying then an interior virtual heat as we see in strong spirituous liquors which are interiously contracting but being made actually hot become exteriously dilating The like of many other bodies so that actual heat is more dissolving then virtual heat And this is the reason why Ice and Snow will melt sooner in some Countries or places then in others and is much harder in some then in others for we see that neither Air Water Earth Minerals nor any other sorts of Creatures are just alike in all Countries or Climates The same may be said of heat and cold Besides it is to be observed that oftentimes a different application of one and the same object will occasion different effects as for example if Salt be mixed with Ice it may cause the contracted body of Ice to change its present motions into its former state or figure viz. into water but being applied outwardly or on the out-side of the Vessel wherein Snow or Ice is contained it may make it freeze harder instead of dissolving it Also Ice will oftentimes break into pieces of its own accord and without the application of any exterior object and the reason in my opinion is that some of the interior parts of the Ice endeavouring to return to their proper and natural figure by vertue of their interior dilative motions do break and divide some of the exterior parts that are contracted by the motions of Frost especially those which have not so great a force or power as to resist them But concerning Thawing some by their trails have found that if frozen Eggs Apples and the like bodies be thawed near the fire they will be thereby spoiled but if they be immersed in cold water or wrapt into Ice or Snow the internal cold will be drawn out as they suppose by the external and the frozen bodies will be harmlesly though not so quickly thawed And truly this experiment stands much to reason for in my opinion when frozen bodies perceive heat or fire the motions of their frozen parts upon the perception endeavour to imitate the motions of heat or fire which being opposite to the motions of cold in this sudden and hasty change they become irregular in so much as to cause in most frozen parts a dissolution of their interior natural figure Wherefore it is very probable that frozen bodies will thaw more regularly in water or being wrapt into Ice or Snow then by heat or fire for Thawing is a dilating action and Water as also Ice and Snow which are nothing but congealed water being of a dilative nature may easily occasion a thawing of the mentioned frozen parts by Sympathy provided the Motions of the exterior cold do not over-power the motions of the interior frozen parts for if a frozen body should be wrapt thus into Ice or Snow and continue in an open cold frosty air I question whether it would cause a thaw in the same body it would preserve the body in its frozen state from dissolving or disuniting rather then occasion its thawing But that such frozen bodies as Apples and Eggs c. immersed in water will produce Ice on their out-sides is no wonder by reason the motions of Water imitate the motions of the frozen bodies and those parts of water that are nearest are the first imitators and become of the same mode By which we may see that some parts will cloath themselves others onely vail themselves with artificial dresses most of which dresses are but copies of other motions and not original actions It makes also evident that those effects are not caused by an ingress of frigorifick atomes in water or other congelable bodies but by the perceptive motions of their own parts And what I have said of Cold the same may be spoken of heat for it is known that a part of a mans body being burned with fire the burning may be cured by the heat of the fire which in my opinion proceeds from a sympathetical agreement betwixt the motions of the fire and the motions of the burned part for every part of a mans body hath its natural heat which is of an
particulars do oppose each other yet all opposition tends to the conservation of a general peace and unity in the whole But to return to Fire since Air is the proper matter of respiration for fire extream colds and frosts either of air or vapour are as unfit for the respiration of fire as water is which if it do not kill it quite yet it will at least make it sick pale and faint but if water be rarified to such a degree that it becomes thin vapour then it is as proper for its respiration as air Thus we see although fire hath fuel which is its food yet no food can keep it alive without breath or respiration The like may be said of some other Creatures Qu. 5. Whether Wood be apt to freeze My Answer is That I believe that the moist part of Wood which is sap may freeze as hard as Water but the solid parts cannot do so for the cracking noise of Wood is no proof of its being frozen because Wainscot will make such a noise in Summer as well as in Winter And it is to be observed that some bodies will be apter to freeze in a weak then in a hard frost according to their own dispositions which is as much to be considered as the object of cold or frost it self for some bodies do more and some less imitate the motions of some objects and some not at all and thus we see that solid bodies do onely imitate the contractive motions of cold but not the dilative motions of moisture which is the cause they break in a hard frost like as a string which being tied too hard will fly asunder and as they imitate Cold so they do also imitate Thaw Quest. 6. Whether Water be fluid in its nature or but occasionally by the agitation of the air I answer That Waters is fluid in its own nature needs no proof but 't is known enough by the force of its dilating motions for Water when it gets but liberty it overflows all and dilates everywhere which proves it is not air that makes it fluid but it is so in its own nature Quest. 7. What produces those great Precipices and Mountains of Ice which are found in the Sea and other great waters I answer That Snow as also thick Fogs and Mists which are nothing but rarified water falling upon the Ice make its out-side thicker and many great shelves and broken pieces of Ice joyning together produce such Precipices and Mountains as mentioned Quest. 8. Whether Fishes can live in frozen Water I answer If there be as much water left unfrozen as will serve them for respiration they may live for it is well known that Water is the chief matter of respiration for Fish and not Air for Fish being out of water cannot live long but whilst they live they gasp and gape for water I mean such kinds of Fish which do live altogether in Water and not such Creatures as are of a mixt kind and live in water as well as by land which the Learned call Amphibious Creatures as Otters and the like which may live in the air as well as in water Those Fish I say if the water be thorowly frozen or if but the surface of water be quite frozen over to a pretty depth will often die by reason the water that remains unfrozen by the contraction of Ice has altered for that time its dilative motions to retentive motions and like as men are smothered in a close air so Fish in close water that is in water which is quite covered and inclosed with Ice but at some men have not so nice and tender natures as others and some have larger organs for respiration then others and some are more accustomed to some sorts of air then others which may cause them to endure longer or respire more freely then others so some Fishes do live longer in such close waters then others and some may be like Men that are frost-bitten which may chance to live even in those waters that are quite thorowly frozen as Experimenters relate but yet I cannot believe that the water in which Fishes have been observed to live can be so thorowly frozen to solid Ice that it should not leave some liquidity or wetness in it although not perceptible by our sight by which those Fishes were preserved alive However it is more probable for Fish to live in Ice then for other Creatures because the Principle of Ice is Water which is the matter of the Fishes respiration which keeps them alive Quest. 9. Whether in decoctions of Herbs when congealed or frozen into Ice the figures of the Herbs do appear in the Ice This is affirmed for Truth by many Learned and though I do not deny but that such liquors in freezing may have some resemblance of their solid parts yet I do not believe it to be universal for if the blood of an animal should be congealed into Ice I doubt it would hardly represent the figure of an animal Indeed there 's much difference between the exterior figures of Creatures and their interior natures which is evident even in frozen water whose exterior Icy figures are numerous when as their interior nature is but water and there may also several changes and alterations of exterior figures be made by Art when their interior nature is but one and the same Quest. 10. Whether Cold doth preserve Bodies from Corruption I answer That in my opinion it may be very probable For Corruption or Putrefaction is nothing but irregular dissolving motions when as Freezing or Congelation is made by regular contracting and condensing motions and so long as these motions of Freezing are in force it is impossible the motions that make Corruption should work their effect But that such bodies as have been thorowly frozen after being thawed are most commonly spoiled the reason is that the freezing or congealing motions being not natural to those bodies have caused such a thorowalteration of the natural motions of their parts as a hundred to one but they will never move regularly and orderly again afterward but on the contrary their interior motions do quite and absolutelely change by which the figure is totally altered from its former nature but if a solid body be not throughly frozen it may be reduced to a perfect regularity again for those natural motions that are not altered may occasion the rest to act as formerly to the preservation of that figure 30. Of Contraction and Dilation THere have been and are still great disputes amongst the Learned concerning Contraction and Extension of bodies but if I were to decide their controversie I would ask first Whether they did all agree in one principle that is whether their principle was purely natural and not mixt with divine or supernatural things for if they did not well apprehend one anothers meaning or argued upon different principles it would be but a folly to dispute because it would be impossible for them to agree But
part and particle has a particular and finite self-motion and self-knowledg by which it knows it self and its own actions and perceives also other parts and actions which latter is properly called Perception not as if there were two different Principles of knowledg in every particular Creature or part of Nature but they are two different acts of one and the same interior and inherent self-knowledg which is a part of Natures infinite self-knowledg 10. Thus Perception or a perceptive knowledg belongs properly to parts and may also be called an exterior knowledg by reason it extends to exterior objects 11. Though self-knowledg is the ground and principle of all particular knowledges and perceptions yet self-motion since it is the cause of all the variety of natural figures and of the various compositions and divisions of parts it is also the cause of all Perceptions 12. As there is a double degree of corporeal self-motion viz. Rational and Sensitive so there is also a double degree of Perception Rational and Sensitive 13. A whole may know its parts and an Infinite a Finite but no particular part can know its whole nor one finite part that which is infinite I say no particular part for when parts are regularly composed they may by a general Conjunction or Union of their particular knowledges and perceptions know more and so judg more probably of the whole or of Infinite and although by the division of parts those composed knowledges and perceptions may be broke asunder like a ruined house or Castle Kingdom or Government yet some of the same Materials may chance to be put to the same uses and some may be joined to those that formerly imployed themselves otherways And hence I conclude That no particular parts are bound to certain particular actions no more then Nature her self which is self-moving Matter for as Nature is full of variety of motions or actions so are her parts or else she could not be said self-moving if she were bound to certain actions and had not liberty to move as she pleases for though God the Authour of Nature has ordered her so that she cannot work beyond her own nature that is beyond Matter yet has she freedom to move as she will neither can it be certainly affirmed that the successive propagation of the several species of Creatures is decreed and ordained by God so that Nature must of necessity work to their continuation and can do no otherwise but humane sense and reason may observe that the same parts keep not always to the same particular actions so as to move to the same species or figures for those parts that join in the composition of an animal alter their actions in its dissolution and in the framing of other figures so that the same parts which were joined in one particular animal may when they dissolve from that composed figure join severally to the composition of other figures as for example of Minerals Vegetables Elements c. and some may join with some sorts of Creatures and some with others and so produce creatures of different sorts when as before they were all united in one particular Creature for particular parts are not bound to work or move to a certain particular action but they work according to the wisdom and liberty of Nature which is onely bound by the Omnipotent God's Decree not to work beyond her self that is beyond Matter and since Matter is dividable Nature is necessitated to move in parts for Matter can be without parts no more then parts can be without a whole neither can Nature being material make her self void of figure nor can she rest being self-moving but she is bound to divide and compose her several parts into several particular figures and dissolve and change those figures again infinite ways All which proves the variety of Nature which is so great that even in one and the same species none of the particulars resemble one another so much as not to be discerned from each other But to return to Knowledg and Perception I say they are general and fundamental actions of Nature it being not probable that the infinite parts of Nature should move so variously nay so orderly and methodically as they do without knowing what they do or why and whether they move and therefore all particular actions whatsoever in Nature as respiration digestion sympathy antipathy division composition pressure reaction c. are all particular perceptive and knowing actions for if a part be divided from other parts both are sensible of their division The like may be said of the composition of parts And as for Pressure and Reaction they are as knowing and perceptive as any other particular actions but yet this does not prove that they are the principle of perception and that there 's no Perception but what is made by Pressure and Reaction or that at least they are the ground of Animal Perception for as they are no more but particular actions so they have but particular perceptions and although all Motion is sensible yet no part is sensible but by its own motions in its own parts that is no corporeal motion is sensible but of or by it self Therefore when a man moves a string or tosses a Ball the string or ball is no more sensible of the motion of the hand then the hand is of the motion of the string or ball but the hand is onely an occasion that the string or ball moves thus or thus I will not say but that it may have some perception of the hand according to the nature of its own figure but it does not move by the hands motion but by its own for there can be no motion imparted without matter or substance Neither can I certainly affirm that all Perception consists in patterning out exterior objects for although the perception of our humane senses is made that way yet Natures actions being so various I dare not conclude from thence that all the perceptions of the infinitely various parts and figures of Nature are made all after the same manner Nevertheless it is probable to sense and reason that the infinite parts of Nature have not onely interior self-knowledg but also exterior perceptions of other figures or parts and their actions by reason there is a perpetual commerce and entercourse between parts and parts and the chief actions of Nature are composition and division which produce all the variety of Nature which proves there must of necessity be perception between parts and parts but how all these particular perceptions are made no particular creature is able to know by reason of their variety for as the actions of Nature vary so do the perceptions Therefore it is absurd to confine all perception of Nature either to pressure and reaction or to the animal kind of perception since even in one and the same animal sense as for example of seeing there are numerous perceptions for every motion of the Eye were it no more then a
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
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
is a self-moving and self-knowing body all her parts must of necessity be so too But particular composed figures and particular degrees of Matter are not single parts nor are particular actions single actions no more then a particular Creature is a single part for it would be non-sense to say single compositions and single divisions and therefore particular and single are not one and the same and as there can be no such thing as Single in Nature so there can neither be single knowledges and perceptions Which is well to be observed lest we introduce a Vacuum in Nature and so make a confusion between her parts and actions Q. 7. How is it possible since there is but one Selfknowledg in Nature as there is but one Self-motion that there can be a double degree of this Self-knowledg as also a double Perception viz. Rational and Sensitive I answer As the several degrees of Matter are not several kinds of Matter so neither are Rational and Sensitive knowledg several kinds of Self-knowledges but onely different degrees of one self-knowledg for as there is but one Matter and one Self-motion so there is also but one Self-knowledg in Nature which consists of two degrees Rational and Sensitive whereof the rational is the highest degree of self-knowledg for it is a more pure subtile active and piercing knowledg then the sensitive by reason it is not bound to work on and with the inanimate parts of Matter but moves freely in its own degree when as the sensitive is incumbred with labouring on the inanimate parts of Matter Indeed there is as much difference between those two degrees of self-knowledg as betwixt a chief Architect Designer or Surveigher and betwixt a Labourer or Workman for as the Labourer and Surveigher though they be different particulars are yet both of one kind viz. Mankind so it is likewise with self-knowledg for were Matter divided into infinite degrees it would still remain Matter and though self-motion be divided into infinite degrees of motions yet it is still but self-motion The like for self-knowledg for self-moving matter can but know it self and as Matter is the ground or constitutive Principle of all the parts and figures in Nature for without matter there could be no parts and so no division and self-motion is the ground or principle of all particular actions so is self-knowledg the ground of all particular knowledges and perceptions Again as one part cannot be another part so neither can one parts knowledg be another parts knowledg although they may have perceptions of each other When I speak of parts I mean not single parts for there can be no such thing as a single part in Nature but by parts I understand particular self-moving figures whether they be such composed figures as for distinctions sake we call finite wholes as for example an Animal a Tree a Stone c. or whether they be parts of those finite figures for it is impossible to describe or determine exactly what the parts of Nature are by reason Nature although it is but one body yet being self-moving 't is divided into infinite figures which by self-motion are infinitely changed composed dissolved c. which compositions and divisions hinder that there can be no single parts because no part though it should be infinitely changed composed and divided can be separated from the body of Nature but as soon as it is divided from such parts it is composed with other parts nay were it possible that it might be separated from the body of Nature it would not be a part then but a whole for it would have no reference to the body of Nature besides if it continued body or matter it would still have parts for wheresoever is body there is a composition of parts But if any one desires to know or guess at the parts of Nature he cannot do it better then by considering the corporeal figurative motions or actions of Nature for what we name parts are nothing but the effects of those figurative motions so that motions figures and parts are but one thing and it is to be observed that in composed figures there are interior and exterior parts the exterior are those which may be perceived by our exterior senses with all their proprieties as colour magnitude softness hardness thickness thinness gravity levity c. but the interior parts are the interior natural figurative motions which cause it to be such or such a part or Creature as for example Man has both his interior and exterior parts as is evident and each of them has not onely their outward figure or shape but also their interior natural figurative motions which did not onely cause them to be such or such parts as for example a leg a head a heart a spleen a liver blood c. but do also continue their being the onely difference is that those figurative motions which did first form or produce them afterwards when they were finished became retentive motions By retentive motions I do not onely mean such as keep barely the parts of the composed figures together but all those that belong to the preservation and continuance of them under which are comprehended digestive motions which place and displace parts attractive motions which draw nourishment into those parts expulsive motions which expel superfluous and hurtful parts and many the like for there are numerous sorts of retentive motions or such as belong to the preservation and continuance of a composed figure as well as there are of creating or producing motions By which we may plainly see that one figure lies within another that is one corporeal figurative motion is within another and that the interior and exterior parts or figures of Creatures are different in their actions for example the ebbing and flowing or the ascending and descending motions of water are quite different from those interior figurative motions that make it water the like may be said of Vegetables Minerals Animals and all other sorts of Creatures nay though both the interior and exterior parts figures or motions do make but one composed figure or Creature as for example Man and are all but parts of that same figure yet each being a particular motion has also its peculiar self-knowledg and perception for the difference of particular knowledges and perceptions depends upon the difference of Natures actions which as by the division of parts they cause an ignorance between them so by composition they cause also perceptions I do not mean an interior or self-ignorance which cannot be in Nature by reason every part and particle has self-knowledg but an exterior that is an ignorance of forreign parts figures or actions although they be parts of one composed figure for the parts of the hand do not know the parts of the stomack and their actions Neither do I mean an interior self-perception which can neither be in Nature because perception presupposes ignorance and if there cannot be a self-ignorance there can neither be
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
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-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
out a Tree which stands in a direct line opposite to them but if there be Meadows or Hedges on each side of the Tree then the extream or side parts of each eye pattern out those meadows or hedges for one eyes perception is not the other eyes perception which makes them perceive differently when otherwise they would perceive both alike But if a thousand eyes do perceive one object just alike then they are but as one eye and make but one perception for like as many parts do work or act to one and the same design so do several corporeal motions in one eye pattern out one object the onely difference is that as I said every eye is ignorant of each others perception But you 'l say There are so many copies made as there are objects I answer 'T is true But though there are many composed parts which join in the making of one particular perception yet if they move all alike the perception is but one and the same for put the case there were a hundred thousand copies of one original if they be all alike each other so as not to have the least difference betwixt them then they are all but as one Picture of one Original but if they be not alike each other then they are different Pictures because they represent different faces And thus for a matched pair of eyes in one Creature if they move at the same point of time directly to one and the same parts in the same design of patterning out one and the same object it seems but as one act of one part and as one perception of one object Q. 15. How comes it that some parts for all they are Perceptive can yet be so ignorant of each other that in one composed figure as for example in the finger of a Man's hand they are ignorant of each other when as other parts do make perceptions of one another at a great distance and when other parts are between I answer This question is easily resolved if we do but consider that the differerence of Perception depends upon the difference of the corporeal figurative motions for if the parts be not the same the perceptions must needs be different nay there may infinite several perceptions be made by one and the same parts if Matter be eternal and perpetually moving And hence it follows that some parts may make perceptions of distant parts and not of neighbouring parts and others again may make perceptions of neighbouring or adjoining parts and not of those that are distant As for example in the animal Perception taste and touch are onely perceptions of adjoining objects when as sight and hearing do perceive at a distance for if an object be immediately joined to the optick sense it quite blinds it Wherefore it is well to be observed that there are several kinds and sorts of Perceptions as well as of other composed figures As for example there are Animals Vegetables Minerals and Elements and these comprehend each several particular kinds of Animals Vegetables Minerals c. Again these particular kinds are divided into several sorts and each of them contains so many particulars nay each particular has so many different parts of which it consists and each part has its different particular motions The same may be said of Perceptions For as the several compositions of several parts are so are they not that the bare composition of the parts and figures is the cause of Perception but the self-knowing and self-moving parts compose themselves into such or such figures and as there are proprieties belonging to such compositions so to such composed perceptions so that the composed parts at the end of a finger may not have the same perceptions with the middle parts of the same finger But some may say If there be such ignorance between the parts of a composed figure How comes it that many times the pain of one particular part will cause a general distemper throughout all the body I answer There may be a general perception of the irregularities of such particular composed parts in the other parts of the body although they are not irregular themselves for if they had the same compositions and the same irregularities as the distempered parts they would have the same effects that is pain sickness or numbness c. within themselves but to have a perception of the irregularities of other parts and to be irregular themselves are different things Nevertheless some parts moving irregularly may occasion other parts to do the same But it is well to be observed That adjoining parts do not always imitate each other neither do some parts make perceptions of forreign objects so readily as others do as for example a man plays upon a Fiddle or some other instrument and there are hundreds or more to hear him it happens oft that those at a further distance do make a perfecter perception of that sound then those which are near and oftentimes those that are in the middle as between those that are nearest and those that are furthest off may make a perfecter perception then all they for though all parts are in a perpetual motion yet all parts are not bound to move after one and the same way but some move slower some quicker some livelier some duller and some parts do move so irregularly as they will not make perceptions of some objects when as they make perceptions of others and some will make perfect perceptions of one and the same objects at some times and not at other times As for example some men will hear see smell taste c. more perfectly at some then at other times And thus to repeat what I said before The several kinds sorts and particulars of Perceptions must well be considered as also that the variety of Nature proceeds but from one cause which is self-knowing and self-moving Matter Q. 16. Why a Man's hand or any other part of his body has not the like Perception as the eye the ear or the nose c. because there are sensitive and rational motions in all the parts of his body I answer The reason why the same perception that is within the eye cannot be in the hand or in any other part of a mans body is that the parts of the hand are composed into another sort of figure then the eyes ears nose c. are and the sensitive motions make perceptions according to the compositions of their parts and if the parts of the hand should be divided and composed with other parts into another figure as for example into the figure of an eye or ear or nose then they would have the perception of seeing hearing and smelling for perceptions are according to the composition of parts and the changes of Natures self-motions But then some will say perhaps That an Artificial eye or ear will have the same perceptions c. being of the same figure I answer That if its interior nature and the composition of its parts
be denied to be Material they can neither be accounted Irrational Insensible or Inanimate by reason there is no part nay not the smallest particle in Nature our reason is able to conceive which is not composed of Animate Matter as well as of Inanimate of Life and Soul as well as of Body and therefore no particular Creature can claim a prerogative in this case before an other for there is a thorow mixture of Animate and Inanimate Matter in Nature and all her Parts But some may object That if there be sense and reason in every part of Nature it must be in all parts alike and then a stone or any other the like Creature may have reason or a rational soul as well as Man To which I answer I do not deny that a Stone has Reason or doth partake of the Rational Soul of Nature as well as Man doth because it is part of the same Matter Man consists of but yet it has not animal or humane sense and reason because it is not of animal kind but being a Mineral it has Mineral sense and reason for it is to be observed that as Animate self-moving Matter moves not one and the same way in all Creatures so there can neither be the same way of knowledg and understanding which is sense and reason in all Creatures alike but Nature being various not onely in her parts but in her actions it causes a variety also amongst her Creatures and hence come so many kinds sorts and particulars of Natural Creatures quite different from each other though not in the General and Universal principle of Nature which is self-moving Matter for in this they agree all yet in their particular interior natures figures and proprieties Thus although there be Sense and Reason which is not onely Motion but a regular and well-ordered self-motion apparent in the wonderful and various Productions Generations Transformations Dissolutions Compositions and other actions of Nature in all Natures parts and particles yet by reason of the variety of this self-motion whose ways and modes do differ according to the nature of each particular figure no figure or creature can have the same sense and reason that is the same natural motions which another has and therefore no Stone can be said to feel pain as an Animal doth or be called blind because it has no Eyes for this kind of sense as Seeing Hearing Tasting Touching and Smelling is proper onely to an Animal figure and not to a Stone which is a Mineral so that those which frame an argument from the want of animal sense and sensitive organs to the defect of all sense and motion as for example that a Stone would withdraw it self from the Carts going over it or a piece of Iron from the hammering of a Smith conclude in my opinion very much against the artificial rules of Logick and although I understand none of them yet I question not but I shall make a better argument by the Rules of Natural Logick But that this difference of sense and reason is not altogether impossible or at least improbable to our understanding I will explain by another instance We see so many several Creatures in their several kinds to wit Elements Vegetables Minerals and Animals which are the chief distinctions of those kinds of Creatures as are subject to our sensitive perceptions and in all those what variety and difference do we find both in their exterior figures and in their interior natures truly such as most of both ancient and modern Philosophers have imagined some of them viz. the Elements to be simple bodies and the principles of all other Creatures nay those several Creatures do not onely differ so much from each other in their general kinds but there is no less difference perceived in their particular kinds for example concerning Elements what difference is there not between heavy and contracting Earth and between light and dilating Air between flowing Water and ascending Fire so as it would be an endless labour to consider all the different natures of those Creatures onely that are subject to our exterior senses And yet who dares deny that they all consist of Matter or are material Thus we see that Infinite Matter is not like a piece of Clay out of which no figure can be made but it must be clayie for natural Matter has no such narrow bounds and is not forced to make all Creatures alike for though Gold and Stone are both material nay of the same kind to wit Minerals yet one is not the other nor like the other And if this be true of Matter why may not the same be said of self-motion which is Sense and Reason Wherefore in all probability of truth there is sense and reason in a Mineral as well as in an Animal and in a Vegetable as well as in an Element although there is as great a difference between the manner and way of their sensitive and rational perceptions as there is between both their exterior and interior figures and Natures Nay there is a difference of sense and reason even in the parts of one and the same Creature and consequently of sensitive and rational perception or knowledg for as I have declared heretofore more at large every sensitive organ in man hath its peculiar way of knowledg and perception for the Eye doth not know what the Ear knows nor the Ear what the Nose knows c. All which is the cause of a general ignorance between Natures parts And the chief cause of all this difference is the variety of self-motion for if natural motion were in all Creatures alike all sense and reason would be alike too and if there were no degrees of matter all the figures of Creatures would be alike either all hard or all soft all dense or all rare and fluid c. and yet neither this variety of motion causes an absence of motion or of sense and reason nor the variety of figures an absence of Matter but onely a difference between the parts of Nature all being nevertheless self-moving sensible and rational as well as Material for wheresoever is natural Matter there is also self-motion and consequently sense and reason By this we may see how easie it is to conceive the actions of Nature and to resolve all the Phaenomena or appearances upon this ground and I cannot admire enough how so many eminent and learned Philosophers have been and are still puzled about the Natural rational soul of man Some will have her to be a Light some an Entilechy or they know not what some the Quintessence of the four Elements some composed of Earth and Water some of Fire some of Blood some an hot Complexion some an heated and dispersed Air some an Immaterial Spirit and some Nothing All which opinions seem the more strange the wiser their Authors are accounted for if they did proceed from some ignorant persons it would not be so much taken notice of but coming from great Philosophers
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
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
of the body there are so many several sorts consisting in features shapes and proportions of bodies as it is impossible to describe properly what Beauty is and wherein it really consists for what appears beautiful to some may seem ill-favoured to others and what seems extraordinary fair or handsom to one may have but an indifferent character of another so that in my opinion there 's no such thing as a Universal Beauty which may gain a general applause of all and be judged alike by every one that views it nay not by all immortal souls neither in body nor mind for what one likes another may dislike what one loves another may hate what one counts good another may proclaim bad what one names just another may call unjust And as for Temperance which he joins to Justice what may be temperance to one may be intemperance to another for no particular knows the just measures of Nature nay even one and the same thing which one man loves to day he may chance to hate or at least dislike to morrow for Nature is too various to be constant in her particulars by reason of the perpetual alterations and changes they are subject to which do all proceed from self-moving Matter and not from incorporeal Ideas Thus Rational souls are changeable which may be proved by the changes of their Fancies Imaginations Thoughts Judgments Understandings Conceptions Passions Affections and the like all which are effects or actions of the rational soul nay not onely natural rational souls but even divine souls if they were all good none would be bad nor vary as we find they do and therefore I cannot believe that all souls can have the same likeness being so different amongst themselves 3. Upon the Doctrine of Pythagoras 1. THe most Learned of the Pythagoreans do assert That things apparent to sense cannot be said Principles of the Universe for whatsoever consists of things apparent to sense is compounded of things not apparent and a Principle must not consist of any thing but be that of which the thing consists To which I answer First I cannot conceive what they mean by things apparent to sense if they mean the sensitive organs of humane Creatures they are mistaken for there may be and are really many things in Nature which are not apparent to humane sense and yet are not Principles but natural effects wherefore not all things that are not apparent to humane sense are principles of Nature Besides there may be many other Creatures which do far exceed Men or Animals in their sensitive perceptions and if things be not subject to humane sense they may be subject to the sense of other Creatures But if by sense they mean the sensitive life of Nature they commit a far greater error for there 's nothing which is not subject or has a participation of this Universal sense in Nature as well as of Reason 'T is true particular senses cannot perceive the infinite figurative motions of Nature neither can the subtilest sense have a perception of the interior innate figurative motions of any other Creature but I do not speak of particular senses but of that infinite sense and reason which is self-moving Matter and produces all the effects of Nature But you 'l say How can Infinite be a principle of particular Finites I answer As well as the Infinite God can be the Author of Nature and all natural Beings which though they be finite in their particular figures yet their number is Infinite 2. Concerning the Numbers of Pythagoras which he makes so great a value of I confess wheresoever are Parts and compositions and divisions of parts there must also be number but yet as parts cannot be principles so neither can numbers for self-moving Matter which is the onely principle of Nature is infinite and there are no more principles but this one 'T is true regular compositions and divisions are made by consent of parts and presuppose number and harmony but number and harmony cannot be the cause of any orderly productions without sense and reason for how should parts agree in their actions if they did not know each other or if they had no sense nor reason truly there can be no motion without sense nor no orderly motion without reason and though Epicurus's Atomes might move by chance without reason yet they could not move in a concord or harmony not knowing what they are to do or why or whither they move nay if they had no sense it is impossible they should have motion and therefore in my opinion it is the rational and sensitive parts which by consent make number and harmony and those that will deny this sensitive and rational self-moving Matter must deny the principles of motion and of all constant successions of all sorts and kinds of Creatures nay of all the variety that is in Nature Indeed I am puzled to understand Learned men what they mean by Principles by reason I see that they so frequently call Principles those which are but effects of Nature some count the Elements Principles some Numbers some Ideas some Atomes and the like And by their different opinions they confirm that there is as well discord and division as there is concord and composition of the parts of Nature for if this were not there would be no contrary actions and consequently no variety of figures and motions 3. Whatsoever is comprehended by man says Pythagoras is either body or incorporeal amongst which Incorporeals he reckons also time But this opinion is contradicted by regular sense and reason for no humane nor any other natural Creature is able to comprehend an incorporeal it self being corporeal and as for time place and the like they are one and the same with body which is so how can they be incorporeal Neither is it possible that incorporeal Beings should be principles of Nature because there is as much difference between corporeal and incorporeal as there is between Matter and no Matter but how no Matter can be a principle of matterial effects is not conceivable For God though he be an Immaterial Essence and yet the Author of material Nature and all natural Beings yet he is not a natural material Principle out of which all natural things consist and are framed but a supernatural decreeing ordering and commanding Principle which cannot be said of created Incorporeals for though Nature moves by the powerful Decree of God yet she cannot be governed by finite Incorporeals by reason they being finite have no power over a material Infinite neither can there be any other Infinite Spirit but God himself 4. Pythagoras's Doctrine is That the World in its nature is Corruptible but the Soul of the World is Incorruptible and that without the Heavens there is an Infinite Vacuum into which and out of which the World repairs As for the corruptibility of the World I cannot understand how the Soul can be incorruptible and the World it self corruptible for if the World should be
Nature which is the cause and origine of all motions 7. This first mover is Infinite Eternal Indivisible and Incorporeal 8. Motion it self is Eternal because Time the measure of Motion is Eternal Concerning the first I answer That Nature and all her parts are perpetually self-moving and therefore it is needless to make three sorts of motions we might say rather there are infinite sorts of Motions but yet all is self-motion and so is accretion diminution and alteration for though our senses cannot perceive the motions of all bodies how and which way they move yet it doth not follow from thence that they are not moving for solid composed bodies such as Minerals may though not to our humane sense be more active then some rarer and thinner bodies as is evident in the Loadstone and Iron and the Needle nay in several other bodies applied by Art Physically for if Nature be self-moving as surely she is then her parts must necessarily be in a continual action there being no such thing as rest or quiescence in Nature Next Aristotle seems to contradict himself when he says that all Motion is finite because it is done in Time and yet affirms that both Motion and Time are Eternal for Eternal is that which hath neither beginning nor end and if Motion and Time be thus how can they be finite 3. I deny that whatsoever is body or quantitative cannot be infinite in act but is onely infinite in power for if it be probable that there can be an Eternal motion and Eternal time which is infinite in act why should it not also be probable that there is an infinite quantity For motion is the action of body and it is absurd in my opinion to make body finite and the action infinite Truly if Aristotle means the World to be finite and yet eternal I do not conceive how they can consist together for if the World be finite in quantity he must allow an infinite Vacuum beyond it which if he doth why may not he allow as well an infinite quantity But he has no more ground to deny there is a quantity actually infinite then he has ground to affirm that it is onely infinite in power for if that which is in power may be deduced into act I see no reason but the World which is Nature may be said infinite in act as well as in power 4. I deny also his Theoreme That whatsoever is moved must necessarily be moved by another for wheresoever is self-motion there needs no exterior movent but Nature and all her parts have self-motion therefore they stand in no need of an exterior Movent 'T is true one part may occasion another by its outward impulse or force to move thus or thus but no part can move by any others motion but it s own which is an internal and innate motion so that every part and particle of Nature has the principle of motion within it self as consisting all of a composition of animate or self-moving Matter and if this be so what need we to trouble our selves about a first Mover In Infinite and Eternity there is neither first nor last and therefore Aristotle cannot understand a first mover of Time and as for motion it self if all parts move of themselves as I said before there is no necessity of an exterior or first Mover But I would fain know what he means by the action of the first Mover whether he be actually moving the world or not if he be actually moving he must of necessity have natural motion in himself but natural self-motion is corporeal and a corporeal propriety cannot be attributed to an incorporeal substance But if he be not actually moving he must move Nature by his powerful Decree and Command and thus the first mover is none else but God who may be called so because he has endued Nature with self-motion and given it a principle of motion within it self to move according as he has decreed and ordered it from all Eternity for God being immovable and incorporeal cannot actually move the Universe like the chief wheel in a Watch. And as for his incorporeal Intelligences which are Eternal and immovable president over the motions of the inferior orbs Forty seven in number this is rather a Poetical Fancy then a probability of truth and deserves to be banished out of the sphere of Natural Philosophy which inquires into nothing but what is conformable to the truth of nature and though we are all but guessers yet he that brings the most probable and rational arguments does come nearer to truth then those whose Ground is onely Fancy without Reason 2. Heaven says Aristotle is void of Generation and Corruption and consequently of accretion diminution and alteration for there are no contraries in it nor has it Levity or Gravity neither are there more Worlds but one and that is finite for if there were more the Earth of one would move to the Earth of the other as being of one kind To which I answer first As for Generation Difsolution Accretion Diminution and Alteration of Celestial bodies it is more then a humane Creature is able to know for although we do not see the alterations of them yet we cannot deny they have natural motion but wheresoever is motion there 's also change and alteration For put the case the Moon were such another body as this terrestrial Globe we inhabit we can onely perceive its outward progressive motion nevertheless it may contain as many different particulars as this Globe of the Earth which may have their particular motions and be generated dissolved composed divided and transformed many nay infinite ways The same may be said of the rest of the Planets and the fixed Stars And as for Gravity and Levity we do onely perceive they are qualities of those parts that belong to this terrestrial Globe but we cannot judg of all bodies alike we see air has neither gravity nor levity for it neither ascends nor descends nay this terrestrial Globe it self has neither gravity nor levity for it is surrounded by the fluid air and neither ascends nor descends The truth is there 's no such thing as high and low in Nature but onely in reference to some parts and therefore gravity and levity are not Universal and necessary attributes of all natural bodies Next concerning the multiplicity of Worlds that there can be no such thing but that the Earth of one would move towards the Earth of the other I answer first There 's no necessity that all Worlds must have a Terrestrial Globe for Nature hath more varieties of Creatures then Elements Vegetables Minerals and Animals Next if it were so yet I see no reason that one Creature must necessarily move to another of the same kind For put the case as I said before the Moon was such another terrestrial Globe as this yet we see they do not move one to another but each remains in its own Sphere or Circle 3. I admire
neutral beings which are between body and no body which is a Paradox to regular reason The Cyrenaick Sect affirms That all bodies are of an incomprehensible nature but I am not of their opinion for although the interior corporeal figurative motions are not subject to every Creatures perception yet in Nature they are not incomprehensible As for example the five senses in man are both knowing and ignorant not onely of each others perception but of the several parts of exterior objects for the Eye onely perceives the exterior figure magnitude and colour and not the Nose the Nose perceives its scent but not its colour and magnitude the Ear perceives neither its magnitude colour nor scent but onely its sound and so forth The like may be said of the infinite perceptive parts of Nature whereby they are both obscured and discovered to particulars and so may be truly known in general but not in particular by any finite Creature or part of Nature The Academicks say That some Fancies are credible others incredible and of those that are credible some are credible onely and some credible and circumcurrent As for example A Rope lying loosely in a dark room a man receives a credible fancy from it and runs away another considering it more exactly and weighing the circumstances as that it moves not that it is of such a colour and the like to him it appears a rope according to the credible and circumcurrent fancy To which I answer A mistake is an irregularity of sense and sometimes of reason too if sense be onely mistaken and not reason reason rectifies sense and if reason be onely mistaken and not sense then sense rectifies reason but when both sense and reason are mistaken the irregularity doth either last longer or changes into regularity by the information of some other circumstances and things which may rectifie sometimes the irregular motions both of sense and reason that is the sensitive and rational motions of other parts may rectifie those irregularities I could make many more Observations not onely upon the aforementioned but several others of the ancient Philosophers but my design is not to refute their opinions but as I mentioned in the beginning to shew the difference between theirs and my own and by this we may see that irregularities do not onely appear in our present age but have been also in times past nay ever since Nature has been or else there would never have been such extravagant opinions concerning the Truth of Nature But the chief which I observe is That most of the Ancient make a commixture of natural and supernatural corporeal and incorporeal beings and of animate and inanimate bodies some derive reason from fancy and some introduce neutral beings which are neither corporeal nor incorporeal but between both especially they do make general principles of particular effects and abstract Quality Motion Accidents Figure Place Magnitude c. from Matter which causes so many confusions and differences in their opinions nor can it be otherwise because of the irregularities and divisions of Natures corporeal actions and most of our Moderns do either follow altogether the opinions of the ancient Philosophers putting them onely into a new dress or patch them up with some of their own and so make a Gallimafry in Natural Philosophy AN EXPLANATION OF Some obscure and doubtful passages occurring in the Philosophical Works hitherto published BY THE AUTHORESSE AS I have made a beginning in my Philosophical Letters to clear some doubtful passages which I marked in my Philosophical Opinions so I thought it necessary to second them with these following Notes and to add not onely what was forgot in the same Book but to explain also some other passages which hitherto I observed in the mentioned Book of Letters For though I know that it is but in vain to hinder all objections yet I 'le endeavour as much as lies in me to prevent such as might be occasioned by the obscurity of my Writings No Creature can be so perfect as not to commit Errors sometimes and so may I in my Philosophical Works where the causes of natural effects are not obvious to every ones sense Wherefore if in some things which yet are but few I have altered my Conceptions from those I maintained heretofore none I hope will condemn me for it but rather account me so great a friend to Truth that instead of being wedded to my own opinions as some or most Philosophers are who think it a great disgrace to go but a hairs breadth from the least tittle of what they have once asserted though the Error be as plain as Noon-day I am most willing to desert what hitherto I have maintained upon more rational and probable arguments then mine and shall joyfully embrace whatever I am in reason convinced to come nearer to Truth But finding as yet my opinions grounded upon sense and reason I am resolved to maintain them so long till the contrary be proved and therefore left their obscurity occasion a wrong interpretation in the mind of the Reader I have as mentioned added an explanation of these following Passages Whensoever in my Philosophical Opinions I say Animate Matter and Motion or the motions of Animate Matter I do not take them to be two different things but one and the same and therefore both in my Philosophical Letters and these present Observations instead of that expression I say Corporeal figurative Motion for Self-motion and Animate Matter are one and the same thing Also when I call the Animate part of Matter the Cause of Motion I do not mean that considered in general they are two distinct things as a Cause and Effect uses to be for as I said before Self-moving Matter and Corporeal Self-motion are equivalent and signifie the same but I speak of particular motions which are particular actions of Infinite self-moving Matter which I call effects and are nothing else but infinite parts of an Infinite whole Again when I name Animate and Inanimate Matter my meaning is not that they are two distinct matters or substances as two wholes but two degrees or parts of one onely Matter whose Nature is one and the same that is to be material When I say that every part or degree of onely Matter is Infinite I do not mean the particular effects parts or figures of self-moving Matter for it is impossible that a part or particular figure can be infinite as I have often declared But I speak of the three prime degrees of Matter which are the constitutive principles of Nature and the cause of all natural effects viz. the animate sensitive and rational and the inanimate which as they are intermixt together are infinite in the body or substance of Nature that is they make but one infinite corporeal self-moving Nature and therefore I desire that my expression of the mentioned parts may be understood as of united and not as of separated parts for it is impossible almost to
especially those that consist of different parts Besides the rational parts of matter being the surveighing ordering and designing parts do not suffer them in such actions to work as they please but order them all according to the Wisdom of Nature and though sometimes it may happen that they work or move irregularly yet that is not perpetual in all actions but sometimes for wheresoever is crossing and opposition there must of necessity be sometimes irregularities and disorders When in my Philosophical Letters I say That there is difference between Life and Knowledg by Life I understand Sense or the sensitive parts of matter and by Knowledg Reason or the Rational parts of Matter not as if the sensitive parts had not Knowledg as well as the rational or the rational Life as well as the sensitive but I speak comparatively in the same sense as I name the sensitive part the Life the rational the Soul and the inanimate the Body of Nature And thus much for the present There may be many more the like places in my Philosophical Works especially my Philosophical and Physical Opinions which may seem dubious and obscure but I will not trouble you now with a long Commentary or Explanation of them but if God grant me life I intend to rectifie that mentioned Book of Philosophical Opinions in the best manner I can because it contains the Ground of my Philosophy in which I hope there will be no labour lost but it will facilitate the Understanding of the Reader and render my Conceptions easie and intelligible which is the onely thing I am at and labour for THE DESCRIPTION OF A NEW WORLD CALLED The Blazing World WRITTEN By the Thrice Noble Illustrious and Excellent PRINCESSE THE Duchess of Newcastle LONDON Printed by A. Maxwell in the Year 1666. TO THE DUCHESSE OF NEWCASTLE ON HER New Blazing World OUr Elder World with all their Skill and Arts Could but divide the World into three Parts Columbus then for Navigation fam'd Found a new World America 't is nam'd Now this new World was found it was not made Onely discovered lying in Times shade Then what are You having no Chaos found To make a World or any such least ground But your creating Fancy thought it fit To make your World of Nothing but pure Wit Your Blazing-world beyond the Stars mounts higher Enlightens all with a Coelestial Fier William Newcastle TO THE READER If you wonder that I join a work of Fancy to my serious Philosophical Contemplations think not that it is out of a disparagement to Philosophy or out of an opinion as if this noble study were but a Fiction of the Mind for though Philosophers may err in searching and enquiring after the Causes of Natural effects and many times embrace falshoods for Truths yet this doth not prove that the Ground of Philosophy is meerly Fiction but the error proceeds from the different motions of Reason which cause different Opinions in different parts and in some are more irregular then in others for Reason being dividable because material cannot move in all parts alike and since there is but one Truth in Nature all those that hit not this Truth do err some more some less for though some may come nearer the mark then others which makes their Opinions seem more probable and rational then others yet as long as they swerve from this onely Truth they are in the wrong Nevertheless all do ground their Opinions upon Reason that is upon rational probabilities at least they think they do But Fictions are an issue of mans Fancy framed in his own Mind according as he pleases without regard whether the thing he fancies be really existent without his mind or not so that Reason searches the depth of Nature and enquires after the true Causes of Natural Effects but Fancy creates of its own accord whatsoever it pleases and delights in its own work The end of Reason is Truth the end of Fancy is Fiction But mistake me not when I distinguish Fancy from Reason I mean not as if Fancy were not made by the Rational parts of Matter but by Reason I understand a rational search and enquiry into the causes of natural effects and by Fancy a voluntary creation or production of the Mind both being effects or rather actions of the rational part of Matter of which as that is a more profitable and useful study then this so it is also more laborious and difficult and requires sometimes the help of Fancy to recreate the Mind and withdraw it from its more serious Contemplations And this is the reason why I added this Piece of Fancy to my Philosophical Observations and joined them as two Worlds at the ends of their Poles both for my own sake to divert my studious thoughts which I employed in the Contemplation thereof and to delight the Reader with variety which is always pleasing But left my Fancy should stray too much I chose such a Fiction as would be agreeable to the subject I treated of in the former parts it is a'Description of a New World not such as Lucian's or the French man's World in the Moon but a World of my own Creating which I call the Blazing-World The first part whereof is Romancical the second Philosophical and the third is meerly Fancy or as I may call it Fantastical which if it add any satisfaction to you I shall account my self a Happy Creatoress if not I must be content to live a melancholly Life in my own World I cannot call it a poor World if poverty be onely want of Gold Silver and Jewels for there is more Gold in it then all the Chymists ever did and as I verily believe will ever be able to make As for the Rocks of Diamonds I wish with all my soul they might be shared amongst my noble female friends and upon that condition I would willingly quit my part and of the Gold I should onely desire so much as might suffice to repair my Noble Lord and Husband's Losses For I am not Covetous but as Ambitious as ever any of my Sex was is or can be which makes that though I cannot be Henry the Fifth or Charles the Second yet I endeavour to be Margaret the First and although I have neither power time nor occasion to conquer the world as Alexander and Caesar did yet rather then not to be Mistress of one since Fortune and the Fates would give me none I have made a World of my own for which no body I hope will blame me since it is in every ones power to do the like THE DESCRIPTION OF A NEW WORLD CALLED The Blazing World A Merchant travelling into a forreign Country fell extreamly in Love with a young Lady but being a stranger in that Nation and beneath her both in Birth and Wealth he could have but little hopes of obtaining his desire however his love growing more and more vehement upon him even to the slighting of all difficulties he resolved at last
were so many rentings of Clouds as there were founds and Cracking noises But this opinion was contradicted by others who affirmed that Thunder was a sudden and monstrous blas stirred up in the Air and did not always require a Cloud but the Emperess not knowing what they meant by blas for even they themselves were not able to explain the sense of this word liked the former better and to avoid hereafter tedious disputes and have the truth of the Phaenomena's of Celestial bodies more exactly known commanded the Bear-men and will never lead you to the knowledg of Truth Wherefore I command you again to break them for you may observe the progressive motions of Celestial bodies with your natural eyes better then through Artificial Glasses The Bear-men being exceedingly troubled at her Majesties displeasure concerning their Telescopes kneel'd down and in the humblest manner petitioned that they might not be broken for said they we take more delight in Artificial delusions then in natural truths Besides we shall want imployments for our senses and subjects for arguments for were there nothing but truth and no falshood there would be no occasion for to dispute and by this means we should want the aim and pleasure of our endeavours in consuting and contradicting each other neither would one man be thought wiser then another but all would either be alike knowing and wise or all would be fools wherefore we most humbly beseech your Imperial Majesty to spare our Glasses which are our onely delight and as dear to us as our lives The Emperess at last consented to their request but upon condition that their disputes and quarrels should remain within their Schools and cause no factions or disturbances in State or Government The Bear-men full of joy returned their most humble thanks to the Emperess and to make her amends for the displeasure which their Telescopes had occasioned told her Majesty that they had several other artificial Optick-glasses which they were sure would give her Majesty a great deal more satisfaction Amongst the rest they brought forth several Microscopes by the means of which they could enlarge the shapes of little bodies and make a Lowse appear as big as an Elephant and a Mite as big as a Whale First of all they shewed the Emperess a gray Drone-flye wherein they observed that the greatest part of her face nay of her head consisted of two large bunches all cover'd over with a multitude of small Pearls or Hemispheres in a Trigonal order which Pearls were of two degrees smaller and bigger the smaller degree was lowermost and looked towards the ground the other was upward and looked sideward forward and and backward They were all so smooth and polished that they were able to represent the image of any object the number of them was in all 14000. After the view of this strange and miraculous Creature and their several observations upon it the Emperess asked them what they judged those little Hemispheres might be They answered That each of them was a perfect eye by reason they perceived that each was covered with a Transparent Cornea containing a liquor within them which resembled the watery or glassie humor of the Eye To which the Emperess replied That they might be glassie Pearls and yet not eyes and that perhaps their Microscopes did not truly inform them But they smilingly answered her Majesty That she did not know the vertue of those Microscopes for they did never delude but rectifie and inform their senses nay the World said they would be but blind without them as it has been in former ages before those Microscopes were invented After this they took a Charcoal and viewing it with one of their best Microscopes discovered in it an infinite multitude of pores some bigger some less so close and thick that they left but very little space betwixt them to be filled with a solid body and to give her Imperial Majesty a better assurance thereof they counted in a line of them an inch long no less then 2700 pores from which observation they drew this following conclusion to wit that this multitude of pores was the cause of the blackness of the Coal for said they a body that has so many pores from each of which no light is reflected must necessarily look black since black is nothing else but a privation of light or a want of reflection But the Emperess replied That if all colours were made by reflection of light and that black was as much a colour as any other colour then certainly they contradicted themselves in saying that black was made by want of reflection However not to interrupt your Microscopical inspections said she let us see how Vegetables appear through your Glasses whereupon they took a Nettle and by the vertue of the Microscope discovered that underneath the points of the Nettle there were certain little bags or bladders containing a poysonous liquor and when the points had made way into the interior parts of the skin they like Syringe-pipes served to conveigh that same liquor into them To which observation the Emperess replied That if there were such poyson in Nettles then certainly in eating of them they would hurt us inwardly as much as they do outwardly But they answered That it belonged to Physicians more then to Experimental Philosophers to give reasons hereof for they onely made Microscopial inspections and related the figures of the natural parts of Creatures according to the presentation of their glasses Lastly They shewed the Emperess a Flea and a Lowse which Creatures through the Microscope appear'd so terrible to her sight that they had almost put her into a swoon the description of all their parts would be very tedious to relate and therefore I 'le forbear it at this present The Emperess after the view of those strangely-shaped Creatures pitied much those that are molested with them especially poor Beggars which although they have nothing to live on themselves are yet necessitated to maintain and feed of their own flesh and blood a company of such terrible Creatures called Lice who instead of thanks do reward them with pains and torment them for giving them nourishment and food But after the Emperess had seen the shapes of these monstrous Creatures she desir'd to know whether their Microscopes could hinder their biting or at least shew some means how to avoid them To which they answered That such Arts were mechanical and below that noble study of Microscopical observations Then the Emperess asked them whether they had not such sorts of Glasses that could enlarge and magnifie the shapes of great bodies as well as they had done of little ones Whereupon they took one of their best and largest Microscopes and endeavoured to view a Whale thorow it but alas the shape of the Whale was so big that its circumference went beyond the magnifying quality of the Glass whether the error proceeded from the Glass or from a wrong position of the Whale against the reflection
they gave according to their observation this following reason There is said they a certain heat within the bowels of the Earth proceeding from its swift circular motion upon its own axe which heat distills the rarest parts of the Earth into a fresh and insipid water which water being through the pores of the Earth conveighed into a place where it may break forth without resistance or obstruction causes Springs and Fountains and these distilled waters within the Earth do nourish and refresh the grosser and dryer parts thereof This Relation confirmed the Emperess in the opinion concerning the motion of the Earth and the fixedness of the Sun as the Bird-men had informed her and then she asked the Worm-men whether Minerals and Vegetables were generated by the same heat that is within the bowels of the Earth To which they could give her no positive answer onely this they affirmed That heat and cold were not the primary producing causes of either Vegetables or Minerals or other sorts of Creatures but onely effects and to prove this our assertion said they we have observed that by change of some sorts of corporeal motions that which is now hot will become cold and what is now cold will grow hot but the hottest place of all we find to be the Center of the Earth Neither do we observe that the torrid Zone does contain so much Gold and Silver as the Temperate nor is there great store of Iron and Lead wheresoever there is Gold for these metals are most found in colder climates towards either of the Poles This observation the Emperess commanded them to confer with her Chymists the Ape-men to let them know that Gold was not produced by a violent but a temperate degree of heat She asked further Whether Gold could not be made by Art They answered That they could not certainly tell her Majesty but if it was possible to be done they thought Tin Lead Brass Iron and Silver to be the fittest metals for such an Artificial transmutation Then she asked them Whether Art could produce Iron Tin Lead or Silver They answered not in their opinion Then I perceive replied the Emperess that your judgments are very irregular since you believe that Gold which is so fixt a metal that nothing has been found as yet which could occasion a dissolution of its interior figure may be made by Art and not Tin Lead Iron Copper or Silver which yet are so far weaker and meaner metals then Gold is But the Worm-men excused themselves that they were ignorant in that Art and that such questions belonged more properly to the Ape-men which were Her Majesties Chymists Then the Emperess asked them Whether by their sensitive perceptions they could observe the interior corporeal figurative motions both of Vegetables and Minerals They answer'd That their senses could perceive them after they were produced but not before Nevertheless said they although the interior figurative motions of natural Creatures are not subject to the exterior animal sensitive perceptions yet by their rational perception they may judg of them and of their productions if they be regular Whereupon the Emperess commanded the Bear-men to lend them some of their best Microscopes at which the Bear-men smilingly answered her Majesty that their Glasses would do them but little service in the bowels of the Earth because there was no light for said they our Glasses do onely represent exterior objects according to the various reflections and positions of light and wheresoever light is wanting the glasses wil do no good To which the Worm-men replied that although they could not say much of refractions reflections inflections and the like yet were they not blind even in the bowels of the Earth for they could see the several sorts of Minerals as also minute Animals that lived there which minute animal Creatures were not blind neither but had some kind of sensitive perception that was as serviceable to them as sight taste smell touch hearing c. was to other animal Creatures By which it is evident That Nature has been as bountiful to those Creatures that live under ground or in the bowels of the Earth as to those that live upon the surface of the Earth or in the Air or in Water But howsoever proceeded the Worm-men although there is light in the bowels of the Earth yet your Microscopes will do but little good there by reason those Creatures that live under ground have not such an optick sense as those that live on the surface of the Earth wherefore unless you had such glasses as are proper for their perception your Microscopes will not be any ways advantagious to them The Emperess seem'd well pleased with this answer of the Worm-men and asked them further whether Minerals and all other Creatures within the Earth were colourless At which question they could not forbear laughing and when the Emperess asked the reason why they laught We most humbly beg your Majesties pardon replied they for we could not chuse but laugh when we heard of a colourless body Why said the Emperess colour is onely an accident which is an immaterial thing and has no being of it self but in an other body Those replied they that informed your Majesty thus surely their rational motions were very irregular For how is it possible that a natural nothing can have a being in Nature If it be no substance it cannot have a being and if no being it is nothing Wherefore the distinction between subsisting of it self and subsisting in another body is a meer nicety and non-sense for there is nothing in Nature that can subsist of or by it self I mean singly by reason all parts of Nature are composed in one body and though they may be infinitely divided commixed and changed in their particulars yet in general parts cannot be separated from parts as long as Nature lasts nay we might as probably affirm that Infinite Nature would be as soon destroyed as that one Atome could perish and therefore your Majesty may firmly believe that there is no body without colour nor no colour without body for colour figure place magnitude and body are all but one thing without any separation or abstraction from each other The Emperess was so wonderfully taken with this discourse of the Worm-men that she not onely pardoned the rudeness they committed in laughing at first at her question but yielded a full assent to their opinion which she thought the most rational that ever she had heard yet and then proceeding in her questions enquired further whether they had observed any seminal principles within the Earth free from all dimensions and qualities which produced Vegetables Minerals and the like To which they answered That concerning the seeds of Minerals their sensitive perceptions had never observed any but Vegetables had certain seeds out of which they were produced Then she asked whether those seeds of Vegetables lost their species that is were annihilated in the production of their off-spring To which they
answered That by an annihilation nothing could be produced and that the seeds of Vegetables were so far from being annihilated in their productions that they did rather numerously increase and multiply for the division of one seed said they does produce numbers of seeds out of it self But replied the Empress A particular part cannot increase of it self 'T is true answer'd they but they increase not barely of themselves but by joining and commixing with other parts which do assist them in their productions and by way of imitation form or figure their own parts into such or such particulars Then I pray inform me said the Emperess what disguise those seeds put on and how they do conceal themselves in their transmutations They answered That seeds did no ways disguise or conceal but rather divulge themselves in the multiplication of their off-spring onely they did hide and conceal themselves from their sensitive perceptions so that their figurative and productive motions were not perceptible by animal Creatures Again the Emperess asked them whether there were any Non-beings within the Earth To which they answered That they never heard of any such thing and that if her Majesty would know the truth thereof she must ask those Creatures that are called Immaterial Spirits which had a great affinity with Non-beings and perhaps could give her a satisfactory answer to this question Then she desired to be informed what opinion they had of the beginning of forms They told her Majesty That they did not understand what she meant by this expression For said they there is no beginning in Nature no not of Particulars by reason Nature is Eternal and Infinite and her particulars are subject to infinite changes and transmutations by vertue of their own corporeal figurative self-motions so that there 's nothing new in Nature nor properly a beginning of any thing The Emperess seem'd well satisfied with all those answers and inquired further whether there was no Art used by those Creatures that live within the Earth Yes answered they for the several parts of the Earth do join and assist each other in composition or framing of such or such particulars and many times there are factions and divisions which cause productions of mixt species's as for example weeds instead of sweet flowers and useful fruits but Gardeners and Husbandmen use often to decide their quarrels and cause them to agree which though it shews a kindness to the differing parties yet 't is a great prejudice to the Worms and other animal Creatures that live under ground for it most commonly causes their dissolution and ruine at best they are driven out of their habitations What said the Emperess are not Worms produced out of the Earth Their production in general answered they is like the production of all other natural Creatures proceeding from the corporeal figurative motions of Nature but as for their particular productions they are according to the nature of their species some are produced out of flowers some out of roots some out of fruits some out of ordinary Earth Then they are very ungrateful Children replied the Emperess that they feed on their own Parents which gave them life Their life answered they is their own and not their Parents for no part or creature of Nature can either give or take away life but parts do onely assist and join with parts either in the dissolution or production of other parts and Creatures After this and several other Conferences which the Emperess held with the Worm-men she dismissed them and having taken much satisfaction in several of their answers encouraged them in their studies and observations Then she made a convocation of her Chymists the Ape-men and commanded them to give her an account of the several Transmutations which their Art was able to produce They begun first with a long and tedious discourse concerning the Primitive Ingredients of Natural bodies and how by their Art they had found out the principles out of which they consist But they did not all agree in their opinions for some said That the Principles of all natural bodies were the four Elements Fire Air Water Earth out of which they were composed Others rejected this Elementary commixture and said There were many bodies out of which none of the four Elements could be extracted by any degree of Fire whatsoever and that on the other side there were divers bodies whose resolution by fire reduced them into more then four different ingredients and these affirmed that the onely principles of natural bodies were Salt Sulphur and Mercury Others again declared That none of the forementioned could be called the True principles of natural bodies but that by their industry and pains which they had taken in the Art of Chymistry they had discovered that all natural bodies were produced but from one Principle which was Water for all Vegetables Minerals and Animals said they are nothing else but simple water distinguished into various figures by the vertue of their seeds But after a great many debates and contentions about this subject the Emperess being so much tired that she was not able to hear them any longer imposed a general silence upon them and then declared her self in this following discourse I am too sensible of the pains you have taken in the Art of Chymistry to discover the principles of natural bodies and wish they had been more profitably bestowed upon some other then such experiments for both by my own contemplation and the observations which I have made by my rational and sensitive perception upon Nature and her works I find that Nature is but one Infinite self-moving body which by the vertue of its self-motion is divided into infinite parts which parts being restless undergo perpetual changes and transmutations by their infinite compositions and divisions Now if this be so as surely according to regular sense and reason it appears no otherwise it is in vain to look for primary ingredients or constitutive principles of natural bodies since there is no more but one Universal principle of Nature to wit self-moving Matter which is the onely cause of all natural effects Next I desire you to consider that Fire is but a particular Creature or effect of Nature and occasions not onely different effects in several bodies but on some bodies has no power at all witness Gold which never could be brought yet to change its interior figure by the art of Fire and if this be so Why should you be so simple as to believe that fire can shew you the principles of Nature and that either the four Elements or Water onely or Salt Sulphur and Mercury all which are no more but particular effects and Creatures of Nature should be the Primitive ingredients or Principles of all natural bodies Wherefore I will not have you to take more pains and waste your time in such fruitless attempts but be wiser hereafter and busie your selves with such Experiments as may be beneficial to the publick The Emperess having
granted her Majesty and when she came to wait on Her the Emperess told the Duchess that she being Her dear Platonick friend of whose just and impartial judgment she had always a very great esteem could not forbear before she went from her to ask her advice concerning the Government of the Blazing-world For said she although this World was very well and wisely order'd and governed at first when I came to be Emperess thereof yet the nature of Women being much delighted with change and variety after I had received an absolute Power from the Emperour did somewhat alter the Form of Government from what I found it but now perceiving that the world is not so quiet as it was at first I am much troubled at it especially there are such continual contentions and divisions between the WormBear and Fly-men the Ape-men the Satyrs the Spider-men and all others of such sorts that I fear they 'l break out into an open Rebellion and cause a great disorder and ruine of the Government and therefore I desire your advice and assistance how I may order it to the best advantage that this World may be rendred peaceable quiet and happy as it was before Whereupon the Duchess answered That since she heard by her Imperial Majesty how well and happily the World had been governed when she first came to be Emperess thereof she would advise her Majesty to introduce the same form of Government again which had been before that is to have but one Soveraign one Religion one Law and one Language so that all the World might be but as one united Family without divisions nay like God and his Blessed Saints and Angels Otherwise said she it may in time prove as unhappy nay as miserable a World as that is from which I came wherein are more Soveraigns then Worlds and more pretended Governours then Governments more Religions then Gods and more Opinions in those Religions then Truths more Laws then Rights and more Bribes then Justices more Policies then Necessities and more Fears then Dangers more Covetousness then Riches more Ambitions then Merits more Services then Rewards more Languages then Wit more Controversie then Knowledg more Reports then noble Actions and more Gifts by partiality then according to merit all which said she is a great misery nay a curse which your blessed Blazing-world never knew nor 't is probable will never know of unless your Imperial Majesty alter the Government thereof from what it was when you began to govern it And since your Majesty complain much of the factions of the Bear Fish Fly Ape and Worm-men the Satyrs Spider-men and the like and of their perpetual disputes and quarrels I would advise your Majesty to dissolve all their societies for 't is better to be without their intelligences then to have an unquiet and disorderly Government The truth is said she wheresoever is Learning there is most commonly also Controversie and Quarrelling for there be always some that will know more and be wiser then others some think their arguments come nearer to truth and are more rational then others some are so wedded to their own opinions that they 'l never yield to Reason and others though they find their Opinions not firmly grounded upon Reason yet for fear of receiving some disgrace by altering them will nevertheless maintain them against all sense and reason which must needs breed factions in their Schools which at last break out into open Wars and draw sometimes an utter ruine upon a State or Government The Emperess told the Duchess that she would willingly follow her advice but she thought it would be an eternal disgrace to her to alter her own Decrees Acts and Laws To which the Duchess answered That it was so far from a disgrace as it would rather be for her Majesties eternal honour to return from a worse to a better and would express and declare Her to be more then ordinary wise and good so wise as to perceive her own errors and so good as not to persist in them which few did for which said she you will get a glorious same in this World and an Eternal glory hereafter and I shall pray for it so long as I live Upon which advice the Emperess's Soul embraced and kiss'd the Duchess's soul with an immaterial kiss and shed immaterial tears that she was forced to part from her finding her not a flattering Parasite but a true friend and in truth such was their Platonick Friendship as these two loving Souls did often meet and rejoice in each others Conversation where all her Friends and Relations did live at which the Emperess was extreamly troubled insomuch that the Emperor perceived her grief by her tears and examining the cause thereof she told him that she had received Intelligence from the Spirits that that part of the World she came from which was her native Country was like to be destroyed by numerous Enemies that made war against it The Emperor being very sensible of this ill news especially of the Trouble it caused to the Emperess endeavorred to comfort her as much as possibly he could and told her that she might have all the assistance which the Blazing-world was able to afford She answered That if there were any possibility of transporting Forces out of the Blazing-world into the World she came from she would not fear so much the ruine thereof but said she there being no probability of effecting any such thing I know not how to shew my readiness to serve my Native Country The Emperor asked Whether those Spirits that gave her Intelligence of this War could not with all their Power and Forces assist her against those Enemies She answered That Spirits could not arm themselves nor make any use of Artificial Arms or Weapons for their Vehicles were Natural Bodies not Artificial Besides said she the violent and strong actions of War will never agree with Immaterial Spirits for Immaterial Spirits cannot fight nor make Trenches Fortifications and the like But said the Emperor their Vehicles can especially if those Vehicles be mens Bodies they may be serviceable in all the actions of War Alas replied the Emperess that will never do for first said she it will be difficult to get so many dead Bodies for their Vehicles as to make up a whole Army much more to make many Armies to fight with so many several Nations nay if this could be yet it is not possible to get so many dead and undissolved bodies in one Nation and for transporting them out of other Nations would be a thing of great difficulty and improbability But put the case said she all these difficulties could be overcome yet there is one obstruction or hinderance which can no ways be avoided for although those dead and undissolved Bodies did all die in one minute of time yet before they could Rendezvouze and be put into a posture of War to make a great and formidable Army they would stink and dissolve and when they
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-actions 8. There is no other difference between self-knowledg and particular knowledges then betwixt self-motion and particular 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
the same position and order as is found in the superficies of them resembling them in all their lineaments and those he calls Images which are perpetually flowing in an interrupted course and when one Image goes away another immediately succeeds from the superficies of the object in a continued stream and this entering into our eyes and striking our sight with a very swift motion causes the Perception of seeing This strange opinion of his is no less to be admired then the rest and shews that Epicurus was more blind in his reason then perhaps in his Eye-sight For first How can there be such a perpetual effluxion of Atomes from an external body without lessening or weakning its bulk or substance especially they being corporeal Indeed if a million of eyes or more should look for a long time upon one object it is impossible but that object would be sensibly lessened or diminished at least weakned by the perpetual effluxions of so many millions of Atomes Next how is it possible that the Eye can receive such an impress of so many Atomes without hurting or offending it in the least Thirdly Since Epicurus makes Vacuities in Nature How can the images pass so orderly through all those Vacuities especially if the object be of a considerable magnitude for then all intermediate bodies that are between the sentient and the sensible object must remove and make room for so many images to pass thorow Fourthly How is it possible that especially at a great distance in an instant of time and as soon as I cast my eye upon the object so many Atomes can effluviate with such a swiftness as to enter so suddenly through the Air into the Eye for all motion is progressive and done in time Fifthly I would fain know when those Atomes are issued from the object and entered into the eye what doth at last become of them Surely they cannot remain in the Eye or else the Eye would never lose the sight of the object and if they do not remain in the Eye they must either return to the object from whence they came or join with other bodies or be annihilated Sixtly I cannot imagine but that when we see several objects at one and the same time those images proceeding from so many several objects be they never so orderly in their motions will make a horrid confusion so that the eye will rather be confounded then perceive any thing exactly after this manner Lastly A man having two eyes I desire to know Whether every eye has its own image to perceive or whether but one image enters into both if every eye receives its own image then a man having two eyes may see double and a great Drone-flie which Experimental Philosophers report to have 14000 eyes may receive so many images of one object but if but one image enters into all those eyes then the image must be divided into so many parts 5. What Epicurus means by his divine Nature cannot be understood by a natural capacity for he says it is the same with corporeal Nature but yet not so much a body as a certain thing like a body as having nothing common to it with other bodies that is with transitory generated and perishable things But in my opinion God must either be Corporeal or Incorporeal if Corporeal he must be Nature it self for there 's nothing corporeal but what is natural if incorporeal he must be supernatural for there is nothing between body and no body corporeal and incorporeal natural and supernatural and therefore to say God is of a corporeal nature and yet not a body but like a body is contrary to all sense and reason 'T is true God hath actions but they are not corporeal but supernatural and not comprehensible by a humane or finite capacity Neither is God naturally moving for he has no local or natural motion nor doth he trouble himself with making any thing but by his All-powerfull Decree and Command he produces all things and Nature which is his Eternal servant obeys his Commands Wherefore the actions of Nature cannot be a disturbance to his Incomprehensible felicity no not to Nature which being self-moving can do no otherwise but take delight in acting for her actions are free and easie and not forced or constrained 6. Although he affirms That God or Nature considers Man no more then other Creatures yet he endeavours to prove That Man is the best product of his Atomes which to me seems strange considering that all compositions of Atomes come by chance and that the Principles of all Creatures are alike But truly take away the supernatural or divine soul from man and he is no better then other Creatures are because they are all composed of the same matter and have all sense and reason which produces all sorts of figures in such order method and harmony as the wisdom of Nature requires or as God has ordered it for Nature although she be Infinite and Eternal yet she depends upon the Incomprehensible God the Author of Nature and his All-powerfull Commands Worshipping and Adoring him in her infinite particulars for God being Infinite must also have an infinite Worship and if Nature had no dependance on God she would not be a servant but God her self Wherefore Epicurus his Atomes having no dependance upon a divine power must of necessity be Gods nay every Atome must be a peculiar God each being a single body subsisting by it self but they being senseless and irrational would prove but weak Gods Besides his Chance is but an uncertain God and his Vacuum an empty God and if all natural effects were grounded upon such principles Nature would rather be a confused Chaos then an orderly and harmonical Universe 5. On Aristotle's Philosophical Principles HAving viewed four of the most Eminent of the Ancient Philosophers I will proceed now to Aristotle who may justly be called the Idol of the Schools for his doctrine is generally embraced with such reverence as if Truth it self had declared it but I find he is no less exempt from errors then all the rest though more happy in fame For Fame doth all and whose name she is pleased to record that man shall live when others though of no less worth and merit will be obscured and buried in oblivion I shall not give my self the trouble of examining all his Principles but as I have done by the former make my observations on some few points in his Philosophy 1. The summe of his Doctrine concerning Motion and the first Mover is comprehended in these few Theorems 1. There are three sorts of motion Accretion and Diminution Alteration and Local motion 2. Rest is a privation of Motion 3. All Motion is finite for it is done in Time which is finite 4. There is no infinite Quantity or Magnitude in act but onely in power and so no body can be actually infinite 5. Whatsoever is moved must necessarily be moved by another 6. There is a first mover in
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
That a deadly Apoplexy was a dead palsie of the brain and the spotted Plague was a Gangrene of the Vital parts and as the Gangrene of outward parts did strike inwardly so the Gangrene of inward parts did break forth outwardly which is the cause said they that as soon as the spots appear death follows for then it is an infallible sign that the body is throughout infected with a Gangrene which is a spreading evil but some Gangrenes do spread more suddenly then others and of all sorts of Gangrenes the Plaguygangrene is the most infectious for other Gangrenes infect but the next adjoining parts of one particular body and having killed that same Creature go no further but cease when as the Gangrene of the Plague infects not onely the adjoining parts of one particular Creature but also those that are distant that is one particular body infects another and so breeds a Universal Contagion But the Emperess being very desirous to know in what manner the Plague was propagated and became so contagious asked Whether it went actually out of one body into another To which they answered That it was a great dispute amongst the Learned of their profession whether it came by a division and composition of parts that is by expiration and inspiration or whether it was caused by imitation Some Experimental Philosophers said they will make us believe that by the help of their Microscopes they have observed the Plague to be a body of little Flyes like Atomes which go out of one body into another through the sensitive passages but the most experienced and wisest of our society have rejected this opinion as a ridiculous fancy and do for the most part believe that it is caused by an imitation of Parts so that the motions of some parts which are sound do imitate the motions of those that are infected and that by this means the Plague becomes contagious and spreading The Emperess having hitherto spent her time in the Examination of the Bird Fish Worm and Ape-men c. and received several Intelligences from their several imployments at last had a mind to divert her self after her serious discourses and therefore she sent for the Spider-men which were her Mathematicians the Lice-men which were her Geometricians and the Magpie Parrot and Jackdaw-men which were her Orators and Logicians The Spider-men came first and presented her Majesty with a table full of Mathetical points lines and figures of all sorts of squares circles triangles and the like which the Emperess notwithstanding that she had a very ready wit and quick apprehension could not understand but the more she endeavoured to learn the more was she confounded Whether they did ever square the circle I cannot exactly tell nor whether they could make imaginary points and lines but this I dare say That their points and lines were so slender small and thin that they seem'd next to Imaginary The Mathematicians were in great esteem with the Emperess as being not onely the chief Tutors and Instructors in many Arts but some of them excellent Magicians and Informers of Spirits which was the reason their Characters were so abstruse and intricate that the Emperess knew not what to make of them There is so much to learn in your Art said she that I can neither spare time from other affairs to busie my self in your profession nor if I could do I think I should ever be able to understand your Imaginary points lines and figures because they are Non-beings Then came the Lice-men and endeavoured to measure all things to a hairs breadth and weigh them to an Atome but their weights would seldom agree especially in the weighing of Air which they found a task impossible to be done at which the Emperess began to be displeased and told them that there was neither Truth nor Justice in their Profession and so dissolved their society After this the Emperess was resolved to hear the Magpie Parrot and Jackdaw-men which were her professed Orators and Logicians whereupon one of the Parrot-men rose with great formality and endeavoured to make an Eloquent Speech before her Majesty but before he had half ended his arguments and divisions being so many that they caused a great confusion in his brain he could not go forward but was forced to retire backward with the greatest disgrace both to himself and the whole society and although one of his brethen endeavoured to second him by another speech yet was he as far to seek as the former At which the Emperess appear'd not a little troubled and told them That they followed too much the Rules of Art and confunded themselves with too nice formalities and distinctions but since I know said she that you are a people who have naturally voluble tongues and good memories I desire you to consider more the subject you speak of then your artificial periods connexions and parts of speech and leave the rest to your natural Eloquence which they did and so became very eminent Orators Lastly her Imperial Majesty being desirous to know what progress her Logicians had made in the Art of disputing Commanded them to argue upon several Themes or sujects which they did and having made a very nice discourse of Logistical terms and propositions entered into a dispute by way of Syllogistical Arguments through all the Figures and Modes One began with an argment of the first mode of the first figure thus Every Politician is wise Every Knave is a Politician Therefore every Knave is wise Another contradicted him with a Syllogism of the second mode of the same figure thus No Politician is wise Every Knave is a Politician Therefore no Knave is wise The third made an Argument in the third Mode of the same figure after this manner Every Politician is wise Some Knaves are Politicians Therefore some Knaves are wise The Fourth concluded with a Syllogism in the fourth Mode of the same figure thus No Politician is wise Some Knaves are Polticians Therefore some Knaves are not wise After this they took another subject and one propounded this Syllogism Every Philosopher is wise Every Beast is wise Therefore every Beast is a Philosopher But another said that this Argument was false therefore he contradicted him with a Syllogism of the second figure of the fourth Mode thus Every Philosopher is wise Some Beasts are not wise Therefore some Beasts are not Philosophers Thus they argued and intended to go on but the Emperess interrupted them I have enough said she of your chopt Logick and will hear no more of your Syllogismes for it disorders my reason and puts my brain on the rack your formal argumentations are able to spoil all natural wit and I 'le have you to consider that Art does not make Reason but Reason makes Art and therefore as much as Reason is above Art so much is a natural rational discourse to be preferred before an artificial For Art is for the most part irregular and disorders mens understandings more then it